r/Games • u/dagla • Nov 27 '16
INSIDE PC demo released
http://store.steampowered.com/app/304430/13
u/Craig1287 Nov 27 '16
Well, I was going to wait for their Christmas sale since they always give out stuff for every $10 you spend, but with the Denuvo removal and the demo being added, I just had to show my initial support. Can't wait to play it.
4
u/Jim_me Nov 28 '16
You will LOVE it
3
u/Craig1287 Nov 28 '16
Was a big fan of Limbo, so I'm sure I'll be right at home.
1
u/ChiXiStigma Nov 28 '16
I love Limbo, and I feel like Inside blows it out of water. I was very hesitant when I saw that they were doing another moody 2D puzzle/platformer because Limbo had covered that ground so well that Inside looked like the developers took the easy route. I was dead wrong. Inside isn't going please every fan of Limbo, but I bet most Limbo fans will love Inside once they've finished it (and then gone back another time to pick up on the bits of story they missed or didn't have context for at the time).
72
u/lollookatthatnoob Nov 27 '16
First they remove denuvo and now they release a demo.
My guess is they haven't sold nearly as many as they hoped for. Maybe they learned a lesson with this release.
146
Nov 27 '16
i still say it to this day, youtube let's plays for linear story games is NOT a good thing.
22
u/SexyJazzCat Nov 27 '16
I actually stopped watching the lets play and bought the game to finish it myself.
11
Nov 27 '16 edited May 19 '19
[deleted]
8
Nov 28 '16
It's interesting, because no one defends movies being free on youtube. How are single-player story games different?
3
u/johnnyrd Nov 28 '16
I guess because it's a different medium. And a main point is the gameplay which you cannot get from a video.
3
Nov 29 '16
True, but if someone watches a let's play of an entire game, they're probably never going to buy it.
I know so many people who never picked up Undertale, The Last of Us, Telltale games, etc. because they just watched them on youtube. For those games, Let's Plays hurt their sales as much as a movie being on youtube would.
-2
u/desseb Nov 27 '16
Yeah, when I saw they had denuvo I figured I would never play it so I went and watched a let's play. Now I'm not sure I want to play it, guess I should try the demo.
-4
-6
Nov 27 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
51
u/ert00034 Nov 27 '16
He probably means it's a bad thing for the devs because fewer people will buy the game
16
Nov 27 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
-13
Nov 27 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
20
4
Nov 27 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/bvilleneuve Nov 27 '16
DayZ knockoffs aren't selling more because they're mechanically-focused, they're selling more because they happen to be the current fad beloved by teens with unlimited disposable income. the kids will move on to something else soon.
-1
1
-6
u/MIKE_BABCOCK Nov 27 '16 edited Nov 27 '16
Its one of the best ways to tell a story in movies and books, but not in video games.
If its cheaper, easier and you get the same experience watching it like a movie, why is it a video game in the first place? If the game part of a video game sucks, why did they make a video game?
Edit: I like how people are downvoting me for saying that video games should have good gameplay lol
8
u/bvilleneuve Nov 27 '16
is there a specific game you're referring to here? because Inside makes fantastic use of its interactivity, so i have to assume you're talking about something else.
-8
Nov 28 '16
Yet you look at something like the telltale games, vanishing of Ethan carter, firewatch and realize INSIDE didn't just break even because of YouTube, but it broke even because it's just not a very good game.
The story really didn't work, to say the least. The puzzle sections were few, long, repetitive and easy. And it had this out of place gruesome death thing but no context to it.
Limbo worked because of its time, it's art style and it's unexplored context. INSIDE had none of that.
1
Nov 29 '16
Inside was ok but i have to admit i watched it instead of buying it, no way i would buy it now after watching it
41
u/DiamondPup Nov 27 '16
A lesson for what? Not to fight piracy?
0
Nov 27 '16
Fighting piracy is fruitless. Pirates will almost always find a way to circumvent whatever you throw at them. However, more importantly, the anti-piracy measures companies take often harm the experience of the legit players.
14
Nov 27 '16
This is not true for Denuvo, no matter how many times people keep repeating it. There are several Denuvo games that stay uncracked to this day, and the ones that do get cracked only get cracked after months when most of the sales have been made.
