[Lunick]

Website | Twitter | Facebook | Blog | Store



"STRAFE ® is a unique singleplayer 3D action experience where the player can pick up a gun and shoot hordes of things in the face. Sounds crazy right? WELL IT GETS CRAZIER, WE PUT YOU IN THE EYES OF A DIGITAL PERSON! YUP, RIGHT BEHIND THE GUN.

We've created groundbreaking technology that changes the levels everytime you play for endless replayability! There are BILLIONS of experiences to be had with crazy secrets to find! We give you the levels, you paint them red."

[OpenMaw]

Huhh. Reminds me of Minecraft crossed with System Shock or something. Very cool.

[Gambini]

The artstyle makes me feel jealous because I have a similar concept in mind and wanted it to be original. I hope it goes commercial so we are ensured it has a steady level of quality and gets finished.

[HulkNukem]

Gambini, on 14 May 2014 - 07:31 PM, said:

The artstyle makes me feel jealous because I have a similar concept in mind and wanted it to be original. I hope it goes commercial so we are ensured it has a steady level of quality and gets finished.

There's been a few times I'll have game ideas in my head and then sometime later a game will come out very eerily similar to those ideas. I always think to myself "damnit, I really need to learn everything there is to game design so I can finally throw those ideas forward"
Anyways, based off of animated gifs on the blog, I'm guessing this is a rogue-like?

[Malgon]

Commando Nukem, on 14 May 2014 - 07:28 PM, said:

Huhh. Reminds me of Minecraft crossed with System Shock or something. Very cool.

Hah, well put! The art style does look neat imo.

[Lunick]

The "GLUTTON".

[Cage]

Nice! I've got a huge boner for low poly models with low-res textures.

The art style really works well, best of luck to the devs!

[Gambini]

"1996"

[Lunick]

I think this enemy looks better than the one above.

[Gambini]

oh shit

[TheZombieKiller]

[Tea Monster]

That is some nice work.

[HulkNukem]

I wish the textures were a bit higher res, the models are great but the textures are just too pixel-y and look like Minecraft.

[Gambini]

for christ sakes!!! you´re missing the point completely!

[Mr. Tibbs]

STRAFE looks badass. I've always wanted to see a developer emulate 90's shooter visuals. Hope to see some gameplay before too long.

[Lunick]

The game has a... uh website now http://www.strafe1996.com

[MusicallyInspired]

Haha that's awesome.

[LkMax]

This page needs more blink tags and ads. 4/10 would not send back to 1996.

[OpenMaw]

These people are my heroes now.

[Altered Reality]

Sorry, I grew tired of that design in 1997, and having it purposefully reintroduced would be an act of masochism. You know how most modern shooters are linear and made for graphics whores who won't play a game unless it has good graphics? Yeah, Strafe is also made for graphics whores, but of the kind who won't play a game unless it has bad graphics. And just because they have been made that way intentionally, it doesn't make them any less bad. I don't believe in "so bad it's good", never have. If it's not genuinely good, then it's genuinely bad.

Let's compare it with Blood Dragon. Blood Dragon had a retro feel, but it was done right. It was detailed, the effects were more spectacular than reality, and most important, it had verisimilitude. As in "if 2007 had actually been a post-nuclear wasteland with cyborgs, lasers, mutant animals and explosions, this is how it would have looked like." Give me a Blood Dragon 2 and I'll buy it.
Strafe, instead, is like "we make everything suck on purpose because it takes less skill, commitment and time than make things look good, and all you graphics whores who love bad graphics will give us your money because of this, just like COD fanboys part themselves from their money because they like the graphics of COD."
Well, I refuse to fall for this commercial machination, and I won't buy Strafe, just like I never bought any Call Of Duty game, and for the same reason. If I ever want a game with that style, I'll just buy Blake Stone instead, because there is no malice behind it.

[MetHy]

Altered Reality, on 17 August 2014 - 03:28 AM, said:

Sorry, I grew tired of that design in 1997, and having it purposefully reintroduced would be an act of masochism. You know how most modern shooters are linear and made for graphics whores who won't play a game unless it has good graphics? Yeah, Strafe is also made for graphics whores, but of the kind who won't play a game unless it has bad graphics. And just because they have been made that way intentionally, it doesn't make them any less bad. I don't believe in "so bad it's good", never have. If it's not genuinely good, then it's genuinely bad.

That's because in your definition of 'good' and 'bad' graphics, you only see the technical aspect of it. Can't really blame you because that's what the industry (video game and console makers and sellers; but also pro reviewers) have taught you since... Since at least the 16bit era (perhaps even before, I can't remember).

