Yikes! Resonance review on Gamespot

Brace yourself before you start reading this review of Resonance on Gamespot...

http://www.gamespot.com/resonance/reviews/resonance-review-6384992/

I haven't played the game so I don't know how accurate their review is, but given their past adventure game reviews I don't put any weight on it.

Ana

I personally would have given the game a 6.5 or 7. It's definitely not mediocre but not great either. The review made it out like it had no merit at all which anyone can tell isn't true.

Still, they've done worse:
Anacapri The Dream: 2.5
Scratches: 3.9
The Dig: 4.5
Barrow Hill: 2.6
Phantasmagoria: 3.7

I have no desire to play Resonance. I had no desire to play it before I read that review. I don't like sloppy graphics and Wadjet Eye hasn't published a game with decent graphics yet, though I enjoyed the drecky looking The Shivah...back when it was free and the product of a forgivable amateur.

That said, it really makes me mad that anyone who has a different opinion is jumped on immediately and inevitably, somewhere down the line, is called a troll. If the reviewer didn't like it, he didn't like it. What does it matter what site he's on? He gave his reasons. He doesn't have to have the same, lock-step opinion as all the fans out there. Frankly, I wish someone had thought as little of Botanicula as I did but I have better sense than to say, almost anywhere else, that I got bored with it.

At least here on Gameboomers I won't get the finger in response, which is what generally happens when someone goes against the current.

Gil.

This is what happened to me on another adventure gaming forum when I said I thought Resonance wasn't that great. I'm glad to hear that GB tolerates different opinions.

Having played the game I personally think this review is more accurate than the 4/5's and 4.5/5's that it has been getting on a lot of other sites. I don't think he gives enough weight to the interesting puzzle system but he's right about the writing and dialogues being weak.

Gamespot are known for slating Adventures. I don't know why they bother to review them

So, none of the reviewers on Gamespot...I assume they have more than one...are ever right?


Gil.

One can't say a reviewer is right or wrong ....

What one can say is that reviews at Gamespot are seldom "favourable" if they are about Adventure games

I try to keep an open mind when it comes to games and reviews. I have played many different games as well as many demos for games, including, but not limited to the demo fra Gray Matter. Let me be frank here: I didn't like it, based on the demo. To me, it looked like something from 5-10 years ago, slideshows graphics I can learn to live with, but the story to me was very slow in picking up and the puzzles were puzzles from adventure games many years ago. Nothing wrong with that, I know many people like this. But if I were to make a review for Gray Matter, I would list why I didn't like the game, the reasons for it, and of course also mention the things I found that was done well in the game.

A review is a personal opinion of the reviewer of said game, say Gray Matter, or Sherlock Holmes: Testament of Sherlock Holmes (to take more recent and upcoming example). Most reviewers however do not know to review a game properly - and I suspect that it has something to do with this: most game reviewers began to review games 20 years ago or 10 years when they were in school. And as such the review form for games didn't exist yet. But as my old Danish teacher always said, "it is not enough to say This game sucks or I like this game. You must give your reasons for it." And reviewevers at gamespot - and other major gaming websites tend to forget this - when they review adventure games - or sometimes - rpg games as well.

Also, many times it seems that some publishers puts a mild pressure on gamesites to publish a favorable score for say games like Call of Duty or Mass Effect 3 - that's why I only trust my fellow Boomers's rview of adventure games or other rpg-players review of rpgs. However, for a game like DA2, my opinion (great game) seemed to be in the minority - at least on the Bioware boards.

Gamespot is a major game site, and needs to compare say Resonance or Gray Matter or any Sherlock Holmes game to what is called mainstream. And try to figure out how the mainstream audience will find this game and as such review the game accordingly....

This particular reviewer at Gamespot did give his reasons for his opinion of Resonance. He didn't totally dish it. He said it had "some clever puzzles, innovative 'memory', and good music". But he thought it was "poorly conceived and written" and that puzzles were often "contrived or confusing".

People may not agree with him but he can't be accused of flipping it off as Mediocre for no reason.

Gil.

I might be wrong here but when you say 'mainstream' I'm guessing you mean other genres that fall ouside of the niche of pure adventures? As such they should be reviewed and graded according to the particular niche they fall into & compared to similar & not 'mainstream'! If the review is good enough it will state what niche the game falls into and give enough info for fans of the genre & broader audiences to make up their minds about whether the game is for them - whether the reviewer liked the game or not is neither here nor there to me as long as they have detailed their reasons!