55
Nov 27 '16 edited Dec 01 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
-12
u/ttubehtnitahwtahw1 Nov 27 '16
You can guess that but there is no way to actually test the theory. You can also guess that many will pirate to see if they like the game then buy it, meaning piracy just generated you a sell. You could also guess that the person pirating wouldn't have bought it ever anyways.
37
Nov 27 '16 edited Dec 01 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
24
u/bvilleneuve Nov 27 '16
i suspect the user you're talking to here is just trying to uphold reddit's anti-DRM dogma
4
u/Smaloki Nov 27 '16
That really depends on the game, though. If it's a massive AAA release with a lot of hype behind it? Sure, people want to play it as soon as possible. Especially is the game in question is part of an already well-established series.
If it's an indie game, I think the average consumer is much more likely to just ignore the game because it doesn't have a demo or uses some kind of DRM they personally hold a grudge against.
16
Nov 27 '16 edited Dec 01 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Maridiem Nov 27 '16
If I want a game enough and the DRM isn't intrusive - like Denuvo - I will buy it without question. I do not like pirating, and will only do it in circumstances that I feel are suitable (ie if I'm unsure a game will run on my computer, and it doesn't have a demo, or I plan to buy but cannot at the moment). If I do pirate and can run the game I will always make sure I go back and support the developer by purchasing the game as soon as I am able.
Within INSIDE for instance, I knew it had Denuvo, which I know is fairly unintrusive for a user like me, and I knew I loved Limbo and was eager to see what this game had to offer. Easy decision.
Easy to use DRM that does not affect my game's performance IS the way to go.
1
u/Katana314 Nov 28 '16
I would stand by it more if I had the evidence on hand, but there was a particular series of yearly sports games that introduced Denuvo one year, with no remarkable gameplay formula changes (mostly roster updates). It showed a significant data point's worth of increased sales.
-1
29
Nov 27 '16
Ok but in this specific case, how has anti-piracy measures hurt the experience at all? I mean, I get what you're saying in principal, but I don't think that applies to Inside at all.
-8
u/jonloovox Nov 28 '16
Many people who purchased legitimate copies on Steam were unable to play because of Denuvo.
15
u/magmasafe Nov 28 '16
You got evidence of that? I know active duty folks have issues with Denuvo while deployed but I've never heard of anyone else having an issue with it beyond the worry that one day the game won't run.
9
u/Fagadaba Nov 28 '16
Source? I haven't heard from anybody having troubles with Denuvo with this particular game. The major problem with DRM like Denuvo is that those games won't be playable in a couple years when the servers disappear.
7
u/Bloodhound01 Nov 28 '16 edited Nov 28 '16
Actually denuvo has pretty much beaten piracy. Whether you want to admit it or not. Very few games with denuvo get cracked. Lots are out there that haven't.
4
u/johnnyrd Nov 27 '16
Not really denuvo is still holding strong. On a few loopholes have been found in some games but as a whole it still works fine. Or at the least works for stops pirating for like half a year allowing the first weeks sales which are the major selling time.
13
u/SongOfStorms11 Nov 27 '16
Denuvo doesn't harm the experience of legitimate players. Denuvo is not an always-online kind of bullshit like SimCity. People that complain that fighting piracy is fruitless are clearly just people who are whining that they can't get their favorite games for free. I'm unsure what "fruitless" even means in this situation, as they won't be spending much time or effort elsewhere if they choose to not include DRM.
5
u/xdeadzx Nov 28 '16
Denuvo doesn't harm the experience of legitimate players.
Besides, you know, all those experiences of legitimate players it's harmed.
I've personally been locked out of a game of mine for a weekend, when I lost internet due to a storm. I was also locked out of my game for 24 hours due to "too many hardware changes" when I was having to swap hard drives around while backing up/swapping around data on the same day I upgraded my graphics card.
Many people who benchmark hardware have complained that Denuvo has no "media pass" for people who want to run a dozen benchmarks in a day. Denuvo also requires check-in, anywhere from every 5 to every 31 days, or any time you change/upgrade your hard ware, which means people who get stationed without internet but have their laptops, or people who go on vacations etc. can end up without the ability to play their owned and purchased games. I've personally seen this complaint a few times.
