I alleviated space on my iPad, however, the download is barely moving... Apple must be bogged down right now.
I'm still not entirely certain about this— is the game actually frightening? That is, is the game specifically made to make you jump out of your seat? From what I've seen, it looks like the game is mostly IB-esque in movement and battles are triggered by moving— the monsters are scary-looking, but they aren't popping out of the walls behind you or anything for a frightening effect. I avoid scary games at all costs, but this game looks so good that I might settle for simply a non-frightening game. So basically, although the game is scary, is it frightening? As in, say, Mission Europa versus Dead Space. In ME, battles are easily preempted, while in Dead Space the game creates many entirely unexpected encounters for fright value.
http://toucharcade.com/2011/10/05/the-dark-meadow-review-atmospheric-survival-horror-now-portable/ I hope this doesn't make anyone angry! We mentioned some things we didn't like. Sorry in advance.
Perhaps the kid gloves went on inadvertently due to previous backlash, but surely a game that's criticised for its combat to the point of suggesting it may benefit from not having any, can't be summed up as being a "standout in every way" overall?
It's not about whether or not the review was honest. It was that Shadowgun's review was so out of touch, with the majority viewpoint. The review was the epitome of Mario Kart: Double Dash and it's infamous 7.9 from IGN. I, personally, cannot fathom how you fawn and rave about outdated, outplayed, casual fare...while great in doses, some of it was best left in 1982. That is where iOS has been. Not where it's going. Collette's review was spot on. A prime example of how a review should be written. She, as a fan of the genre, was able to expand on the good and the bad while giving justice to the game she was examining. Good on her.
Cute, Hodapp, cute. Okay, so I read the review: I guess I did care a little about TA's official opinion (so sue me ). I actually agree with it, but I would even take it a step further. Dark Meadow has excellent production values -- everything from graphics, to sound, voice acting and writing, are top notch -- and it's definitely entertaining, but it simply does not work as survival horror. ikemike asked above whether the game was scary. It isn't, and not only because you can't die (if you are "killed," the narrator tells you, you simply awaken refreshed in your room). Dark Meadow breaks one of the cardinal rules of horror: take your time to show the monster. Here you see everything immediately, from a distance; no matter how well designed the creatures are (and they look really good), they lose their power when they show on screen as tiny things down the hallway. It would help if the building were poorly lit, or if the hallways turned and twisted. So far (I'm 40-50 minutes in) every hallway is a straight, forgettable passageway and every room a rectangle. The level design is miles away from the kind of disorientation achieved by games like Silent Hill. If you get lost here, it's because everything looks pretty much the same. The combat itself I think it's okay. It helps that there seems to be a large variety of monsters, and their behavior is varied enough to keep things challenging. Adding ranged weapons definitely adds to the IB formula and makes up for the way melee was simplified. The game would benefit tremendously if there was more variety to the encounters themselves; it would be great if the creatures dropped from the ceiling or popped out of locked doors -- anything to make you jump a little. A worse sin, however, is how the whole RPG component (XP awarded, gold rewards, etc) takes you out of the experience. Horror games are all about immersion, and Dark Meadows does a good job with the atmosphere, the scattered messages and newspaper clippings, the beautifully art directed decay. But every time combat ends with a black screen and an XP counter, I lose the feeling. I really don't understand that design decision. In the end, if feels that Dark Meadow is two games fighting each other. There's a point-and-click horror adventure (without any real puzzles, at least so far) and an action RPG. The combination sounds interesting, but so far it doesn't feel very coherent. Then again, it's possible that I'll change my mind about this as I get further into the game. As I said before, the game is definitely entertaining, if only for the fantastic production values and the great creature design. And the story seems cool, though perhaps a bit familiar and on the nose. I'm definitely glad to pick it up, but anyone hoping for a true survival horror experience may end up disappointed.
We rave about fun games. Nothing more, nothing less. Also, regarding the fan of the genre thing, I assigned Thorin Shadowgun because he likes third person shooters. Shadowgun is not a good game, and the review reflected that independent of genre bias.
These are E X A C T L Y the impression I had from the videos and that I already stated in my earler post. the battle really looks blant. And now that stats screens always pop up an break the already weak atmosphere, the possiblity of getting are close to zero. After ShadowGun another missed opportunity to make a jaw dropping game.
Uh, no it wasn't. ShadowGun was reffered to as "garbage" which the majority of buyers would probably consider an unspeakably large exaggeration. Besides, if you consider the fact that people disagree with your review as equal to them getting mad, then there is definitely something wrong with your logic. Just saying.
Let me put on my moderator hat: this thread is about Dark Meadow. Time to put an end to the Shadowgun review discussion.