I loved Resonance but actually, in hindsight, can't disagree with a lot of the criticisms except for the part about the 'trial & error' of what characters to use where - whatever happened to a little bit of working things out for yourself & not being led by the hand! - it was quite obvious after a little 'research' who were the best people to use! The Gamespot review did mention the positive aspects of the game which unfortunately got overshadowed by harsher views! The fact is that often a game, film etc that has flaws can be more appealing & popular than something deemed to be more perfect!

traveler, I would hesitate to call the graphics in WadgetEye Games 'sloppy'! - yes! they're retro but I think they do a great job of producing very good games on a limited budget well reflected in the price you pay for them! - but no! not to everyone's taste!

chrissie,

Have you ever played the free game, Spooks? Well done, very good, interesting graphics. Kinda short but haven't I read that Resonance isn't all that long? Or the free game, A Tale of Two Kingdoms? The game is long, has several endings and the graphics are immeasurably better than those in Resonance. The limited budget came out of those dev's pockets but they did a great job on the graphics (especially in Spooks by The Ivy).

"Retro" is a choice and not a very good one, IMO.

Gil.

Hi traveler, I haven't played either of those games but will take a look at both of them!

chrissie,

Two Kingdoms (2007) is the product of a team and I think it says something for them that their game is still one of the most downloaded on AGS. The background graphics are especially nice, definitely not retro.

Spooks is the first game that Ivy did. It is Retro, so you see I can like a game like this even if I prefer something more polished. Here, Ivy was just starting and her use of color, while not earth-shakingly creative, was clever, I thought. Since then, she has made more games (Little Girl in Underland cracked me up) and the graphics keep getting better (although she seriously cannot draw. )


This is my major problem with Wadjet Eye. The look of a game is dead last in their 'to do' list and stays dead last.

Gil.

I just got my boxed copy of Resonance, which I ordered a while back without having seen the graphics because it was in a box. I agree with Traveler about Wadjet games in general. Resonance is clever enough in terms of the interface that I sighed, reminded myself how much I enjoyed GK1 a couple of years ago, and decided to play. So far, as long as I keep saying to myself "looks aren't everything," I'm enthralled, in fact, enthralled enough that I just started over once I actually read the directions.

Reading the instructions for Resonance is a good idea.

I know the GK1 analogy is false in the sense that the graphics were good when it was made. My point, though, is that I loved it playing for the first time when graphics had moved light years ahead.

If everything in Resonance blows up per the beginning sequence at the end, I'm going to feel shafted. Graphics so retro that I have to play through a veil of goodwill won't sustain that much geo-political noir. But don't tell me.

I too ignore Game Spot having seen bias against Adventure Games many years ago. Rather than get frustrated with the joy stick crowd I stay away.

Regarding comments about retro graphics found in Wadjet Eye's games it is my sense the decision to go retro is a result of economics rather than choice. Dave is using the free downloadable game engine from AGS to make his games. What independent creative developer can afford the elaborate game engines available to the corporate operations? What independent creative developer stands a chance to work with such an operation? You have to start somewhere.

You do not see those guys giving free game engines to struggling artists. As seen in the Blackwell series the creativity found in character development, voice acting and story content is far superior to a lot of the garbage foisted upon us by graphics hogs.

I am no fan of "retro" graphics, however, a close look at any Blackwell Game will reveal superior clarity than that found in GK1. I am not saying Blackwell is better than GK1 as a game, but the graphics are. The retro graphics are just an excuse to pile on. Since when are the graphics essential to story telling? Oh yeah, graphics can hide the lack of good writing.

You have to examine the game not the glitz. I could list a hundred games right now produced by corporate gaming that can't hold a candle to some of Dave's creations. You might consider many games hide their failures behind glitz. If my sense is correct I'd guess Game Spot's trashing in their latest hit piece is based upon two things. One is, it's an Adventure Game, the second is the retro graphics. The joy stick crowd depends on Star Wars glitz not content.

The reviewer supposedly listed what he did not like about the game. Big Deal, I guarantee you if I had a particular bias against a genre I would have no problem finding several weak points in any "game of the year" and beat it to death.

I have not played Resonance it does not appear to be a game I'd like. That sense has nothing to do with graphics. Resonance simply is set in a theme I do not enjoy or hold an interest in. Just my two cents.

oldmariner,

Actually, yes, you do. It took me less than a minute to find Panda 3D a free, open source game engine. Look at the games that were made with it: Ghost Pirates of Vooju Island and A Vampyre Story. It is not the only free, open source game engine out there that could probably beat the socks off AGS.



By the same token, if someone has a down on a particular website, nothing anyone can say will convince him or her that one of their reviewers was being fair and setting aside bias as much as possible. Bias works in more than one way.

Gil.

[/quote]

By the same token, if someone has a down on a particular website, nothing anyone can say will convince him or her that one of their reviewers was being fair and setting aside bias as much as possible. Bias works in more than one way.