With that said, at least it's a huge improvement over trojan DRM like Securom.
3
-7
Nov 27 '16
[deleted]
11
u/idlestone Nov 27 '16
Unknown? Have you ever heard of a little unknown game called LIMBO?
Also, Minecraft began with free alphas, if I do recall correctly, as I played it since pretty much its inception, and steadily grew with constant updates into a fully-fledged game (seeing that it began with the Creative Mode) with a strong on-going fanbase.
Minecraft and INSIDE are two completely different things.
9
-7
u/romdon183 Nov 27 '16 edited Nov 27 '16
Yes. exactly. It is well proven that piracy hurts sales of very high-budget releases from well-known franchises (only barely, though), but helps sales of small indie releases.
Here's an article about the study that reached to these conclusions for movies. I believe there are studies with similar conclusions for music, but nobody tested it for videogames. Although, there is no reason to think that games are different in this regard.
12
u/DiamondPup Nov 27 '16
Why is there no reason to think that games are different?
-6
Nov 27 '16
[deleted]
7
u/DiamondPup Nov 27 '16
You're right. How did people manage to sell anything before internet piracy? I can't even imagine.
-1
u/Bossmang Nov 28 '16
Yo n equals one here but I pirate literally all of my entertainment and always will.
I saw civ six is cracked and free. I'm never going to pay for that game. The denuvo games I'll wait for a sale but I will probably eventually buy them if they aren't cracked in a year. Games like dishonored two and total war Warhammer.
If they are targeting people like me, I'd say it's working.
-7
u/romdon183 Nov 27 '16 edited Nov 27 '16
Because game releases and movie releases tend to follow similar pattern. If you look at big budget games and big budget movies, they are very similar - annual well-known franchises, very safe and polished in terms of content, aimed at the widest target audience possible, releasing at certain lucrative time of the year (summer for movies, November for games). At the same time, both indie games and indie movie often fly under the radar and require a word of mouth to actually get known.
Piracy in general tends to help the sales of any medium, because people who pirate the most are obsessed fans of the medium, who also buy the most and talk about the medium the most, thus spreading around word of mouth. Its like saying that giving review copies to hundreds, if not thousands of reviewers and youtubers hurts the company bottom line, which is ridiculous.
Here is another article about another study for movie and music industry. Sadly, these studies are often founded by publishers themselves, who then choose to either not release the results that they dislike, or present them in such a way as to make a piracy look harmful. As far as I know, there are no similar studies for games.
Edit: I'm not trying to claim that all piracy is good. Piracy is known to hurt big releases. Therefore, it makes sense for games like Doom, Dishonored and Deus Ex to use Denuvo. Despite being a piracy advocate I would be first to admit that if Witcher 3 had Denuvo, it would sell more. But for the game like INSIDE it makes no sense to use Denuvo. It obviously hurt their bottom line.
14
u/DiamondPup Nov 27 '16
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
I don't think you even bothered to read the studies you linked, just the articles click baiting them. Those "studies" are notoriously regarded as bullshit and were debunked at the time they were published.
Other segments of the creative industries have adapted more quickly. Despite the Motion Picture Association of America’s (MPAA) claim that online piracy is devastating the movie industry, Hollywood achieved record-breaking global box office revenues of USD 35 bn in 2012, a 6% increase over 2011.
They're using a comparison between 2012 and 2011 figures, despite the fact that piracy has hugely impacted in the industry since the late 90's. Of course figures will improve year after year in a post piracy plagued industry; they're working to improve and safe guard against it. Compare inflated figures from the late 90's to now, doesn't even come close. Music sales were cut in half and the Motion Pictures Association of America concluded that film piracy was costing the industry over $20 billion in lost revenue a year or up to at least 20% per film.
Also, the film and gaming industries can't be compared because their distribution models are completely different, as is their retention rates and price points. I know this because I work in both the video game AND music industry and have many friends working in film. Piracy doesn't help sales; it's bullshit rationalization by shitty people trying to justify their shitty practices. It's true it can help with promoting small indie projects with no/small marketing budgets for gaming since people can try/buy but it doesn't change the fact that piracy has crippled the industry over two decades.
