
And the sun sets - panza
http://tale-of-tales.com/Sunset/blog/index.php/and-the-sun-sets/
======
ChuckMcM
I found this user comment fascinating:

 _I am one such person. I am interested in Sunset and fully intent to play it,
but have not yet purchased it, for the simple reason that there are many
titles that I already own that I have yet to play; I am suffering from a
massive backlog, and from what I can tell, this is the case for an
overwhelming majority of RPS readers_

Here is a person who likes the genre, but they _already own_ so much product
that they don't have time to play a new game. What that says to me is that
game publishers are doing themselves a huge disservice by charging so little
for their games. If you could imagine a fine art store where everything was
$0.99, you might have dozens of paintings in your collection that you don't
have wall space to put them on.

So rather than paying a lot of money for a game and valuing it such that it is
played before the next one is purchases, people binge on a dozen different
games which never satisfy and only a few are "worth it".

It is a sad place for game developers (charge more but get few sales as people
work through the crap) or charge less and get few sales because nobody knows
which are good and which are crap.

~~~
pervycreeper
One person having a backlog doesn't mean that games themselves are overpriced.
This isn't true of physical goods (like books), and certainly not true of
digital goods, which are not limited in the same way on the production side.

~~~
ChuckMcM
The concept I was going for wasn't "overpriced" as it was "too much choice". I
first experienced it when I reached a point where, when walking into the
computer store to buy a replacement PC, I had enough funds to buy _any_
computer in the store. Before that point buying a computer was easier, I took
the amount of money I had, read reviews, and then bought the one that best met
my needs and stayed in my budget. But without a budget, the number of choices
is huge. And to some extent overwhelming. It lead to the worst laptop purchase
I ever made (which was a Sony 8 lb monstrosity).

When things cost "a lot" in ones mind, it makes us far more discriminating
buyers. That was certainly true when Games were $60 a pop, but not true when
they are $1 - $9 each.

~~~
Zikes
I find that to be an odd opinion. More competition tends to work out in the
consumer's favor, doesn't it?

I think what we're missing is curation. In the hardware world, there are
companies like Alienware and Apple that whittle down those choices into fairly
straightforward options (though for a hefty premium, usually). For gaming,
Steam is working on a Curators[1] feature that seems to be an alright start,
but still needs a lot of work.

[1]
[http://store.steampowered.com/curators/](http://store.steampowered.com/curators/)

~~~
ChuckMcM
Yes and no, more choices add cognitive load to the choice. So up to a point
its a good thing, beyond that point it becomes a more difficult thing. In a
generally commoditized market such as computer games or laptops, curation is a
good helper, doesn't completely solve the problem though because there is the
question of how much like the curator the buyer is (some movie critics for
example will pan movies that I find enjoyable so I have to calibrate my
opinions with the critic's opinions)

Back in the day I got three different computer games magazines and could
reliably buy the games that got high scores in all three, knowing I would get
enough enjoyment out of them to feel they had good value. My Andriod and iOS
game experience has been spotty at best.

~~~
Zikes
I agree that relying on reviews/critics work best for similar tastes, but a
responsible consumer should be aware of a (modest) variety of sources for that
information to account for unavoidable biases.

Metacritic tries to do that by aggregating reviews, but apart from the
extremes it just winds up rating everything as "average", which I suppose is
accurate, but not really informative.

Other than a variety of sources providing a variety of perspectives on any
given game, though, how else could consumers make an informed decision? Your
suggestion that price correlates to quality doesn't add up particularly where
games are concerned, as there have been several very high-dollar flops and
disappointments in recent years. It also sounds like you're suggesting
creating artificially higher barriers to entry to get there, which I disagree
with philosophically.

------
Udo
After reading this, and having never heard of the game before, I checked it
out and just spent 90 minutes playing it. It has some serious problems, and
those are in my opinion the reason why it's not selling very well:

The basic idea is great. This game has the kind of factors that _make_ you
_want_ to like it: it's experimental, it hints at a great story, it's a period
piece. However, the disappointments keep adding up as you interact with it.

Sunset's graphics performance is abysmal on OS X. On a current, maxed-out iMac
I had to keep lowering the settings throughout play and still wound up with
intolerable choppiness. The game _does_ look good, but not _that good_ as to
justify having these issues.

In the beginning, it's fun to play. You discover the house, and the house
keeps changing in interesting ways every time you visit. It's atmospheric. The
music is as stark and beautifully depressing as the apartment. I enjoyed doing
the chores, and took great care of what I did in the house. But it soon dawned
on me that my actions don't really have any consequences. The "plot" keeps
moving along, telling you of the results of your actions, whether you actually
performed them or not (at least as far as I can tell, it's kinda difficult to
say).

The chores get old very fast, and you start to skip your work. Which doesn't
seem to be of any consequence at all. The more you play, the more you get the
feeling that you're moving on rails, pushing difficult-to-reach yet pointless
buttons in the process.

The monologue put forth by the protagonist isn't encouraging either. While at
times poetic, it seems mostly banal and fake - which is astonishing
considering the subject matter. Talking about banality, I played this on
Steam, and you literally get achievements for zooming in on book titles and
record labels, for no apparent reason.

More than anything, it's a missed opportunity. Nobody involved in the process
stopped and looked at basic factors like: the pacing, the graphics, the
dialogue/monologue, or the user experience overall. The game feels like
something you'd expect to be still in development.

Although the game is most likely a labour of love, the jarring shortcomings in
its implementation make it look like it's coasting along lazily on the merits
of its premise without any intention of actually delivering on it.