Gil. [/quote]

That is true, however, far too many AGs are trashed on that particular site supporting opponent's view they are biased. The body of reviews in total strongly suggest they are only interested in supporting the joy stick crowd.

The attitude presented at Game Spot appears to be condescending regarding AGs. You are free to defend them if you wish, but that is how I see it based on hundreds of reviews that appear there. If I want a review of an Adventure Game I will search here and at Adventure Gamers or Just Adventure. At least on these sites I have a sense the reviewers know what they are talking about and do not present a superior know it all attitude.

I am not defending "them". I am saying that I found this one reviewer credible. Others may believe they all march in lockstep. So be it.

Gil.

Traveler

I did not read the review in question, nor have I played the game.

Based on comments you have made here over the years my view is your opinions are valid. I have no reason to doubt you on this point. I will take your word that what the reviewer wrote is credible.

In general I have a low regard for that web site's opinions and do not go there. Gameboomers, Adventure Gamers and Just Adventure along with Mr. Bill are all that is required to find a reliable Adventure Game review.

Isn't it great that we can all have our own opinions?

Previous posts lead me to wonder why Gameboomers isn't reviewing Resonance. So many games, so little time?

It's on the list for reviewing!

You're a trooper, as amazing as the intrepid WT writers.

That's a tough standard to live up to! Thank you for your kind words.

Traveler

After defending this thing without seeing it, I bought it at Gog's fire sale last week for five bucks.

I played at it for a week on and off. Let me put it to you this way. I do not ever agree with Gamespot but this time for different reasons I came to a similar conclusion. Gripe number one, once installed when I click on the icon I get the no go message suggesting I run the game as an administrator. That Win 7 64 bit can be picky.

All well and good. I right click on the icon choosing run as administrator. A setup box pops up requiring I set various things and when done there are four choices.

Save
Save and Run
Cancel
Advanced

What does save mean to you guys? To me it means save your selected options.

Save and run should be obvious as well as cancel.

Advanced adds two options, that is the literal view. There is only one option really. The first selection is a drop down box offering one choice. "Don't Run a Replay" Whatever that means. "Don't run a replay" is the only option offered. There is no unselect/select checkbox meaning no matter what you are not going to run a replay. The second box allows you to limit the maximum amount of cache memory. At least there you can have your pick of four preselected values.

I make my selections, none of it is rocket science then click Save. I next attempt to start the game to receive the same message "you must run as an administrator." My response sarcastically is, "what do you think I just did?"

Which begs the question, what was it I saved? Certainly the instruction to run as administrator fell on deaf ears.

I again right click telling it to run as administrator to find the same box. Inside that box I find Save not only failed to retain run as administrator, it failed to retain the setup. I setup again and this time I choose option two, Save and Run.

Imagine that the game loads up and runs just fine. Fine is subjective at best. You see the developer told us how clever he was with his inventory tweaking. I like innovation. Except there is no manual included with the Gog release. Nothing personal but when you change operating procedure you should describe how the changes work. It is called a manual.

only a developer's diary is included with the Gog files. There you get a very short video where the developer tells you how clever he is with his innovations to the use of your inventory. Vince 12 also discussed his addition of short and long term memory. Perhaps more than a three minute video with less self promotion and more operation detail would have helped.

It was Chrissy in her walkthrough that actually described how to navigate the game. Thank you Chrissy.

I found myself struggling to get into this game discovering there is really nothing to generate my interest. Yes I managed to manipulate the "clever" inventory, short and long term memory operations. Note to the developer, they are clever but cumbersome at best. Sometimes you should leave things alone.

Now that I managed to get past the first few scenes it was time to save and quit.

Again I visit the dreaded desktop icon. Save and Run, like its brethren Save, failed to retain the set up. You think Cancel is the correct option? The result is every time I restart the game I have to right click, run as administrator, setup, save and run because nothing is saved when you tell the program to save. That is a minor frustration, except the joke goes flat really fast. Some will say I am being unreasonable to expect a computer program to retain simple instructions. I think not. I have had other programs that only needed to be told once to "Run as administrator."

Upon completion of the opening fifteen percent of the game I have had enough. The above rhetorical question is answered, Cancel is the only sensible option. We wave goodbye as this little gem is dissolving into cyberspace long gone by the time you read this.

So Traveler we have agreement this game is not top shelf material. It has achieved what precious few other games have accomplished. That is causing this gamer to throw the thing out long before reaching the end. Clearly, I could have made a better choice of how I spent my five bucks. Happily it was only five bucks. I regret not spending it on a gallon of gas. It is fair to say you will not be reading a review of Resonance from me. Well perhaps, this diatribe might be considered a review. Naw, it is simply a rant. A review is supposed to be a subjective unbiased description. I doubt this qualifies or sounds anything like subjective or unbiased.