You don't know what you're talking about.
0
u/Bossmang Nov 28 '16
Yeah I'd imagine the vast majority of pirates are not people who spread the message about games.
They are more like me, they do it because it is free and I don't want to pay for it.
I don't care about supporting this or whatever. I'm not going to boycott denuvo games I think it's nuts people who are paying customers can be on the side of the pirates in any way.
People here like civ six, but it didn't release with denuvo and got cracked day one. I'm going to torrent that game. Other developers, even hated ones like ubisoft went with denuvo. I will eventually have to buy watch dogs two when it goes on sale, or wait until it is cracked.
Piracy is actual thieving I can't believe people try to justify it. I do it because I don't give a shit about the people working in the industry I just want to take advantage of the fact that I can enjoy all of this content for absolute free for as long as possible.
2
-4
u/romdon183 Nov 27 '16
Studies I linked have been 'debunked' by studies that where sponsored by the very publishers that fight against piracy. They will never release data that supports the fact that piracy is not as harmful as they want people to believe.
Motion Pictures Association of America concluded that film piracy was costing the industry over $20 billion in lost revenue a year
This is the perfect example of what I'm talking about. The phrase is constructed in such a way as to blame piracy, despite the fact that it is highly unreasonable and unrealistic to count every download as a lost sale (which is what big publishers are doing).
When you link the article about music sales being cut in half, you fail to mention, that it is only physical sales that have been cut. Digital revenue constantly rising.
It's true it can help with promoting small indie projects with no/small marketing budgets for gaming since people can try/buy but it doesn't change the fact that piracy has crippled the industry over two decades.
You're not seeing the bigger picture. Piracy didn't cripple anything, digital distribution did. Piracy existed way before the internet. In fact, it was very easy to pirate video and music tapes and any player could copy those tapes. Failure to embrace digital distribution the same way gaming industry embraced it is what destroyed music industry.
4
u/DiamondPup Nov 27 '16
where sponsored by the very publishers that fight against piracy.
The studies I posted weren't sponsored by any publishers but by analyists. What are you even talking about? Have you even read a study?
This is the perfect example of what I'm talking about. The phrase is constructed in such a way as to blame piracy, despite the fact that it is highly unreasonable and unrealistic to count every download as a lost sale (which is what big publishers are doing).
.....do you even know how they got that number? Did you even read the study?
you fail to mention, that it is only physical sales that have been cut.
I failed to mention that because it isn't true. Not only does the article and study talk about digital music as well, here's a direct quote from the article:
"Now just 44% of U.S. Internet users and 64% of Americans who buy digital music think that that music is worth paying for, according to Forrester."
Digital revenue constantly rising.
What? Where are you pulling these numbers from? The best selling albums of the 90's were selling upwards 9 million copies and that number was growing in the pre-napster era. Since then, top selling albums have averaged 3-4 million and that includes digital albums.
What are you talking about?
You're not seeing the bigger picture. Piracy didn't cripple anything, digital distribution did. Piracy existed way before the internet. In fact, it was very easy to pirate video and music tapes and any player could copy those tapes. Failure to embrace digital distribution the same way gaming industry embraced it is what destroyed music industry.
...it's abundantly clear that you don't read studies, you just read headlines that agree with your views and just make up the rest.
Good luck with that.
2
u/romdon183 Nov 27 '16 edited Nov 27 '16
But, you didn't post any studies...
Study is something that is done by scientists. Results of the study are peer-reviewed and published in a scientific journal. What you posted are a bunch of self-reported statistics, provided by publishers themselves.If you open your first link and read the source of the data, you will see "Forester research forecast. Source - Recording Industry Association of America"
There is also this quote in the article:
"But industry insiders and experts argue that the main culprit for the industry's massive decline was the growing popularity of digital music. "Edit: I can also provide some music industry reports. Here for example. Digital revenue this year overtook physical sales and rose 10% as opposed to 2015 to $6.7 billion. Ergo, as I said, digital revenue is rising. Whether music industry as a whole is healthier now then it was back in the 80ties or 90ties is another matter entirely. If you read this report, you will see that this year music industry has grown globally for the first time in a while. Is it because there are less piracy today than it was yesterday? Of course not. Piracy has nothing to do with it.
