I understand you are trying to be diplomatic here, but I don't think that STP review is good for anyone. Sword of Fargoal is probably the best entry point for people who are "not into this sort of game". I don't think you should be changing any "flaws" to try to appeal to people like Jordan Minor. The fact is that rogue games are what they are, if you change too much of that formula, they aren't a roguelike game anymore. There's a reason games like this stay true to their formula, it's because that's the way people want them to stay. Sure there have been huge advancements in the RPG genre since these games first arrived, heck, pretty much every RPG ever made owes something to the original D&D. But if you add in all that excess stuff, then Sword of Fargoal just becomes another RPG that's already been done to death countless times. Honestly, I only occasionally will get into a certain RPG, it's not my favorite genre by a long shot. But Sword of Fargoal and Rogue Touch gave me everything I needed, without any extra crap, and that's what I truly love about these games. Ideally, a niche genre type game should really be reviewed by somebody who understands them. Not necessarily likes or dislikes them, but at least someone who gets the gist of what they are about. The little synopsis at the top of the STP review is killing me, I can only imagine how many people will just gloss over these blurbs and look at the score, and dismiss Sword of Fargoal: Pros Improved yet faithful adaptation of the classic Commodore 64 game; charming presentation Cons Repetitive look and feel; no real sense of progression; difficult without payoff Bottom Line This remake reveals several flaws of its predecessor as well as the entire genre of randomly generated dungeon crawlers. The "Cons" are a joke. I don't think this game is repetitive, I think there is a good variety of different dungeon themes and the color pallette used is beautiful and non-traditional. Maybe it's repepetive because all there is is dungeons?? And no real sense of progression? Ummmm, what do you call me carefully uncovering each square of a new floor, revealing what's underneath the fog, until the entire floor and all the sub-dungeons are uncovered. That's a pretty significant sense of progression to me. I'm one more floor closer to the sword, I have progressed. And the real killer, "difficult without payoff". Ummmmm excuse me? Yes it's difficult, however, not nearly as difficult as most roguelike games. Rogue caters to the masochist in us all, spending hours or days with one character only to have him die at the drop of a hat is a feature that is part of a roguelike game. I love it. And obviously he didn't rescue the sword, because the sense of payoff when you finally do is astounding. It makes all the hours you spend playing and all the cheap deaths you befall completely and soundly worth it. And finally, the "Bottom Line, This remake reveals several flaws of its predecessor as well as the entire genre of randomly generated dungeon crawlers." Well, it sounds to me like this reviewer is predisposed to dislike any game that features randomized dungeons, as they are inherintly flawed (in his opinion). At least that's the feeling I get from that statement, so apparently this game was doomed before he even played it. I can appreciate different reviews and opinions, but this STP review just flat out fails. Sorry for such long rant, this review really ruffled my feathers And PS: Since STP hasn't done it, here's my review of Saucelifter - It rules, 'nuff said.
Well spoke. The review disturbs me because roguelikes are a beloved genre to me and so many are wholly unaware of them. This (game) is a wonderful opportunity for new folks to get in on it and the STP review makes it seem like the game is poor. In fact Sword of Fargoal is one of the best Roguelikes I've ever seen. And certainly the most approachable. blakespot
What if we who disagree with the STP review post our comments below the review AND add a user-submitted review to the article? That's what I did, anyways and as the above poster noted, the STP reviewer just doesn't "GET" what a roguelike is.
Heh, thanks boarddumb. Saucelifter does rock, doesn't it! Sequel this spring/summer hopefully. Yes, I don't agree with the review; for one, random dungeons are what keep me even *interested* in developing this game for as long as I have... I have to have fun playing the game, or I'm not making it right! And intelligent randomization is the key to replayability, otherwise it's just the same old story. Don't worry, I'm not going to break anything about Sword of Fargoal to appease non-roguelike fans. Quite the contrary... my goal is to convert them somehow, and let them see the light. So this review, if anything, exposes the achilles heel of certain players at which I can aim Cupid's arrow. Anyway, enough yapping from me! I have monsters to pixel, intelligent behaviours to implement, new dungeon maps to populate.