What this game does is telling people that what matters most is a good art direction, not the technical aspect. (Not saying it's the only one which does that...)

But anyway - personally this doesn't really appeal to me. I'm more a sucker for 8bit, 2D or 2.5D design.
Plus, I'm not goint to be excited until I see how gameplay is; and so far, I have to say that gameplay sound like it's going to be bad. Why? Because of the map randomizer.... A good program that makes map by itself might create decent, playable maps; but I believe only humans will create great maps, and a set of maps that is logical and flows well.
No matter how good your art direciton is, or even your weapons and enemies are; if the maps are only average at best, the game won't stand up above the masses of other games coming out.

[Altered Reality]

MetHy, on 17 August 2014 - 05:32 AM, said:

That's because in your definition of 'good' and 'bad' graphics, you only see the technical aspect of it. Can't really blame you because that's what the industry (video game and console makers and sellers; but also pro reviewers) have taught you since... Since at least the 16bit era (perhaps even before, I can't remember)

Is there any other aspect than the technical one?
I have an anecdote: in 1910, the French novelist Roland Dorgeles presented an abstract painting to an art exhibit, titled Et le soleil s'endormit sur l'Adriatique and allegedly made by a painter named Joachim Raphael Boronali. The critics appreciated it, praised it, and it was purchased for 500 francs. Except that it wasn't an abstract painting, it was the result of dipping the tail of a donkey into paint of various colors and letting the donkey "paint" a canvas nearby by wagging its tail.
How would you judge the people at that art exhibit, if not graphics whores who did not really understand what they were doing and only liked that painting because it was bad?

I'll go further and say that liking bad graphics is the result of a much worse kind of indoctrination, simply because liking things that look good is an innate tendency of humans. Liking things that look bad, on the other hand, requires:
1) rejecting what many people say, not because of an indoctrination, but because it comes natural to them, and
2) blindly believing whoever tells you that starting to act contrary to an aspect of human nature somehow makes you better.

MetHy, on 17 August 2014 - 05:32 AM, said:

Plus, I'm not goint to be excited until I see how gameplay is; and so far, I have to say that gameplay sound like it's going to be bad. Why? Because of the map randomizer.... A good program that makes map by itself might create decent, playable maps; but I believe only humans will create great maps, and a set of maps that is logical and flows well.
No matter how good your art direciton is, or even your weapons and enemies are; if the maps are only average at best, the game won't stand up above the masses of other games coming out.

Really? A map randomizer? Well, thanks for proving my point further. It's like they're saying: "We don't have the skills to make good maps, and we don't need them either, because all of you sheep who were indoctrinated to dislike good games and delusionally consider yourselves independent thinkers will gobble up any trash that was randomly generated by an algorithm, and we'll laugh all the way to the bank."

I stand by my position: Strafe is going to be garbage.

[ReaperMan]

Gambini, on 29 June 2014 - 04:26 PM, said:

for christ sakes!!! you´re missing the point completely!

^

[MetHy]

Altered Reality, on 17 August 2014 - 05:49 AM, said:

Is there any other aspect than the technical one?

What the fuck man.

Fuck. It's sad what the video game industry and its obsession with pixel and polygon count has done to people's vision of beauty.

[Inspector Lagomorf]

Altered Reality, on 17 August 2014 - 05:49 AM, said:

I have an anecdote: in 1910, the French novelist Roland Dorgeles presented an abstract painting to an art exhibit, titled Et le soleil s'endormit sur l'Adriatique and allegedly made by a painter named Joachim Raphael Boronali. The critics appreciated it, praised it, and it was purchased for 500 francs. Except that it wasn't an abstract painting, it was the result of dipping the tail of a donkey into paint of various colors and letting the donkey "paint" a canvas nearby by wagging its tail.

Invalid analogy. The appeal of a minimalist art style is not comparable to the absurdity of putting a price on abstract art.

[LkMax]

Altered Reality, on 17 August 2014 - 05:49 AM, said:

Really? A map randomizer? Well, thanks for proving my point further. It's like they're saying: "We don't have the skills to make good maps, and we don't need them either, because all of you sheep who were indoctrinated to dislike good games and delusionally consider yourselves independent thinkers will gobble up any trash that was randomly generated by an algorithm, and we'll laugh all the way to the bank."

I stand by my position: Strafe is going to be garbage.

You are judging the game without even bothering to look how they plan to implement this stuff. By your comments you seem to discard all other aspects that Strafe might (or might not) do right just because the fist thing you noticed is how the graphics look bad (which in turn would put you in the position of being a graphic whore). Also, the quality of the graphics doesn't determine the quality of the aesthetics as a whole. e.g.: I'd prefer a thousand times a game with the aesthetics of Unreal 99 or 2k4 instead of Unreal 3 or Gears of War.
It's also subjective to each person and has nothing to do with stupid delusions as you try to point out (e.g.: a bunch of people loved Bastion aesthetics to death while for me it was ugly and only distracted from the gameplay).