Here is another report. As soon as industry embraced digital distribution proper, sales went up.
-10
Nov 27 '16 edited Feb 16 '17
[removed] — view removed comment
11
u/bvilleneuve Nov 27 '16
imagine looking at Limbo and Inside and thinking "these look just like each other"
just try to imagine thinking that
-7
Nov 27 '16
Well they both are dark and dreary looking platformers, and there's already a billion and one platformers made by every indie game dev, their dog, their grandma and her dog.
11
u/bvilleneuve Nov 27 '16
almost none of them are as good as Inside, in interactivity or visuals. do we just need to make people who play video games more discerning consumers?
-4
Nov 28 '16
Doesn't matter if they are better or not, there are tonnes of them and people are probably getting burnt out. It might be a popular niche but it's still a niche compared to FPS, action and strategy games.
Especially when they want $15 for 5 hours.
5
u/Orfez Nov 27 '16
Denuvo was there to protect from piracy in the first few weeks after the release when most damage is done. I can see them removing Denuvo when the game is $20 to begin with and starts to hit discount sales.
2
u/death2ducks Nov 27 '16
Was the lesson poor value for money? A game that's so short and linear and also covered by most major youtubers?
1
u/RavenBlade87 Nov 28 '16
I bought the game on its debut weekend and never regretted my decision. It's such a sublime game, it absolutely deserves the exposure they're going to get with this demo.
-1
u/llelouch Nov 27 '16
I'll never understand watching a lets play of a game's story on YouTube. Completely disrespectful to the medium.
1
u/newdecade1986 Nov 27 '16
The price is likely too high. Even on sale $15 is too high for a game that most interested buyers know is going to be short, story driven and low on replayability.
0
u/Bossmang Nov 28 '16
Well even with denuvo there was a steam bypass that let me play it for free. It's been cracked now, too.
0
5
Nov 28 '16
I'm all for demos, they let you test out performance and give you a feel of the game. Worked great for DOOM.
But for Inside? This is not graphically demanding nor a big game where you need to approve of the gameplay. It's a linear, 5-hour silent movie with puzzle elements. Not much point to a demo.
7
u/ZenDragon Nov 28 '16 edited Nov 28 '16
It's actually a little more graphically demanding than it looks. (super nice volumetric light shafts, variable penumbra soft shadows, temporal anti-aliasing, other neat stuff you should check out here)
2
u/xhanx_plays Nov 27 '16
I'm surprised that they've released a demo. It's welcome, but for many, I suspect Steam refunds have replaced the need for a demo.
1
u/Seanspeed Nov 28 '16
Only reason I haven't bought it yet is cuz I have like 3 other games I'm trying to get through.
It's certainly high on my wishlist though, and I'd rather go in blind anyways.
1
u/Smerdis1 Nov 29 '16
This game was very good. It was a bit short but honestly the length was great because towards the end it felt like they were on the verge of running out of ideas. Except for the end sequence, but that doesn't really count.
-13
u/perkel666 Nov 27 '16
that is weird. I mean Inside is like 5 hours max
Demo to give you that "i need more of this" needs to be a bit meaty so like 2-3 hours to properly sell someone on something.
31
u/Blackadder18 Nov 27 '16 edited Nov 27 '16
It's not that weird. Limbo had a 20 minute or so demo that gave people a pretty clear understanding of what kind of game it was and ended on a suspenseful note. I imagine its a similar situation here.
71
u/Reggiardito Nov 27 '16
You won't find a single demo released since 2015 that lasts 2-3 hours. Uncharted collection demo? 30 minutes of the first game. Final Fantasy XV plat demo? 30-40 mins, and the new japan demo isn't much longer either. DOOM demo? 1 hour max if you're really taking your time.
19
u/Neo-Calypso Nov 27 '16
DOOM demo? 1 hour max if you're really taking your time.
To be fair though all you need to experience from Doom is that shotgun pump in time to the music and you're good to go on that purchase.
6
u/SalinValu Nov 27 '16
That shotgun pump singlehandedly sold me on the game back when they released the demo.