~~~
sageabilly
This is a really excellent point, doubly so when three of the bullet points in
the article about what they did to sell Sunset had zero to do with improving
the game itself (namely, hire a PR firm, take out a pricy internet ad, hire an
image consultant).

Advertising your game is great and all (although I seriously question if their
PR/ad markets were well researched before their money was spent, because their
ROR on those dollars was essentially nil) but you HAVE TO have a good game in
the first place or else no one is going to want to play it. After reading the
article it seems like they were more interested in going around saying "hey we
made this game and we really really want you to pay us money and play it!"
instead of making a kick-ass game in the first place.

~~~
Udo
_> what they did to sell Sunset had zero to do with improving the game itself_

There are genres where this could and does work, but not in the niche Sunset
is playing in.

 _> although I seriously question if their PR/ad markets were well researched
before their money was spent_

I agree, and it's an easy trap to fall into for anyone. Spending money in all
the wrong places is always a danger, and the problem is that the people you
are paying of course won't tell you even if they know you're making a mistake.

 _> instead of making a kick-ass game in the first place_

I believe _someone_ on the team thought the game was excellent as is.
Development shops and teams of all sizes can exhibit work dynamics where
problem areas get ignored and sub-par stuff is getting churned out. In a big
company this might be due to politics and power structures. In small shops
this might be because you don't want to disappoint a close friend.

Somebody at that company should have said " _this is a good idea, and a
promising prototype, now let 's get back to the drawing board and keep
iterating_". In retrospect I don't get the bitterness expressed in the
article. It's not like they lack talent, and it's not like they're drastically
under-appreciated for unknowable reasons. Those would be reasons to quit. But
not this. This is something you can learn from and improve on.

~~~
smacktoward
_> I believe someone on the team thought the game was excellent as is_

Behind every terrible work of art is a creator insisting that it's brilliant.

Artists love their art the way parents love their children. That means they're
not really reliable judges of its quality, so a key to success for them is
finding people who can be objective, and learning to listen to them.

------
stared
They have made "The Path" ([http://tale-of-tales.com/ThePath/](http://tale-of-
tales.com/ThePath/)), for me on favourite example of something on the edge of
"a game"/"a non-game". And playing with convention of a game (you need to fail
to "win") and a story (what is real, what is a metaphor?).

I love the analysis on [https://gamerdame.wordpress.com/2011/08/13/in-depth-
analysis...](https://gamerdame.wordpress.com/2011/08/13/in-depth-analysis-for-
the-path/) (ALERT: heavy spoilers and an interpretation that can affect your
perception).

~~~
Zikes
I know them better as the developers for "The Endless Forest" ([http://tale-
of-tales.com/TheEndlessForest/](http://tale-of-tales.com/TheEndlessForest/))
which made a bit of a splash a few years ago as something original and
different.

------
roel_v
Indie game makes no money, news at 11.

Also, paying PR and marketing people to market some niche 'art' game? WTF are
these people thinking?

------
strangecasts
I think their conclusion - that the advice they got just didn't fit for
_their_ games - is a little too neat, and leaves out a couple of factors that
were absolutely in their control (pricing, for instance).

------
benihana
I hate to be harsh. I read that whole piece and I'm on board. But despite
that, and looking up the game [1] on Steam, I still have no freaking clue what
the point of the game is. The description makes it seem like you're cleaning
some guy's office. The trailer doesn't show any gameplay footage. The
screenshots look like a poorly rendered interior decorating catalog. What are
you supposed to do in this game that is fun? I'm sure there's something - I'm
guessing it's one of those graphical adventure type games, but I have no idea.
And if I have no idea what kind of game this is, I'm not going to drop 10
bucks on it. And I can't tell from any of the normal channels companies what
this game is about, other than being artistic.

1)
[http://store.steampowered.com/app/287600/](http://store.steampowered.com/app/287600/)

~~~
david-given
Emily Short (of interactive fiction fame) did a really good review of it a few
days ago:

[https://emshort.wordpress.com/2015/06/18/sunset-tale-of-
tale...](https://emshort.wordpress.com/2015/06/18/sunset-tale-of-tales/)

