RPGWatch Forums
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

RPGWatch Forums (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/index.php)
-   News Comments (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Antharion - Falls Short (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=18660)

Dhruin November 18th, 2012 08:21

Antharion - Falls Short
 
Antharion has fallen short of their Kickstarter goal, closing at $13.8k out of $15k. For fans, it looks like they plan to re-group and try again. From the comments:
Quote:

Alright, you guys have convinced us!! We're going to relaunch, but we'll take a week to regroup and polish. We've learned a lot this first time around and will definitely put this knowledge to good use for the relaunch. Check back here or on our website for details - and we'd continue to appreciate any feedback or advice regarding Antharion or how to move forward with Kickstarter. Thanks again guys!
orphicsoftware.com
More information.

Twotricks November 18th, 2012 08:21

What? I am surprised. This one actually looked very promising.

zahratustra November 18th, 2012 09:57

Ok guys and galls, each to their own and all that but PLEASE could somebody who contributed to game's fund explain to me what's so "very promising" about it? Graphics were (are) atrocious and bits of the game world that I have seen certainly didn't look all that very interesting to me. Are mere promises of "an immense open-ended living-breathing world where the player is free to go anywhere and do anything" and "deep tactical turn-based combat system" enough to get you going?

Dhruin November 18th, 2012 10:29

Thought the graphics were quite charming but that was a low priority for me. All pre-released games are "promises" - and surely Kickstarters are the very definition of promises.

So, yes, tactical combat and living, open worlds are a pretty good start. Reminded me of an Ultima with better combat.

Myrkrel November 18th, 2012 11:27

The mixture of a tactical turn-based, party-based game with an interactive open world rewarding exploration is what sold me on it. The Codex interview stirred my interest a lot as I liked the way the developer responded. And the pixel art is quite good in my opinion - but of course art is a subjective thing.

I think their biggest hurdle to get lots of funding might be a perceived mismatch of art style and gameplay. The art style (especially the big heads) makes one think of casual, lighthearted games. The gameplay looks to be entirely in the other direction (turn-based, tactical, intricate, deep and thoughtful). I imagine if it had a more traditional WRPG look it would get a lot more backers.

I've grown to like the art style (even the big heads) but I imagine it is a turn-off for some.

rune_74 November 18th, 2012 16:47

I fail to see how the graphics were atrocious. They weren't cutting edge 3d but they sure did the job.

Oh well, he has confirmed they will be relaunching. I pushed him a lot during the campaign to post more updates but it didn't seem to get done. I hope if he does it again he does more updates.

Kordanor November 18th, 2012 17:32

I also liked the game in some ways, but the controls in combat seemed to be horrible and the comical bobble-heads really kept me away.

If they had taken a more serious attempt, like Myrkel suggested, I also would have pledged. And I am not really talking about “better graphics”. The graphics itself were good enough for me and the sprites in 3D surrounding also look quite decent. Avernum is one of my favorites this year and I’d love to see more games like this.

ToddMcF2002 November 18th, 2012 17:36

Just my opinion: I think this is an opportunity for those who say "gameplay first" to step up to the plate. An RPG with turn based tactical combat should have our support even if the graphics fall a bit short. I'm a cheap SOB but I'll contribute this time.

getter77 November 18th, 2012 17:36

Hope the next attempt makes it, but launching that soon after Black Friday might make for a tricky start.

rune_74 November 18th, 2012 17:47

The thing is, if he restarts and gets a ton of support right away they will be in the hot items this week area getting more support.

Shagnak November 18th, 2012 21:56

Ah, crap. Oh well, they'll have my support next time.

Wulf November 19th, 2012 10:21

supporting a kick-start project for liking the game is one thing but pledging out of sympathy is a completely different kettle of fish - it becomes a charity - a credit card charity - - - - - "send your sympathetic donations now"

DArtagnan November 19th, 2012 12:52

Gameplay first != aesthetics don't matter.

GhanBuriGhan November 19th, 2012 13:14

I didn't like the graphics when I had just looked at the screenshots, but I thought it actually looked quite good in motion. Tehy have some nice atmospheric effects and nice dynamic lighting. So I was OK with the Aesthetics, with exception of the lack of movement animation.

sakichop November 19th, 2012 13:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by zahratustra (Post 1061171474)
Are mere promises of "an immense open-ended living-breathing world where the player is free to go anywhere and do anything" and "deep tactical turn-based combat system" enough to get you going?

Yes and yes.

I will take that any day over walking down corridors of beautiful graphics mashing buttons at everything that moves.

The market is full of linear, shallow,button mashing, graphicfests.

CrazyIrish November 19th, 2012 14:04

Aesthetics do matter. We are talking about a primarily visual media here. Cutting edge 3d graphics with full dynamic post processing aren't needed. But if it looks like a $0.99 casual iPad game, you simply aren't going to get the same response as a more serious looking endeavor.

GhanBuriGhan November 19th, 2012 14:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrazyIrish (Post 1061171596)
Aesthetics do matter. We are talking about a primarily visual media here. Cutting edge 3d graphics with full dynamic post processing aren't needed. But if it looks like a $0.99 casual iPad game, you simply aren't going to get the same response as a more serious looking endeavor.

Of course, but they are also asking for $15.000, not $1.500.000.

DArtagnan November 19th, 2012 14:14

I guess that, conclusively, most people can't live with visual standards that low.

They could hire a real artist before trying again - and I'm sure they could double their budget - and be more than able to pay for it. A lot of amateur people out there with talent, who wouldn't need much money to create some quality stuff.

pibbur who November 19th, 2012 14:44

My problem with the visuals in this game and many other indie games is that the avatars dont fit with the environment. They look like something taken from a comic book. I think if would be better if they were a bit less sharpely drawn. To illustrate my point: I think the visual quality of the avatar in U8 (not including the animations) fit very well with the background in that game.

Other than that, graphics are well, within what I find acceptible. So may be I'll sponsor them next time.

pibbur who feels a bit pixellated at the moment

4

DArtagnan November 19th, 2012 14:48

Agreed. I, for one, will never figure out when "cutie cutie cartoonish" became the accepted norm in the indie segment. I feel like I'm from a different planet when I hear so many RPG fans throw praise on that visual approach.

Then again, I feel that very same way when people praise JRPGs.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:09.
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch