Aquaria

[Katana]

You heard me obsess about it in group chat, and now…[/SIZE]
With my main computer dead for now, I’ve been obsessively playing this indie title for a looong time now.
Aquaria[/SIZE]

from the Store page:
Aquaria is an award-winning action-adventure game set in a massive underwater world teeming with life and filled with ancient secrets. Join Naija, a lone underwater adventurer, as she travels from hidden caves shrouded in darkness, to beautiful, sunlit oases in search of her past. She’ll uncover hidden treasures, explore uncharted waters, and do battle with massive underwater beasts to learn the truth about her family and reveal the secret of Aquaria.

Normally when I think ‘indie’, I expect something fairly short but with a unique artstyle that makes me glad I supported them.
Aquaria, on the other hand, felt like it cut no corners whatsoever. Most players report a total playtime of around 20 hours, and new experiences all along the way. It’s an expansive adventure game like Metroid or Castlevania, through and through, encompassing many different environments: The dark and forbidding depths of the sea, the sunny Veil (surface of the water), ruins of ancient civilizations, etc. It even has numerous side-quests and extra powerups/collectables you can get all over the place. Finally, it’s one of the last remaining games I can think of that actually has a whole succession of challenging, thrill-inducing boss fights. (consulting a random FAQ, it totals 19 bosses; many of which are actually optional)
If you’re not sure, at least give it a try from the demo

And finally, if you got the Humble Indie Bundle but never bothered downloading this one…then for GOD’S SAKE, man, don’t let it go to waste!

PS. To anyone who just looks at the metacritic reviews, here is a quote from the guy who did the one 70 that offset the score.

@eurogamer reviewer

I tried to sound upbeat and happy with it, because I certainly was, so score-bickerers should focus on the words. Also the comment on the price is clearly open to interpretation - people who disagree would probably think and score higher. And you’re right - such a very pretty and atmospheric game, and so warming after about 48 billion men-with-guns games. I’m sitting here playing UT3 on PS3 at the moment and I would certainly rather be playing Aquaria! Why aren’t more games about magical underwater fairy things?

[Black_Bob]

…but it’s 2d…

[Maxey]

@Black Bob

…but it’s 2d…

So? Kim Jong Il disapproves?

[Black_Bob]

Well, I don’t really think a 2d game can live up to the quality of a 3d game. I feel like a 2d game simply doesn’t have a place in this era of 3d. It’s like going back and making games in 8bit even tough we can do so much better. Take the latest Street Fighter for example. It’s a decent game, but it simply doesn’t live up to modern day standards because it’s in 2d. The same counts for this game.

[Maxey]

@Black Bob

Well, I don’t really think a 2d game can live up to the quality of a 3d game. I feel like a 2d game simply doesn’t have a place in this era of 3d. It’s like going back and making games in 8bit even tough we can do so much better. Take the latest Street Fighter for example. It’s a decent game, but it simply doesn’t live up to modern day standards because it’s in 2d. The same counts for this game.

That’s, like, your opinion, man.

Games can be good in any format.

[Black_Bob]

@Maxey

So? Kim Jong Il disapproves?

@Maxey

That’s, like, your opinion, man.

Games can be good in any format.

But this board is about technology, right? We should be talking about the latest technological advancements in video games, instead of going back to 2d.

[Maxey]

Progress is good, but we can’t automatically consider old technology bad, as soon as new technology appears.

[Hamst3r]

Aquaria is awesome.

[Grey_Acumen]

@Black Bob

Well, I don’t really think a 2d game can live up to the quality of a 3d game. I feel like a 2d game simply doesn’t have a place in this era of 3d. It’s like going back and making games in 8bit even tough we can do so much better. Take the latest Street Fighter for example. It’s a decent game, but it simply doesn’t live up to modern day standards because it’s in 2d. The same counts for this game.

as a fan of Zelda: Link to the Past, Minish Cap, Cave Story, N, Crystalis, Faxanadu, Braid, RocketKnight Adventures, Baldur’s Gate 2, Chrono Trigger and Pheonix Wright, I will prescribe you a Boot To The Head, take once every hour until the symptoms of your poor recognition of quality alleviate.

[mattemuse]

I didn’t make it through the demo, too slow. It’s like an Ecco the Dolphin clone with a hackish (white kids trying to draw japanese) ripoff of the Muramasa art style. But maybe I’m just pissed because their extraneous “open treasure chest by matching colors” gameplay mechanic is irritating for colorblind people.

[Katana]

Oooh. You’re right, that must suck for colorblind. At the least, you can swing around the color spectrum until the flower vibrates. I do have to say the “singing” is the basis for some pretty awesome puzzles later on. And yeah, it takes a little too long to get interesting. (at the very beginning, you have no attacks. Your first “form” after some exploring is then one of your most powerful)

Also, Gray Acumen, thank you for the comeback. I will also note the surprising coincidence that RTS’s seemed to mostly die after Age of Empires 2 and Starcraft; ensuing RTS’s were in 3D. The DS is easily the more popular handheld than the PSP, and while Super Mario 64 DS proved it can easily handle a 3D platformer, most of its games are in 2D. Plus, most games on the iPhone, iPad or DS eager to use touch-functionality will likely use 2D (hard to associate 3D-positioned objects with a position on the screen)

tldr; 2D is still awesome. Besides, beyond ‘technology’ the other topic of the forum is ‘gaming’.

[shifty]

@Black Bob

…but it’s 2d…

So what if its 2d, you don’t judge a game based on its graphic’s, you judge it on its game play. I remember countless games having shitty graphics yet being more fun and better than games with the latest gen graphics. The problem is that i forgot the names of those games.

Btw how old are you? If you tell me your 14 i can see how you would think that, since the older generation of gamers can tell you how fun it was playing Super Mario on the Nintendo 64

[Winged_One]

@Black Bob

…but it’s 2d…

@Black Bob

Well, I don’t really think a 2d game can live up to the quality of a 3d game. I feel like a 2d game simply doesn’t have a place in this era of 3d. It’s like going back and making games in 8bit even tough we can do so much better. Take the latest Street Fighter for example. It’s a decent game, but it simply doesn’t live up to modern day standards because it’s in 2d. The same counts for this game.

@Black Bob

But this board is about technology, right? We should be talking about the latest technological advancements in video games, instead of going back to 2d.

How does it feel to be a moron?

[Black_Bob]

I don’t mean to say that a 2D game can’t be fun. What i’m trying to say is that 2D games are of a time that has passed and should not be created anymore. A developer who creates 2D games is just taking it easy and spending less effort and money on old technology to make a game which he then tries to sell.

Imagine the following scenario: Let’s say that 10 years ago Ice cream caused cancer. However, with the advancing tecnology people found ways to create ice cream that doesn’t cause cancer. Skip ten years ahead and everyone is eating the ice cream that doesn’t cause cancer. Suddenly, some jerk decides to create the old ice cream that was cancerous. That’d be stupid, right? You wouldn’t buy it, right?

This also counts for 2D. Sure, 2D games don’t cause cancer, but you’re still buying something that’s old instead of something that’s better. Let’s look at Street Fighter 4 again. The first street fighter was in 2d, and so is the 4th. There have been no advancements in that; the developers have been lazy and did not feel like improving their game because enough people bought it already. However, the fact that they’re still trying to push 2d in a time where it simply doesn’t belong is stupid and results in a very low quality game. This has been proven for street fighter 4 (It shrivels away in comparison to games like Tekken 6 and Soul Calibur 4) and will also be the same for this Aquaria game.

I’m just stating simple facts…

[TheOneAndOnly]

Oh gosh, next time you’re going to say that Halo is the shit just because it is 3D.

Go away, I am sure you are contagious.

[vivanto]

@Black Bob

However, the fact that they’re still trying to push 2d in a time where it simply doesn’t belong is stupid and results in a very low quality game.

@Black Bob

I’m just stating simple facts…

According to whom?

[Black_Bob]

@Jokerine

Oh gosh, next time you’re going to say that Halo is the shit just because it is 3D.

…You don’t like Halo? I I think it’s great. I don’t like Halo Because it’s 3D, but I like it because it’s one of those classics that revolutionized 3d gaming.

[Mr.Shadow]

Just a note, I’m pretty sure all source games are 2D you fuckwad.

On topic: Looks interesting.

[Maxey]

Black Bob is officially an idiot.

[Grey_Acumen]

@Black Bob

I don’t mean to say that a 2D game can’t be fun. What i’m trying to say is that 2D games are of a time that has passed and should not be created anymore. A developer who creates 2D games is just taking it easy and spending less effort and money on old technology to make a game which he then tries to sell.

Imagine the following scenario: Let’s say that 10 years ago Ice cream caused cancer. However, with the advancing tecnology people found ways to create ice cream that doesn’t cause cancer. Skip ten years ahead and everyone is eating the ice cream that doesn’t cause cancer. Suddenly, some jerk decides to create the old ice cream that was cancerous. That’d be stupid, right? You wouldn’t buy it, right?

This also counts for 2D. Sure, 2D games don’t cause cancer, but you’re still buying something that’s old instead of something that’s better. Let’s look at Street Fighter 4 again. The first street fighter was in 2d, and so is the 4th. There have been no advancements in that; the developers have been lazy and did not feel like improving their game because enough people bought it already. However, the fact that they’re still trying to push 2d in a time where it simply doesn’t belong is stupid and results in a very low quality game. This has been proven for street fighter 4 (It shrivels away in comparison to games like Tekken 6 and Soul Calibur 4) and will also be the same for this Aquaria game.

I’m just stating simple facts…

And this:

is in black and white, therefore it must be inferior to this:

which is in color.

And look at this:

Those hacks! Color movies were standard when this was made, how could they be so cheap?

And just look at how this old 2d animation…

Clearly gets blown out of the water by the incredible visuals of this masterpiece:

and just look how this horribly outdated 2d game:

was instantly made better when Sega chose to upgrade it to 3d:

It’s an ART STYLE, you tard. As long as it supports the gameplay and mood of the story, then it doesn’t matter WHICH artstyle is used. 3d animation DOESN’T make everything better, therefor making the claim that using a 2d artstyle is cheap, lazy, or not as effective, even in the most broadest generalization possible, is utterly stupid.