You and me both -- that's pretty much my take on this ridiculous review. It reads like a review from someone who doesn't like roguelikes, doesn't play them, and based his entire review around a five minute video he watched of it. His feeling that it lacked a sense of progression probably came from the load bar going too slow and stuttering the video playback. But as a certain someone pointed out to me privately, this is the site that holds Uggles up as a 4-star yard stick against which all other games should be measured, which pretty much says everything you need to know about STP's credibility.
@Blake: Thanks, I see that we agree that the bigger picture here is not the fact that someone doesn't like this game, but that the actual review itself fails at representing this particular niche genre. It's like they're reviewing the game based on what they wish it was, rather than what it IS and what it does so well. That's my biggest problem, and I don't want new players to be turned off by something like that. And I don't think we're merely a group of fanboys scoffing just because someone gave a game we like a poor review. The fact that you're not overly-active in the forums, but you're posting your concerns in this thread shows that there really is a problem with that review. I'm curious to have either of the STP members here weigh in on this topic. Keep in mind I'm not bashing on STP or anything here, I like their website and one person's review doesn't taint that. But I do think they have an obligation to represent a game they are reviewing correctly, and I wonder what their take on this is. At the very least, have a roguelike enthusiast do an additional review for the game. Game Informer does this (last time I read one), and it's nice to have another person's take on a game. @Madgarden: Glad to hear about Saucelifter sequel. Please make sure it contains both a "cow abduction" and "ladle" mode. Thanks. And don't worry, I trust you as a devout fan to the original SoF that you wouldn't do anything to break the game. I trust you guys! Just wanted to get my thoughts out there... just in case. @Mindfield: Yeah, like I said I don't totally dislike STP or anything, but sometimes their reviews make me scratch a hole in my head. It's like they'll give a poor review to a game that everybody praises just to be "the one that gave a poor review to something that everyone praises". Not always, but I get that feeling sometimes. In this case, though, I think the review is just flawed at even the most basic levels.
That's just it though. For a review site that purportedly holds itself up as a premiere destination for App Store reviews, there is a deplorable lack of journalistic integrity. Not that I equate iPhone reviews with proper journalism, but any reviewer worth his or her salt should hold themselves to similar standards of professionalism and objectivity if they want to be taken seriously, and that's where STP so often falls over on its ear. Granted, when I wrote reviews I tended to pepper them with snark, sarcasm, and my own particular brand of wit (or witlessness, depending on who you ask), but I always maintained as much objectivity as possible where it was merited. At least a few of STP's reviewers do not. The real problem is that there are those who will take those reviews at face value and not buy the game because they take STP's advice, and that's both a damn shame and an embarrassment to STP as a whole. It's hard to take anything on STP seriously when at least a few of its reviewers shouldn't be writing anything more complicated than shopping lists.
Thanks for letting me know, that I'm not alone. From time to time, I got the same feeling. And btw, never played any dungeon crawler before Rogue Touch. I liked this one, but it's really difficult. Then, SOF came around, I tried and fell in love immediately. So, this game also wins people outside the rogue-like fan community.
Heh, WHAT? So, he's floating over everything, you can't open chests etc. for 3 hours? Alright, I'll take a closer look... it's odd, because it's just another *effect* like any spell, poison, etc. so it should wear off in a timely fashion. EDIT: Did you notice (3 hours ago...) if it said "You float to the ground..." at some point?
