Amnesia: A Machine For Pigs Review - Squeals and Fury

[keserak]

I simply can't agree with the review. Even though it's a solid one and well written, it simply suffers from X-Com syndrome.

Simply put, people expected more of the same, they were handed something differently and then they go on to crucify the game simply because it doesn't fit to what they expected.

This is just not true and requires an almost deliberate misreading of the review. The review claims that Amnesia was a good horror game. It cites the sanity mechanics as part of the reason why Amnesia was a good horror game. It claims the sequel is not a good horror game. It notes that the sequel is intended to be a horror game, which means it fails at its goal. It cites the lack of the sanity mechanics of its predecessor as one reason why it is not a good horror game.

You are perfectly entitled to have expectations for a game that is marketed as being part of a given genre and as being a sequel to, and therefore a reiteration of, a previous game. They are literally charging you cash money in exchange for the fulfillment of that expectation.

Claiming that "failed expectations" was a problem here is simply sophistry, and worse, it is sophistry that is a go-to method of dismissing criticism on the internet.

Also: note that criticizing truthful criticism is, in fact, a negative thing. It is tiresome to hear people complaining about "all the negativity" as they, in fact, create negativity. Meta-complaints saying we shouldn't say things you don't like are, by definition, negative.

 

[AlwaysPractical]

Who the hell thought it was a good idea to add an infinite light and remove the scare mechanic? What made moments when the monster walked close by even more scary in the first Amnesia was seeeing your character freak out and realising that he may not be able to run away, but is instead scared and rooted to the spot. Really dumb design decision imo.

Captcha: mad hatter ... damn right, captcha

 

[rolandoftheeld]

Also, you can't die in Machine for Pigs, ever.

Not true. I died once, and in another instance of Pigs doing something better than Descent, it forced me to replay the encounter. In Descent, if you died, you respawned pretty much on the spot, with full health and sanity, but the enemy that killed you was gone. That was my absolute number one complaint about Descent. As soon as I realized that death not only carried no penalty but was actually beneficial, enemies lost a lot of their punch. Not so in Pigs.

 

[Andy Chalk]

Well, maybe I was wrong that you didn't actually play the game but your review does read remarkably like a summary of a movie by someone who slept through half of it. I'm going to have to spoiler this explanation but here it goes.

Interesting! Based largely on some pretty big assumptions and it still leaves questions unanswered, but I like what you've come up with.

The trouble with your conclusions is that they rely on information that's either well-hidden, extremely vague or just not there at all. Dark Descent botched the ending but at least it pulled everything together into a proper conclusion as the end approached; Machine For Pigs just wanders around with flowery prose and imagery that leads nowhere. If a game is going to rely on a creepy, convoluted story for its punch, then it needs to tell that story in a coherent manner, and this one does not. And even if it did, it fails to generate anything near the terror that Dark Descent did; Uru: Ages Beyond Myst is a great game, but I'd be pretty pissed if I bought it as a sequel to Quake.

 

[Aposthebest]

This is just not true and requires an almost deliberate misreading of the review. The review claims that Amnesia was a good horror game. It cites the sanity mechanics as part of the reason why Amnesia was a good horror game. It claims the sequel is not a good horror game. It notes that the sequel is intended to be a horror game, which means it fails at its goal. It cites the lack of the sanity mechanics of its predecessor as one reason why it is not a good horror game.

You are perfectly entitled to have expectations for a game that is marketed as being part of a given genre and as being a sequel to, and therefore a reiteration of, a previous game. They are literally charging you cash money in exchange for the fulfillment of that expectation.

Claiming that "failed expectations" was a problem here is simply sophistry, and worse, it is sophistry that is a go-to method of dismissing criticism on the internet.

Also: note that criticizing truthful criticism is, in fact, a negative thing. It is tiresome to hear people complaining about "all the negativity" as they, in fact, create negativity. Meta-complaints saying we shouldn't say things you don't like are, by definition, negative.

Noone said that you can't have expectations, it's part of being a free consumer on a free market. But saying that you expected more on this product is like going to McDonalds and complaining why their super-cheap, super-small hamburger is too small and not that tasty.

But the game cost 15 bucks/euros, what did people expected for that price anyway? A triple A game? It's cheaper than the original. I'm quite certain that's enough a hint to show that someone should be expecting less from it when it comes to content and work being done into it.

Look, I'll blame the producer when the producer is wrong and the consumer when the consumer is wrong. Setting the standards too high was the consumer's fault, not the producer's. Failing to deliver on some levels is the producer's fault. But hey, at least they didn't charge 50-60 freaking dollars for it, neither did they advertise that they would bring everything hardcore amnesia fans wanted.

