Comments on: Deeper Gaming: Fathom

By: Jayt

Jayt — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 08:21:27 +0000

I do enjoy reading comments that some gamers cannot deal with a no-win situation.

By: Schwerpunk

Schwerpunk — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 01:48:13 +0000

Well, I loved it. Also, it was just the right length.

I would gauge that you probably have to be in the right mood to enjoy it, though.

By: geldonyetich

geldonyetich — Sun, 24 May 2009 06:18:44 +0000

“We undermine your typical expectations that because the game hasn’t ended on your defeat, you can still win the game.”
“I see… but what’s the object of the game – what’s the point?”
“The point is that there doesn’t have to be a point.”
“… Sure, if you’re tired of trying to create a compelling object of the game, you can always spin the absence of it is a compelling point.”
“Oop! You got us.”

It was a fun trip, though. Good production all around. To a great extent, that I even found it to be a good journey is in itself a verification it was a good game. It is still a bit easier than the alternative, though.

By: Melf_Himself

Melf_Himself — Thu, 21 May 2009 10:11:07 +0000

“1. boss you can’t beat
2. find fishes
3. find item”

Guess I got bored of either 2 or 3…. didn’t care to keep sticking around swimming in circles.

At first I thought the music track was designed to be more upbeat when you were heading in the right direction, which would have been genius.

By: Scandalon

Scandalon — Wed, 20 May 2009 20:01:52 +0000

All the handwaving and shouting seems to be getting the concept and the execution mixed up – most of the complaints aren’t that’s it’s something different, it’s that it’s something different, done not so well. (Interesting to me that the “standard side-scroller shooter” part is done so well, but the latter part…)

Artsy, “deeper” games with meaning are great, *if* they get across their meaning/story/point, etc. This one failed on multiple accounts. The “jet backward” mechanic was interesting, the “jet backward then rotate around wildly so you can see where the *(%# you’re going – why don’t you point your flashlight forward you twit” mechanic wasn’t. Nor were the “oh, I picked something up, wonder what it is?” and “Something’s rumbling for some reason, guess I crossed an invisible trigger, oh, a giant tree randomly appeared” and later “something rumbling again, finally, but I can’t freakin’ see anything” or the “hmm, going up toward a light, yup, I’ve been dead the whole time, this is the end….uh, I think those parts are supposed to be me? I guess I’m dead…” parts something to praise.

Title screen changes after first playthrough, and I liked the fishies. (But if they were supposed to be a navigation aid, they too, failed.)

By: KafkaTamura

KafkaTamura — Wed, 20 May 2009 19:52:36 +0000

Did anyone else notice that when you went through the opening in the watery bit you end up in a watery version of the level at which you started, and then the bit where you go up towards the light is the bit where you fought the unwinnable boss battle?

Plus, you should always follow the fishes.

By: Hypocee

Hypocee — Wed, 20 May 2009 18:59:11 +0000

Yes, they should definitely have had only the one water opening.

By: moyogo

moyogo — Wed, 20 May 2009 15:20:06 +0000

RPS should re-post that video from TIGSource every single day. A game as good as this getting trolled for not being a standard platformer,

By: bonuswavepilot

bonuswavepilot — Wed, 20 May 2009 15:09:55 +0000

@Xercies: You find “artsy” intention more masturbatory than a game you just play for the pleasure of playing? I would have thought that even if poorly executed, an attempt at an artsy message in a game is less like wanking than the standard revenge-fantasy plotline, twitch-gamed through to make the numbers go up…

By: brulleks

brulleks — Wed, 20 May 2009 14:44:42 +0000

Yeah, I think it probably seems even more futile if, like me, you fall down the very first pit and only get to see the underwater section rather than the rest of the game…

By: Ian

Ian — Wed, 20 May 2009 12:04:12 +0000

So I got to an underwater bit, kept trying to go down, found some fish friends and eventually got bored and gave up.

For what it’s worth, I’m sure it’s my fault and not the game or it’s creator’s.

By: CdrJameson

CdrJameson — Wed, 20 May 2009 11:43:55 +0000

That was quite fun under the water, but.. pointless?

I jumped down the first pit to see what was there, apparently an underwater area, but hey! I’ve played platformers before where there’s an underwater bit in the pits, and I’m a robot. Doesn’t hurt, don’t have to breathe (perfectly valid tactic in Hired Guns, folks).

Had a pleasant swim around underwater collecting fish for a while, and having random trees grow and holes open, entered a second underwater area, got to the end and then apparently I was dead.

Um.

Making the second underwater level the same as the above world level would be clever (and is an easy trick – get two levels out of one design), but as I’d only gone a little way in the above world before I jumped in the pit, I didn’t get to it.

Defying genre conventions? Confounding expectations? No – just putting a screen up saying ‘Ha Ha! You Lose Suxxxor’ at the end.

EDIT – Just played it again, and the second underwater level isn’t the same, as it’s missing the pit I jumped down. Also, y’know, why would I be in bits in some water? INTERNAL CONSISTENCY FAIL