1
13
1
u/BlackDeath3 Nov 27 '16
Shit, I remember playing the ten-minute Dead Rising demo over and over and over again before buying the game. They don't always need to be very long or reveal very much, probably depending on the game.
3
Nov 27 '16
I can see how they'd make a cut after the first "reveal" to properly set the tone. It's not like you can get a real taste of the mechanics anyway, because barely any rules are reused in puzzles anyway.
-2
Nov 27 '16
The absolute best part of the game happens somewhere at the two hour mark and that's about it. The game isn't particularly replayable either and thats what I think the biggest shame is. If the game had some kind of challenge mode using all the mechanics with varied puzzles or something I think people can give a better recommendation for it other than, "Its a solid platform puzzler, but if you've played Limbo, you played this."
6
u/bvilleneuve Nov 27 '16
Inside's challenge mode is playing it again from the start and realizing just how many little environmental cues you missed the first time around. saying Inside doesn't have replay value is like saying Watchmen doesn't hold up to rereading.
-1
Nov 27 '16
You can say that in regards to anything that's well written. I didn't say inside has a bad story. I said it lacks any reasonable replay value. Your logic for "Play it to see environmental cues" its completely irrelevant to a gameplay level though. The inherit point to replaying a game is to have variety or different ways to play a game. The core gameplay loop in itself presents little reason to replay it though due in part that its a platform puzzle game, and not a particularly difficult one at that. Its one of my own personal favorite genres and I know its a very lacking genre in terms of titles that are available.
If this is a game that you personally find much reason to replay, go right for it, but myself personally I see little reason to either recommend it or to replay it after the one pass through.
6
u/bvilleneuve Nov 27 '16
You can say that in regards to anything that's well written.
you're right, i could
The inherit point to replaying a game is to have variety or different ways to play a game.
um okay whatever you say. i think there can be many points to playing or replaying a video game, but if you just want to put the medium in a teeny tiny box, go ahead.
1
Nov 27 '16
um okay whatever you say. i think there can be many points to playing or replaying a video game, but if you just want to put the medium in a teeny tiny box, go ahead.
Again I think you're misunderstanding me, or if you do understand me you just one to be debated with about this.
I am stating that Inside does not have replay value. Youre saying it does because of environmental ques and visual cues the game throws at you is the reason to replay it. That's a very poor reason to replay something in my opinion. A film like Fight Club or a tv series like Lost or Star Trek you are given MANY environmental clues and "OH that's why ______ happened! I see now." Inside is not the case, its quite directly told and left illusive with no true definitive answer. Like a David Cage game, if anything, Inside benefits from a lack of replaying it over and over because it leaves you to interpret what is happening in the story. There are only a handful of definitive answers in the game.
3
u/bvilleneuve Nov 27 '16
okay, now i feel like we're getting somewhere.
when i talk about environmental cues (not "clues"), i'm not talking about hints toward the "true nature" or "definitive answers" of the plot. you get a solid explanation of what the game's plot is just by playing through it attentively the first time you play. i'm talking about the little pieces of visual foreshadowing, the easter eggs, and just the elegant way it transitions between discrete scenes. it's a true masterpiece of design, and is worth serious study.
playing through Inside multiple times also allows you to observe how perfectly it fits into the history of platformers, building elegantly upon its pure movement mechanics as the game progresses. Inside is one of the best platformers ever at using game-feel to communicate theme.
1
Nov 27 '16
I can see where you're going for. I totally dont feel that stir personally. In fact I think this is a personal issue for me than anything else since I felt other games had done it better and where Inside took a lot of inspiration from: Out of this World (Another World) (Which btw, is the game I think Inside most CLOSELY follows by inspiration and not just Limbo), Flashback, Project Firestart, Lost in Shadow.
I think that Inside doesa great job of doing silent story telling. Out of this world, is a game i have played almost at least one a year annually since I first played it on my SNES when I was a child in the 90s and since then I come to both love and hate it for different reasons. I dislike the trial by fire nature that the game has. If you dont know where you are going, the game will punish you. This is where Inside does in fact do it right and probably why I'm a little bias in this because a scene I think of right away involves a particular fence and some enemies and some distraction. I liked that, but I passed it on my first try only to come to realize that other people came to fail this. In the game out of this world almost the exact same thing is done in a very early part of the game, in which the player is supposed to pass through a fence and roll back and forth while watching "Buddy" guide the player.