About the level design, what I understand is that there will be handcrafted levels, but the player will be able to play randomly generated maps as well (quoted from the blog, emphasis mine: "we wanted to create a fun fast gameplay experience that you could return to after beating the game and not get sick of static levels").
There's more information here, with their own detailed words: http://strafedevblog...ation-in-strafe

So before shitting not only on an unreleased game but also on the potential playerbase it might attract (which is completely unnecessary), I'd suggest you to at least get to know what you're talking about first.

PS: With that said, I also like shine graphics but I see the appeal of some games that uses retro aesthetics.

[Gambini]

@Altered reality: Just because the painting was exhibed by an eminence and that it was a canvas and not a piece of paper proves the point that you buy any shit that is high res and sold by a renowed company.

This game (while the map randomizer doesn´t account for my concept) is showing you that there is appreciable art beyond the big companies and highres graphics. Thinking pixelated art is good doesn´t mean we "feel smarter than most people" just because we think differently. The game that gathers people around here is from 1996 and it´s pixelated as shit, we may find more people thinking alike here than thinking the other way around. You´re being the one that blindly believe that acting contrary to an aspect of the forums´ nature somehow makes you better.

[Gambini]

MetHy, on 17 August 2014 - 05:32 AM, said:

That's because in your definition of 'good' and 'bad' graphics, you only see the technical aspect of it. Can't really blame you because that's what the industry (video game and console makers and sellers; but also pro reviewers) have taught you since... Since at least the 16bit era (perhaps even before, I can't remember).

What this game does is telling people that what matters most is a good art direction, not the technical aspect. (Not saying it's the only one which does that...)

This saves me to rewrite a post that i forgot to finish.

[MetHy]

LkMax, on 17 August 2014 - 10:12 AM, said:

About the level design, what I understand is that there will be handcrafted levels, but the player will be able to play randomly generated maps as well (quoted from the blog, emphasis mine: "we wanted to create a fun fast gameplay experience that you could return to after beating the game and not get sick of static levels").
There's more information here, with their own detailed words: http://strafedevblog...ation-in-strafe

Oh I didn't see that.

[Altered Reality]

MetHy, on 17 August 2014 - 09:13 AM, said:

What the fuck man.

Fuck. It's sad what the video game industry and its obsession with pixel and polygon count has done to people's vision of beauty.

The creators of Strafe are trolling you, don't you get it? They want you to spend money to get something that looks bad (which is obvious from the released screenshots) and plays bad (which can be inferred from the presence of a map randomizer). And you are falling for it, just like COD fanboys are falling for unoriginal games that offer nothing innovative just because they have a graphical style they like. What is Strafe, if not a game that offers nothing innovative and only appeals to you because it has a graphical style you like? The only difference between Strafe and any game of the COD series is that COD games are gold-plated turds, while this is a turd that advertises the fact that it's NOT gold-plated!

Gambini, on 17 August 2014 - 10:13 AM, said:

The game that gathers people around here is from 1996 and it´s pixelated as shit

First: Not necessarily.
Second: there is a difference from having a certain graphical style because of technical limitations, and having a certain graphical style out of the malicious desire to make money by selling shit advertised as shit to people who already convinced themselves that it's gold.

LkMax, on 17 August 2014 - 10:12 AM, said:

By your comments you seem to discard all other aspects that Strafe might (or might not) do right just because the fist thing you noticed is how the graphics look bad (which in turn would put you in the position of being a graphic whore)

What I am, is a gamer with high standards regarding everything in a game. For me to like a game, it must excel in every aspect.
For example:
- GTA5: looks good, plays good, sounds good = excellent game.
- Duke3D: looks good (FOR ITS TIME), plays good, sounds good = excellent game.
- Frontier: looks good (for its time), plays very well, sounds okay (for its time) = excellent game.
UT2K4: looks good (for its time), plays bad (I've never been interested in multiplayer-only games) = bad game.
- COD: plays bad = this already puts me off, I won't even judge the other aspects because one of them is missing.
- Colin McRae Rally Remastered: looks okay, plays bad = bad game. (This, by the way, really pissed me off because I was expecting everything to be upgraded, instead they cut off most of the circuits, cars and customizability, with the only intent to make money off the Colin McRae name)
- Strafe: looks bad = this already puts me off, with the aggravating factor that its look is due to the desire to make money off the nostalgic emotions of people, instead of giving an experience that is fun on its own.