In short, they don't deserve to be crucified over consumers having false expectations. Most people have played Dear Esther and are aware of the artistic orientations of the developer. It's silly to say that someone would expect something different because "Amnesia".

Seriously, this approach to games is the reason why the industry has stagnated to bringing out generic sequels to everything. Any change is simply sacrificed in the altar of nostalgia.

 

[Andy Chalk]

In short, they don't deserve to be crucified over consumers having false expectations. Most people have played Dear Esther and are aware of the artistic orientations of the developer. It's silly to say that someone would expect something different because "Amnesia".

I don't think it's fair to say that I (or anyone, really) have "crucified" AAMFP. 3/5 is actually not a bad score, you know; it's average, middle-of-the-road, not spectacular, but it doesn't signify a "bad" game - just one that misses on a lot of key points.

Here: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/7149-What-Our-Review-Scores-Mean

I'm not a fan of review scores, FWIW, but this isn't something we have a choice about.

 

[Aposthebest]

In short, they don't deserve to be crucified over consumers having false expectations. Most people have played Dear Esther and are aware of the artistic orientations of the developer. It's silly to say that someone would expect something different because "Amnesia".

I don't think it's fair to say that I (or anyone, really) have "crucified" AAMFP. 3/5 is actually not a bad score, you know; it's average, middle-of-the-road, not spectacular, but it doesn't signify a "bad" game - just one that misses on a lot of key points.

Here: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/7149-What-Our-Review-Scores-Mean

I'm not a fan of review scores, FWIW, but this isn't something we have a choice about.

I don't look at scores either and I'm not aiming at you alone, nor personally. I'm more focused on the exaggerated replies and reactions over game and over what the review is saying.

My initial reply was aimed at the review, my later ones are aimed towards the users. Excuse me if that is not clear enough with my form of writing.

I just think that the reactions over The Chinese Room are a bit hypocritical when publishers like 2K, Ubisoft,EA and Sega are ruining franchise after franchise,releasing games full of bugs and/or terrible AI, giving false promises and charging full price on top of that,in a time where salaries are getting lower and lower around the globe, yet they go away with it.

 

[Animyr]

I'll still probably be getting this. Honestly, when it came to pulse-pounding thrills, I didn't get a whole lot from TDD either. People talk about how predictable the pacing in AMFP was, but I always felt that TDD was similarly easy to anticipate. I liked TDD because it was a creepy, atmospheric adventure game set in a lovecraftian mythos, and from what I hear AMFP does that part decently enough.

And as one of those "pretentious twats" who liked Dear Esther, the criticisms of the storytelling style sound like they're more about taste then quality, at least to me. Though I can see why TCR's storytelling style, at least if Esther is anything to go by, won't do it for everyone.

And even so, regardless of the quality of the game itself I do kind of like the basic idea behind the development; handing off a series to different developers to make their own installments, each of whom puts their personal spin on it while keeping a shared theme/atmosphere. Kind of like episodes of the twilight zone, I suppose.

 

[SnakeoilSage]

A Machine for Pigs starts out on a high note, with plenty of atmosphere and dread. But it never pays off. Compared to its predecessor, AMP is severely lacking. There's no inventory or resources to manage, the puzzles (if you can call them that) are brief, and the monsters rarely show their faces.

Amnesia: The Dark Descent works so well because it makes full use of your helplessness. When a monster shows up you have to run and hide, and it creates some very tense moments. There were chase scenes where you're running down a corridor slamming doors behind you to stall a pursuing monster, moments where you had to drop what you were doing and seal yourself inside a closet to avoid the arrival of a sudden enemy, and times when you furiously spun the mouse trying to turn a crank to open a door before the monster breathing down your neck got within swiping distance. There were puzzles that required careful thought and clever use of the environment.

All of that is gone from A Machine for Pigs. I never had to backtrack, never had to think twice about what I was doing, and I rarely felt threatened by the monsters. It seemed that as long as I kept pushing the forward key, I'd make it to the end of the game eventually. I found myself more and more disappointed as opportunities for scares were wasted.

The story also doesn't compare to the original. It's much shorter, and less involved. It failed to properly hook me as I deduced most of it early on, making it predictable. The story makes a few attempts to make sudden revelations, but these feel more like tacked on exposition to fill in the few plot holes that the story didn't address until the end of the game, when it's too late to reveal it naturally through journal entries and flashbacks. The antagonist's motivations are also confusing, you understand his mad reason for doing what he's doing, but the way he goes about it with supervillain-esque speeches that makes him feel less threatening and more like he's trying to convince himself that he isn't making huge leaps in flawed logic.