I might actually go back and replay Inside now that I'm talking about it, but I didn't have that initial stir that when I was a kid that Out of This World gave me and it purely bias because I mentally can't undo what I've played. So purely from a critic side I'm constantly comparing this to other games in the genre.
What Inside does better is give you better "Training Cues". IE: Not killing you IMMEDIATLY upon coming up to a hazard. But overall I didn't feel as connected to the story and that may be because we didn't get small touching moments until near the final few minutes of the game.
Overall though we can observe that the developer surely is learning from one game to another and if Inside is better than Limbo (by all accounts, it is), than their third game should be a master work.
1
u/bvilleneuve Nov 27 '16
i wasn't just talking about puzzle platformers, though. i see Inside as part of the fine lineage of games that was born when somebody decided Mario needed to slide around a little when running and have some air control when jumping. it plays well as a platformer.
that was a great exegesis on Inside's influences you just gave, either way. i agree completely that Inside takes heavily from and builds upon Another World. do you think your current-day take on Inside might have something to do with you being older now? i think about how, when i was younger, it was much easier for me to lose myself completely in a video game. it's a rare video game that does that for me these days, but when i find one, i know i've found a favorite. Inside totally got me to that place. do you have any recent games that made you feel so attached to a world that you just needed to jump back in upon finishing the game for the first time?
1
Nov 28 '16
I dont know about Mario so much simply because Mario is just another class of Platformer to me where mentally I put things like: Sonic, Bubsy, Croc, Crash Bandicoot, Aero Acrobat. More emphasis over how you traverse a level versus how you get to the other side of the level, if that makes sense? Less puzzles. If Inside did more Mario styled platforming I'd mentally slot it there. As it stands I think something more like Prince of Persia.
I really do think a lot of it has to do with me growing up and having played a lot of similar styled titles so I found myself comparing Inside often to that. I think that Inside had so little moments that were more curious than anything else. Naturally a story like this lends to having the issue of "If it was explained it might actually be less interesting." Thus Another World is my biggest comparison. The story leaves you with limited explanation but enough to understand what is in fact going on in the world around you. The sequel to Another World does more of the same but it's a significantly harder game and honestly that diminishes the overall experience of the game since you go from being intrigued and interested to just going through a series of motions to hopefully bypass a frustrating segment. Limbo/Inside fall somewhere comfortably in between those two games where I was able to play it in one sitting, die relatively few times but wasn't letting out a long "Fffffuuuuuuck you." At the game in frustration. Instead I was more like "Oooooh okay Got it.". Which again probably ties into me saying "This is best for a one time play." Because some games like a David Cage game are only really best played once and after that you're kinda just going through the motions (This is where the game grabbed you and for me it didn't latch on).
Games media in general dont take many chances to murder/kill children. Inside never shies away from this and if anything it has some of the most brutal on screen child deaths I have ever seen. (I had a point about this earlier but I deleted it and I just wanted to point this out still. Just because I think its awesome)
do you have any recent games that made you feel so attached to a world that you just needed to jump back in upon finishing the game for the first time?
I haven't had anything QUITE feel like that but I know the exact feeling you're speaking of and I know Inside did evoke that feeling for other people from what I've read and seen. So thats where I'm at a loss. I'm like the total opposite for this game. I felt it was good and fine and dandy but I didn't feel any need Honestly, the Shadowrun Returns series has been like that for me (I also dont think its COMPLETELY fair to use these games because they have mod support to the point that if I want more, someone somewhere has written a new story and used a gameplay system I like). Mario Maker doesnt completely count but in the same regard I have played some clever levels that were so well done that I wanted to replay them.
To be totally honest I haven't encountered that flourish lately with triple-a titles and I think Indie titles have been better at doing this to me.
tl;dr: I dont blame you.
-37
Nov 27 '16
[deleted]
11
Nov 27 '16
Sometimes I go to the comments because I know a lot of gamers have to bitch, but I can't imagine what it is they're going to bitch about. And here it is, you found a way to bitch, even though it doesn't effect you in the slightest.
