This project currently is waiting for a game developer with some time at hand. See this thread.

View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sun 23. Sep 2018, 20:27



Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
 Is the original Transarctica game ridiculous? 

How consistent is the original game regarding atmosphere meets gameplay?
It's ridiculous sometimes. 25%  25%  [ 1 ]
It's somewhat offbeat. 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
It's a little bit weird sometimes. 25%  25%  [ 1 ]
It's inherently consistent. 25%  25%  [ 1 ]
None of the above. 25%  25%  [ 1 ]
Total votes : 4

 Is the original Transarctica game ridiculous? 
Author Message
Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Sat 16. Mar 2013, 18:24
Posts: 410
Location: Germany
As this is one of the questions which surfaces once in a while I want to know the opinion of others.

Let me explain:
Sometimes there are games which are not taking themselves so seriously but actually are inherently consistent.
I'm not necessarily talking about the ultra-comical games like Leisure Suit Larry or such.
But for example let's think of 'The Bards tale'.
You would run into drunk people singing and a very cocky narrator.
(The first time you killed a wolf he drops so much loot (I think a chandelier and such) and the narrator then just takes the loot away - which makes fun of all other games out there.)
Of course the game aimes to make fun of the other games but it's still inherently consistent and much fun to play. :D
The game world of Bards Tale is to be taken serious as you can still die etc. etc. it's not just only fun.

What I mean is, a game doesn't need to be all-serious just to be taken seriously.

Let's talk about Transarctica.
The game's setting and atmosphere are pretty unique and it's one of the first 'big' games featuring insta-death.
You drive onto a mine? Sorry, you are dead. Forever. Yes yes, you can load a game. From maybe an hour ago. ;)
It adds to the atmosphere and you should not take it lightly.
Also the stuff you get to hear in the cities (without quest-log) - most of it is utterly important if you want to get far in the game - whereas other games overwhelm the player with 'random' background info.
So the game cannot be taken lightly.
It tries to be max serious.

Nevertheless: there are things which I find just 'ridiculous'.
I know you need to make compromises for gameplay reasons to not demand too much from the player.
  • Why can't the player rotate those cannons. They seem rotatable. There is no reason why they shouldn't be.
  • Why can't you just flee the battle. Of course you can add techno-babble like 'ok there are special BATTLE TRACKS and you can't drive faster than 15mph on them' etc. - and you drive on to them because the enemy train catched you and it's a question of honor to face up to the pursuer etc.
  • Why are flying missiles destroying whole trains from the enemy but on a surveillance wagon they just disable the enemy loco for just some ingame - minutes (which are real-time seconds)?
  • ... this list could just go on ...

So. In it's special way this game seems very serious to me and at the same time ridiculous.

What do you think?
What is the most 'ridiculous' in Transarctica for you?

_________________
'Person who say it cannot be done should not interrupt person doing it.' --Chinese Proverb


Mon 9. Dec 2013, 09:37
Profile WWW
Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Fri 30. Aug 2013, 14:10
Posts: 125
Location: Rostock, GER
The experiment that caused the ice age:

To cover an entire planet with a thick layer of clouds you need a hell of a bomb. The largest atomic bomb ever constructed had a power of 50 megatons and I think you need something in the range of one or more gigatons to create a thick layer of clouds that lasts for at least 700 years. Even a global thermonuclear war with all warheads available would be enough wipe out mankind but it wouldn't be sufficient to trigger a new ice age.

The Gycode:

This is clearly esoteric crap because even today you can buy machines which promise to destroy clouds and they don't work. But this element is necessary for the game even if it is not compatible with healthy logic.

Rotating cannons / machine guns:

Possible in real life but I think they simply couldn't acomplish this with the technology they used. I mean those bitmap wagons are steady images.

Flee a battle:

They didn't implemented it because the game need something that's challenging and of course for the boss fight.

Missile vs. enemy train:

Same reason as you can't flee from a battle.

Final opinion:

It's fantasy steampunk with some realistic and some fictional elements and that's good. A game doesn't need to take itself too seriously even if it has a serious background. This also makes development less funnier. Being serious and coding with a focused view like a sith lord all time just drives you insane sometime. Joking around, letting your phantasies play is healthy and might create something awesome. That's were innovations come from.


Mon 9. Dec 2013, 10:14
Profile ICQ
Administrator
User avatar

Joined: Sat 16. Mar 2013, 18:24
Posts: 410
Location: Germany
Scarabaeus wrote:
It's fantasy steampunk with some realistic and some fictional elements and that's good. A game doesn't need to take itself too seriously even if it has a serious background. This also makes development less funnier. Being serious and coding with a focused view like a sith lord all time just drives you insane sometime. Joking around, letting your phantasies play is healthy and might create something awesome. That's were innovations come from.


I concur.

But the original game took itself very serious, I think?
Maybe that's the reason I can't find a good starting point when trying to come up with 'joking around' options to exceed the original game. :(
You know I would like to have a vision of how 'Transarctica 2' (or whatever we will call it), will look like.

_________________
'Person who say it cannot be done should not interrupt person doing it.' --Chinese Proverb


Mon 9. Dec 2013, 10:35
Profile WWW
Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Fri 30. Aug 2013, 14:10
Posts: 125
Location: Rostock, GER
You have a vision so your phantasy is already playing around in your head. So can you take yourself and the game seriously if your phantasy is involved instead of rely on your logic?


Mon 9. Dec 2013, 10:55
Profile ICQ
Contributor
User avatar

Joined: Sun 17. Mar 2013, 11:31
Posts: 424
Location: Hajdúszoboszló. Hungary
The game created at the dawn of gaming industry when there were easy to create new style games which never existed before!
Dune 2 for example was the very first Real Time Strategy game!

The developers took ideas from a book/comics series popular in France, and mxed it with a possible future! Think that this game born in 1993, the cold war ended just only a few years ago and there were the Chernobyl incident, and the emerging environmentalism and the green ideas.

For Scarabeus: both the game and the manual describes it was not a nuclear weapon that made changes in the clouds but a machine, or many machines.

Also we need to add that in this timeline there are 2 major dates:
2022 (30 years in the future when the game come out) still 10 years in the future, the time when the project "Blind' initiated.
And the 700 years later when we wonder the world.

The game it is hard or difficult even nowadays, and though only few noticed that this game required you read the manual (if you have it to begin with) and to note the things you encounter in your journey, which was rare in those days and basically unimaginable nowadays.


Mon 9. Dec 2013, 21:07
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 5 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software for PTF.