Oldmariner,

I feel for you and I'm really surprised that they managed to screw things up so badly you can't save! Every free game I've played made with the AGS engine, including one of Wadjet Eye's earliest games, The Shivah (free then, not now), was quite easy to set up and run. In fact, I seldom had to change the defaults.

But those appear to have been made with an older version of AGS. There's a newer version which Wadjet Eye upgraded to, according to a reviewer at Forbes (yes, Forbes !), because of "the later version’s compatibility with Valve Corporations Steamworks, and thus the possibility of a smoother path to Valve’s dominant PC digital download store". (No comment.)

Well, maybe it wasn't this updated antique that was the problem for you, but Forbes' reviewer, who loved the graphics and said they were beautiful, making me wonder just how thick a bottle-bottom he looks through, also said "The graphics are similarly retro, in part a conscious artistic choice and in part a response to the limitations of the game engine.

So maybe it was the game engine. Or someone messing around with it. What do I know. But the earlier AGS games run on my 7/64 bit without tweaking. And no need to Run as Administrator.

Whether the engine was the trouble or not, in my opinion a developer who is selling games shouldn't be using AGS since it's getting fairly old by now, has "limitations" and there are newer, better ones out there. Free, too.

As far as ranting goes, rant away. That may not have been a review but it surely should give fair warning to those thinking of playing Resonance that they might run into trouble and, if the developers come by here, to let them know that someone who is always fair and very informative and helpful in his reviews is just a tad unhappy with the mechanics of Resonance as well (I think?) as the game itself.

Gas is $5 a gallon? Aaack! It was bad enough at 4 bucks the last time I downloaded...er, filled up with gas.

Trav

I had exactly the same difficulties with game settings on my windows 7 computer, annoying yes, but I learned the procedure. You have to repeat the same run as admin every time you start the game, just as you describe it above.
Other things made me quit the game. An example; if you know that a person has an desired object in his pocket and the only way of retrieving it is through a tedious use of game mechanics and you sense this is what can be expected from the game also further on you become bored.)
The first game from Wad Jet Eye having this effect on me.
Well every game can't be for eveyone.

I hadn't played all the Blackwell games yet, so I went for those and took a pass on Resonance for now. I don't mind playing retro-style games if the story and gameplay itself are fun.

Traveler you could make game saves. It was when you clicked on the icon to start the game. Not only did you have to right click to select run as administrator but each time you did the game setup page loaded. You had to fill in the proper setup boxes and click save to remember the setup. If you clicked save in setup, the box would close and again the game would not start. You then right click choose run as admin then get the stupid box only to fill it in again. If you click save and run. The game would run but every time you restarted you went through all the previous garbage over again. What I meant was the stupid thing would not save the setup details or remember you repeatedly told it to run as admin.

You could save games. After a few dozen times of entering set up game saves no longer mattered.

Unless you change the "Run as Administrator" option in the game shortcut (or the game exe itself) to "Always run as administrator" through the compatibility tab (instructions ***here***), I don't think you'll get any different result from what you got. I don't think a game settings configurator has the Windows permissions to set itself to always run as administrator -- at least not if it's installed in C:\Program Files or C:\Program Files(x86). And even if Windows itself allowed the change, an antivirus may block it.

There may be a game file that you could manually edit to save the rest of your settings preferences. No, you shouldn't have to do that, but if you wanted to continue the game and having to reset the settings each time you was driving you crazy...


Or a tutorial, which is what Big Fish games usually do.


Agreed! Newer and "clever" isn't always better. Sometimes there's good reason for doing things the old-fashioned way.



I'm sorry to hear it wasn't any good. I also bought it from GOG, though I think I paid $10 and I haven't had time to play it yet. I'll see if it saves the settings in XP (not every game does) any better than it did in your Win7.

Hi old mariner I'm so sorry you got so frustrated with starting the game & also thank you that something in my walkthrough was helpful!

I played the game on Win 7 64 bit. Yes, each time I launched it I had to right-click on the icon & Run as Administrator - I only ever after that clicked on Save & Run for the game to run. I never changed the settings as it seemed to work ok on the default ones so never realised that they weren't saved if you needed to alter them & that there were problems if you needed to!

I know traveler your feelings on the AGS graphics! but oldmariner - the game's not perfect but I thought it was very good for an Indie with such an interesting story & would love to read your take on it!

This is not at all my area of expertise (I don't even have one), but I don't think there's such a thing as AGS graphics. You can make a high res game just as well with AGS, it's just much more work. If Resonance had used Wintermute or something else the result wouldn't have been different I think (although I'm not sure where the problem with the settings comes from).

AGS is created for 2D graphics though so I don't know what it can do with 3D if that's what you mean.