And Now You Can Buy Pid

By John Walker on November 1st, 2012 at 8:00 am.

I completely forgot about Might And Delight’s Pid. Last December I saw the first trailer, and my thoughts turned to goshes. Time then went past at a quite inconsiderate rate, and it’s out today. Crikey. And oddly enough, it’s still looking incredibly lovely. I’m going to get my hands on it straight away.

Just take a look:

See, now you want it too.

It’s $20, via M&D’s Humble Store.

__________________

« | »

, , , , .

24 Comments »

  1. aego says:

    Or $9.99 on gog.com.

    • AlwaysRight says:

      Insta-bought, and you just saved me £6. Happy Days.

    • FunktionJCB says:

      The $20 version the developers are selling directly is a “deluxe edition” that includes a number of bonuses, including the kick-ass soundtrack (with bonus tracks), not to mention the game DRM free + a Steam key.

      IMO it’s worth the price difference, for the soundtrack alone.
      I’ve been listening to it since yesterday, and it’s very much worth listening to outside of the game.

      A quick sample (and far from my favourite of the OST):

      Damn, yet another week of kick-ass indie games.
      Yesterday Pid, today Cargo Commander. 2012 has been really awesome for PC gaming.

  2. jmexio says:

    Looks soooo pretty!!

    You can actually get it on Steam for half that. It is worth noting that buying direct will get you a DRM-free version plus the Steam code, and a bunch of extras including soundtrack, wallpapers and illustrations, a design document, etc… Anyway, here is the link:

    http://store.steampowered.com/app/218740

    EDIT: or at gog, as posted above, for the same price as steam…

  3. Squirrelfanatic says:

    Wow, this looks pretty. Reminds me a bit of Rochard, just more complex and, well, more pretty. Apparently, the game has a coop mode as well and it supports the use of control pads, nifty.

    • mechabuddha says:

      Rochard was good, but left me feeling like so much more could have been done with the game mechanics. Judging from the trailer, it looks like Pid has plenty of it.

      • trjp says:

        I think Rochard is a masterclass in taking something and making “just the right amount of game” out if it.

        Some developers just over-egg their puddings every time – and some players just seem to want more and more options despite the fact it’s just cluttering the game.

        How many games have 20-30 ‘powers’ or ‘weapons’, most of which are so clearly defined that you know they’ll unlock 1 or 2 doors or move a crate or whatever.

        A CLEVER game will make the player use their powers creatively AND it will offer options – Rochard does that.

        This looks lovely and may be ever better but DON’T mistake a lack of toys for a lack of design – too many games are brimful of ideas but have no design.

        • Berzee says:

          I quite agree! And most of the time, when they want to introduce more variety, they introduce a new world element (enemy type, machines, crates, etc) that must be dealt with in a new way, rather than adding a new one-trick tool to the player’s bag.

          Shame they didn’t take the same “just enough” approach to the story. -_- Maybe I’m just overly sensitive to it because I accidentally encountered a string of movies and games all in a row where (spoilers impending) the big real was aliens+native-americans ancient artifact collaboration powerz!(spoilers have ceased)

          • KevinLew says:

            I own Rochard but I think that I understand why it didn’t attract many fans or get much critical acclaim. The game starts off as a puzzle game that feels clever and unique, with the only negatives being somewhat uninteresting characters and cliched voice acting. But by the end of the game, it becomes more of an action game with a gravity gun. It doesn’t feel really cohesive and it feels like the gameplay in the beginning doesn’t match the ending part. It’s kind of like how Deus Ex: Human Revolution stuck in boss fights that nobody liked.

            Finally, I think games deserve negative points if they intentionally end on a cliffhanger unless they are absolutely guaranteed to have a sequel. To me, it shows arrogance on the developer’s part, because it’s basically saying: “We already know that this game will profit so much that it will warrant a sequel. Now we’ll just end the story at a weird place to justify it.” The worst part is, there are many games that stop after one game but they still have a junk cliffhanger ending.

    • DPB says:

      Rochard is much, much easier than this, I’m playing on normal and it makes me wish there was an easy mode to bring it more in line with that. I’m currently at the second boss, which is infuriatingly difficult – I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve died. This boss has far too much health, and since I have no shield power-up it’s one-hit kills from everything.

      It’s still an enjoyable game when you’re not fighting bosses, but it’s more action-oriented and less puzzle-focused than I was hoping for.

  4. mrd says:

    I’d love to get that but I know for a fact I will SUCK at it. It looks and sounds so good but… 15 minutes of frustrated playing later it would sit never to be opened again.

    • Shadrach says:

      For me it’s the same, unfortunately – I mean, I love interesting and cool art design and the music sounds awesome but once I saw the spikes I knew it was not for me… I get easily frustrated these days :p

      • qrter says:

        You see this a lot, now – mainstream games hold hands like there’s no tomorrow, and indie games rake you screaming over the coles.

        • trjp says:

          Problem here is that ‘tough platforming’ has been defined by Super Meat Boy – but SMB puts your RIGHT back into the action, wheras this makes you look at a black screen for a while before throwing you back to an arbitrary checkpoint.

          As I said below, the controls aren’t ideal either – at least that was the 360 version, perhaps the pC is miraculously better!?

  5. sirdavies says:

    It looks beautiful.

  6. pupsikaso says:

    Oh my, how lovely. I thought for a moment this was an interesting take on stealth when the trailer said “stay out of sight”, but at the end it looks a bit more traditional. Still seems like worth a try.

    Wish there was a demo!

  7. Squirrelfanatic says:

    Just re-watched the trailer, with sound this time around. Noice!

  8. Dilapinated says:

    This looks and sounds wonderful.

  9. Tiguh says:

    Instabought! I am loving the living, breathing sh*t out of this this! Thanks John!

  10. BathroomCitizen says:

    I would buy this just for the soundtrack!

  11. trjp says:

    Just tried the XBOX Demo for this and – erm – I hate it…

    It looks lovely but it’s one of those games which puts presentation ahead of gameplay. It only tells you what you absolutely need to know (good) but will happily let you die to demonstrate what is lethal (bad) and a lot of the early design feels ‘different for the sake of it’ (e.g. not necessarily better).

    Technically it’s a bit shoddy too – on XBOX at least – when you die there’s a nasty pregnant pause before the level reappears (think 4-6 seconds) – that will get REALLY grating, pretty fast.

    The controls also feel a bit poor – there’s a delay/lag, especially when the level first loads. Add this to the amount of time you spend ‘floating’ and those darting enemies will become a real potluck encounter, every single time.

    As I said tho, looks lovely and it may bloom into something amazing – but the first 20-30 mins were dire, frankly…

    • FunktionJCB says:

      For what is worth, I didn’t experience any of the issues you mentioned on the PC version.
      The loadings for new screens or after dying are pretty much instantaneous (a fraction of a second).

  12. Sinomatic says:

    This reminds me of MicMacs (the Jeunet film) for some reason (not a bad thing)

    Regardless, it looks lovely. Colour me very interested.

Comment on this story

XHTML: Allowed code: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>