Ultimately though, A Machine for Pigs is boring, the cardinal sin of any video game, but especially one that has made a reputation for creating so much delightful fear and panic in its players.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

But the game cost 15 bucks/euros, what did people expected for that price anyway? A triple A game? It's cheaper than the original. I'm quite certain that's enough a hint to show that someone should be expecting less from it when it comes to content and work being done into it.

It's 1/4 cheaper than the original. That doesn't ring far less.

If I had been one to price AMFP it would be two dollars, MAXIMUM. I got more enjoyment from a few of the free custom-stories (though 80% of them are shit).

neither did they advertise that they would bring everything hardcore amnesia fans wanted.

They did. In interviews and even on the Steam page:

Fresh and new approach to the Amnesia world while staying true to its origins.

As for me, I knew what to expect as soon as I saw that chineseroom was developing it. Yet I decided to try it anyway because I small sliver of me wanted to hope that the final product would resemble the Amnesia that I loved.

What's new? Ok they removed the inventory, fine, surely the puzzles are different then? Nope. The puzzles that aren't "press these 2 buttons" are flat out taken from Amnesia and Penumbra, they are literally copy/pastes.

Taking away health and sanity? Ok, do they have new mechanics to replace them? No.

And "staying true to its origins" does not include over 10 pointless jump scares that build up to nothing.

In short, they don't deserve to be crucified over consumers having false expectations. Most people have played Dear Esther and are aware of the artistic orientations of the developer. It's silly to say that someone would expect something different because "Amnesia".

They put the Amnesia name on it. People were willing to trust that they would stick to it's roots, not just get a few references to the previous game along with the protagonist having Amnesia. They waited 2 years for something that would expand on Amnesia.

Instead they got Dear Esther 2.0, if people wanted Dear Esther 2.0 they would have bought it instead.

Seriously, this approach to games is the reason why the industry has stagnated to bringing out generic sequels to everything. Any change is simply sacrificed in the altar of nostalgia.

It's the opposite. A Machine For Pigs took out everything that made Amnesia an engaging experience. REMOVING features is not something to be praised, people criticize Bioware and Bethesda for it all the time.

It's been casualized, people who disliked the puzzles and resource management in the previous game are happy that they have an experience where they can walk to point A and point B without any other worry in the world.

Remember when adventure games were graded on the quality of their puzzles?

 

[Aposthebest]

They put the Amnesia name on it. People were willing to trust that they would stick to it's roots, not just get a few references to the previous game along with the protagonist having Amnesia. They waited 2 years for something that would expand on Amnesia.

And Blizzard put the Diablo name in Diablo 3, yet I think I'm one of the very few who actually boycotted the company completely from that point on.

The only problem is, that in this case, we are talking about a whole different studio. You and everyone else KNEW that The Chinese Room were responsible for the development. You KNEW how they approach horror games. You KNEW it from the very first moment it was announced.

You said that Bioware and Bethesda do it all the time. Well, they do it ON THEIR OWN GAMES. When a different studio takes control, then things will change by nature. Fallout:NV changed many things compared to Fallout 3 and it got hated and loved for it.(apart from the bug-fest it was at release)

The problem here is that you guys expected The Chinese Room to be Frictional Games.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

And Blizzard put the Diablo name in Diablo 3, yet I think I'm one of the very few who actually boycotted the company completely from that point on.

Not sure how this is relevant. I boycotted Blizzard for their online shit and anti-mod things.

The only problem is, that in this case, we are talking about a whole different studio. You and everyone else KNEW that The Chinese Room were responsible for the development. You KNEW how they approach horror games. You KNEW it from the very first moment it was announced.

And yet, they said they were going to try and appeal to fans of the original game. Cause I'm not a sheep, I opted to believe that they were full of shit, others got suckered in.

You said that Bioware and Bethesda do it all the time. Well, they do it ON THEIR OWN GAMES. When a different studio takes control, then things will change by nature. Fallout:NV changed many things compared to Fallout 3 and it got hated and loved for it.(apart from the bug-fest it was at release)

Which studio is irrelevant, the design choices are what matter in the end. If you must argue the analogy, Fallout: NV made changes and added content, it did not flat out remove anything.

The problem here is that you guys expected The Chinese Room to be Frictional Games.

No.

They expected Amnesia cause it has the Amnesia name on it, imagine that eh?

When you take up the name of a beloved series, by all means, you can make your own thing. But "we're a different studio with a different vision" is not an adequate defense when you make unpopular changes.