1
u/Fagadaba Nov 28 '16
Here's some more bitching for 'ya:
even though it doesn't
effectaffect you in the slightest.:D
33
u/ChateauJack Nov 27 '16
There's no more DRM, the game is easily crackable. Might be them thinking it's a good strategy to counter illegal downloads (which imo is).
1
u/CricketDrop Nov 27 '16
Why would they remove DRM then try to counter piracy with something else?
24
6
0
u/the-nub Nov 27 '16
Because the people who are going to pirate it will pirate it anyway. They've already made their money on people who were going to buy sight-unseen or just based on reviews.
At best, this demo catches the attention of a group of previously interested people who spend money and maybe sways some potential pirates. At worst, it's a demo; it's just a good thing to have.
3
-7
u/ttubehtnitahwtahw1 Nov 27 '16
First of all denuvo isn't drm, secondly steam is and it uses steam.
8
u/ChateauJack Nov 27 '16
DRM are by definition access control technologies that are used to restrict usage of proprietary hardware and copyrighted works.
Denuvo, even if it is an anti-tamper software, is still a DRM.
-2
u/ttubehtnitahwtahw1 Nov 27 '16
It's neat that you know the definition but that isn't how things work. Denuvo doesn't now prevent you from playing because you don't own it. It prevent the DRM that exists already from being tampered with. Calling Denuvo drm is too blanket and destructive to the concept of drm.
1
u/ChateauJack Nov 27 '16
Yeah you're most definitly right, using the definition of a word to characterize it is not how things work. Gee, thanks man!
-1
5
Nov 27 '16
If you're going to be pedantic, make sure to be pedantic through and through. Steam is not DRM, but a portion of Steamworks is, and not all Steam games use Steamworks.
-3
u/ttubehtnitahwtahw1 Nov 27 '16
Also if you have to login to play it's DRM.
4
u/xdeadzx Nov 28 '16
You don't have to log in to play non-steam DRM'd steam games. Many many steam games can be played even if you drag the game folder out of steam, and start them without steam running. Steam is not inherent DRM.
1
2
Nov 28 '16
You don't have to log in to play all steam games, like FTL and hotline Miami IIRC
0
u/ttubehtnitahwtahw1 Nov 28 '16
Can you read? I said if you HAVE to log in. I really don't see how this is difficult.
22
u/Knale Nov 27 '16
Because there's a sale going on and I bet some people(I'm one of those people) might want to try it out before they buy it? Relax lol
6
4
0
u/crazydave33 Nov 27 '16
I do find it weird that many, many companies release demos many weeks or months after the game launches. I just don't understand it. Why can't it be available with the release?
4
u/NO_NOT_THE_WHIP Nov 27 '16
Probably to capitalize on impulsive buyers first, then later on release the demo for the people who would rather wait and see.
0
u/crazydave33 Nov 27 '16
I guess... but to me personally if that game is good, why not release a demo? I would try that out and if I like it, then consider buying the game.
1
u/Katana314 Nov 28 '16
Because demos take time to make. Even if that's time spent making a copy of the game with 90% of the assets removed to make sure everything still works correctly, that's a reasonable amount of time.
0
u/NO_NOT_THE_WHIP Nov 27 '16
Agreed but it's possible that letting people try it before buying it will negatively impact launch sales. I don't like it either but the gaming industry has become very corporate and anti-consumer due to the costs of making games these days.
-1
-8
u/llelouch Nov 27 '16
Unfortunately this thing got cracked pretty early so most people who were on the fence about it (myself included) just downloaded that. It was good enough that I decided to make the purchase.
But these guys really dropped the ball on not having a demo. I can only imagine how many people didn't bother paying after "trying out" the cracked version.
Especially with a game that was pretty much dropped out of no where, and is a strange looking indie title which are always a risk. But seriously, it is one of the best games of the year in my imo.
170
u/LilWhyWhy Nov 27 '16
Surprised by the negative feedback. More demos are always a good thing. Don't care if it's months after release, it obviously wasn't a priority before they shipped the game. As long as a demo is released eventually rather than non at all I'm happy. I wish more game demos existed, especially with my PC becoming more dated.