Reviews of SoF My View Hey Your Personal Robot (YPR) and Everyone, In my eyes, "Improved yet faithful adaptation of the classic Commodore 64 game; charming presentation" is a good thing! Not like getting 2/4 is fun, but I don't take offense. Like Paul, I think the STP review issues a challenge. But rather than taking it as a challenge to "roguelikes" in general, I see it more as a direct challenge to SoF to continue to try and find its place in the modern world. Historically-speaking, I would almost say that SoF was an 'accidental roguelike,' with my never having intended it to be anything other than accessible, fun, and involving. I wasn't exposed to other games like it at the time it was created other than having played "Adventure" (Colossal Cave) on mainframe terminals and later having seen contemporaries like "Temple of Apshai" so that's why it has tended to be more of a casual bridge to that genre, even to this day. My goal is to always to and keep it relevant, current, and inviting to today's audiences, while still capturing their original charm and integrity from its roots. Like YPR says, he was introduced to this specific sub-genre (dungeon crawlers) recently, like many others could be. IMO we are in a new time the era of instant music purchases, 3-D movies, and short game-play experience expectations and I believe there is merit in finding a way to walk that fine line between traditional and modern expectations. In that sense, I am glad there is a forum where the reviewer has spoken for what many people considering buying the game may be "thinking" or at least might think once they buy it... That said, we (Paul, Elias, and I) can work to make SoF that much better, and continue to draw more people into a genre that we all love. Making it a great twist on what *was* and making it something new. Just my two cents... -- Jeff McCord
I don't know that I'd take STP's review as any sort of challenge. SoF has found its place in the world, and it is a good place. Perhaps it's been "lumped" in with Roguelikes accidentally, but that's not at all a bad place to be, especially when it has the fortunate position of being both a kind of entry-level Roguelike, and being its own standalone game that just happens to be rather Roguelike in a more approachable, less cumbersome way that is accessible by a much wider audience, including those who never played Roguelikes before or who aren't even particularly fans of the genre. It has a knack for transcending certain boundaries even as it plays well within them, and that says a hell of a lot about the game. STP's review shouldn't be looked at as Jordan throwing down the gauntlet -- unless you prefer to think of him then stomping on said gauntlet repeatedly out of spite and then crossing his arms and holding his breath until someone gets him some ice cream. It's a luke warm review from someone who appears to approach these sort of games with the same level of intellectual honesty as Glenn Beck does liberals. Only without the crying and hissy fits. Maybe.
I don't think there's anything wrong with Fargoal being a roguelike, whether that was accidental or not. I think most people just don't 'get' roguelikes (especially by today's gaming standards) because it doesn't make sense to a lot of people to have a game where you're pretty much supposed to lose in the most glorious manner possible. That's what makes these games great, is ending up with stories about how you equipped some armor and it turned out to be cursed so all your movement got flipped in reverse and you tried randomly drinking potions you picked up to try to find a way to remove a curse only to drink an illusion potion, have all monsters turn in to rabbits, and finally getting killed by a gang of elder dragons while you hopelessly stumbled around waiting for the potion to wear off or for a way to break the curse. In fact, if I had one criticism for Fargoal, it's that these hilarious game ending catastrophes are too few and far between.
That's what happens usually. But in this case I didn't see the message. I didn't notice right away but once I tried going down the stairs I realized that I was floating still. It's a bit hazy but what i remember was I had a combination of teleportitis and floating (from mushroom effects) on level 18. I was teleported around several times (maybe even up to level 17???) and I saved the game as i went on a break from the game. When I resumed the game later I was still floating though teleportitis eventually wore off. I tried all kinds of things to stop floating like casting drift, teleport, reloading game, turning off itouch etc. ... nothing worked so far. Thanks. Hope this helps.
I would say the reviewers comments that the difficulty has no payoff are BS. I don't think he played the game long enough. When you running around the earlier levels, it's hard, but it's not so much of a big deal if you die. (my second game, I got down to level 18, explored everything, and then got killed, my third game, i died on floor two!) My point being that it's when you've invested a certain amount of time to get to the lower levels that the tension of the game starts to really kick in, knowing you could be dead any moment and have to try it all again! I personally found getting out with the sword hugely satisfying, and I'm looking forward to the update because it sounds like getting out after that will be even more challenging. I also believe a lot more people see the itunes reviews than the STP one.
fellowes, Thanks for the bug report. And, I'm sorry... I think your dude is pooched. There was a case where an effect's duration could be canceled, but the effect itself was not being cleared. It didn't really matter for anything, except levitation since it's sort of a special case. Seems pretty rare. So, I think this happened to you.
Back to the whole review controversy, I like best reviews that try to lay out the facts as objectively as possible and then share their own subjective conclusion but all the while making it clear, "Hey, this is my take, your mileage may differ." and not as this STP review who lays out his assessment as a statement of fact.