If I bought the the Big Mac trademark and sold grapes instead:
"can I have a Big Mac?"
"sure thing, here you go!"
"these are grapes."
"no it's a Big Mac."
"but this isn't like the Big Mac they sell at McDonald's"
"Well that was THEIR vision of the Big Mac, not mine."

 

[BleedingPride]

It's not that different from Dark Descent actually. Go around a corner, hear a noise, monster is there. Doesn't quite sound scary by itself does it? AAMFP has build up, for sure, so that isnt the issue either. So what's missing? Actually something very simple, Mikko Termia's soundtrack. The Dark Descent's soundtrack bombared you with creep and noises the whole way through the game, not a quiet moment ever. AAMFP tried to use silence in place of this, but it doesn't work as well, not to mention Jessica Curry is a little bit minimal when it comes to using music in the game.

 

[BleedingPride]

Ah, yes. Because it's the chinese room, there's walking, and metaphors it's automatically Dear Esther BECAUSE REASONS -.-

 

[Lovely Mixture]

Ah, yes. Because it's the chinese room, there's walking, and metaphors it's automatically Dear Esther BECAUSE REASONS -.-

The omission of:

-the inventory
-the sanity system
-the health system
-the lantern requiring oil
-a great chunk of the physics props

Don't mean anything?

Amnesia without those is just an interactive story, hence the comparison to Dear Esther, Gone Home, and other Walking Simulators.

Amnesia is not just avoiding monsters.

 

[BleedingPride]

Ah, yes. Because it's the chinese room, there's walking, and metaphors it's automatically Dear Esther BECAUSE REASONS -.-

The omission of:

-the inventory
-the sanity system
-the health system
-the lantern requiring oil
-a great chunk of the physics props

Don't mean anything?

Amnesia without those is just an interactive story, hence the comparison to Dear Esther, Gone Home, and other Walking Simulators.

Amnesia is not just avoiding monsters.

It's not enough to make it Dear Esther, they've streamlined it immensely, which isn't good, but that doesn't automatically make it anywhere close to Dear Esther apart from the developers.

 

[BleedingPride]

They have no clue what made Descent a great game.

Yeah it does seem that way. It kinda baffles me that they would take away the few things that made the first game so original and scarey (the oil, tender boxes, and sanity mechanic) in order to better tell the story.

To be perfectly honest, the story of the Dark Decent was the least interesting thing about the game to me and I'm sure I'm not alone on this.

I agree with you on how the Dark Descent's story was the least interesting part of the game, however I don't think the sanity elements were as central to the scares as you think they were. Perhaps you spent the game worrying about when the camera was going to go fuzzy and eventually mess up your balance, and that's reasonable, but I was more worried about what could be around the next corner, the feelings of dread.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

It's not enough to make it Dear Esther, they've streamlined it immensely, which isn't good, but that doesn't automatically make it anywhere close to Dear Esther apart from the developers.

Would you concede that it is indeed a walking simulator?

 

[BleedingPride]

It's not enough to make it Dear Esther, they've streamlined it immensely, which isn't good, but that doesn't automatically make it anywhere close to Dear Esther apart from the developers.

Would you concede that it is indeed a walking simulator?

No, because like it or not, there are puzzles, there are dangers you hide from, you can die, and you need to balance between attracting the Nearly-Men, or being able to see. So no, hardly like my everyday walks down my street.

 

[Story]

They have no clue what made Descent a great game.

Yeah it does seem that way. It kinda baffles me that they would take away the few things that made the first game so original and scarey (the oil, tender boxes, and sanity mechanic) in order to better tell the story.

To be perfectly honest, the story of the Dark Decent was the least interesting thing about the game to me and I'm sure I'm not alone on this.

I agree with you on how the Dark Descent's story was the least interesting part of the game, however I don't think the sanity elements were as central to the scares as you think they were. Perhaps you spent the game worrying about when the camera was going to go fuzzy and eventually mess up your balance, and that's reasonable, but I was more worried about what could be around the next corner, the feelings of dread.

Yeah fair enough, the sanity mechanic did make Amnesia a pain to play through most of the time. But I would argue that it made the monsters rather frightening because not only where you most of the time unable to see them clearly, the game actively discouraged looking at them for too long because of the sanity mechanic which I though was very clever. To me, in any scarey medium, it's better that the monsters chasing you remained mysterious. Because once you have a good look at the monsters they kinda loose their fright factor you know?

If anything I thought the sanity mechanic was the most 'unique' feature in Amnesia at the very least.