VVVVVV for Vendetta: VVVVVV Interview

VVVVVV has been my favourite game of the year so far. Small, perfectly formed and highly punishing, it reminds me of some of my favourite games – and girlfriends, for that matter – of years gone by… without really being like any of them. It’s a dream of the past, retro as an idea rather than simple recapitulation. After writing a Wot I Think, I decided it was time to talk to Mr Distractionware – Terry Cavanagh – about all things VVVVVV. Discover below why the Jet Set Willy comparisons aren’t quite right, the thinking behind the pricing decision and lots more…

RPS: The basic one – who are you, Terry?

Terry Cavanagh: I’m a game designer.

RPS: Okay – how did you fall in love with games? Are you still in love why games? WHY GAMES?

Terry Cavanagh: I started out programming on the C64 when I was a kid, but at that point it was really more of a technical thing – I enjoyed programming, but I didn’t really care about making games, exactly.

The game that really made me want to be a game designer, that made me fall in love with games, was Final Fantasy VII. I think I was maybe 13 or 14 when it came out, and I’d never played anything like it. On a moment to moment basis I just loved everything that game did, everything about how it was constructed. I’m not sure if I’d even played an RPG before that; it was completely alien to me.

Not long after that I started making proper games of my own – I taught myself QBasic, made a load of silly minigames, but mostly worked on one big failed RPG project after another. I’ve still never made an RPG.

Absolutely, I’m still fascinated with games. I’m not sure if I can even explain why, really – I love making games, I love playing games, I love that games can surprise me and reach me in ways that other mediums don’t. Games have been around all my life, and I’ve seen them grow and change, and I love that there’s so much to explore, still. It’s a very exciting time to be a game designer!

RPS: Hurrah! Why was now the time to make a commercial Indie game?

Terry Cavanagh: Because I found myself months into a big project and it was the only thing that made sense if I had any hope of continuing to make games into the new year. I’ve been doing this full time for over two years now, but I ran out of money nearly a year ago. If it wasn’t for the Don’t Look Back sponsorship money from Kongregate, I would have had to quit way back then.

I try not to think about my debts, mostly – I don’t open bank statements or keep track of money going out. I figured I could worry about paying back everything when I got a job, and for the moment I was better off seeing where this game development thing was going to lead me. Otherwise I was probably just going to find myself working to pay off my debts, saving up and eventually going indie again when I’m 30 or something.

I never really thought I was going to be able to do this full time – I just assumed that eventually I’d run out of money and that’d be that.

RPS: Okay, core question – why VVVVVV. What’s the inspirations? What were you trying to do?

Terry Cavanagh: VVVVVV is basically an exploration of a single gameplay mechanic. In VVVVVV you can flip gravity, but you can’t jump at all. My goal with the game was to explore its level design possibilities as much as I could, without falling back on any elements that I felt would detract from its focus. I wanted to create a game that explored a very simple set of mechanics to its limits.

It’s probably just easier to say that I’m influenced by Jet Set Willy, because it’s the connection that everybody makes, but I had a C64, not a speccy! It’s more accurate to say that I’m influenced by the games that were influenced by Jet Set Willy, like Monty on the Run and Jack the Nipper 2 and Mystery of the Nile and all the weird budget games I had when I was a kid. Dizzy was a really big influence too – the facial expressions and individually named rooms and single colour sprites in VVVVVV all come right out of that.

RPS: Your last two free indie games – Don’t Look Back and Judith – have leaned towards the art game side of things, full of negatively charged emotions. VVVVVV’s character leans emotionally joyous and towards pure ludic craft. Could you talk about your thinking here?

Terry Cavanagh: Pretty much all my games are concept driven; I’m inspired by some core idea, so I start working on it and see how it develops. Judith, for example, just started from me and Stephen wanting to mess around with some fucked up raycasting renderings. And Don’t Look Back was initially just an exercise in a minimalist graphical style before I ended up fusing it with a lot of other loose ideas.

The point is I don’t necessarily know how a game is going to develop right away, so it’s not like VVVVVV was an intentional break from the kind of games I was making earlier last year – I was inspired to explore this particular gameplay mechanic in more detail, and it just ended up having a different mood to some of my other games. I guess it might have been possible to take VVVVVV in a, I dunno, let’s say darker direction – but it was pretty clear from quite early in development that VVVVVV was going to be something more upbeat.

RPS: You clearly like a retro-seeming aesthetic… or do you actually grate at that? I saw some fascinating complaints about VVVVVV because it wasn’t “real” pixel art. It seems to me that you were more interested in creating the impression of an artifact from a past age rather than the actuality. What are you trying to do with the graphics?

Terry Cavanagh: I’ve probably got funny ideas about what I think looks good – I’m no artist, but what I am basically trying to do with my graphics is make my games look distinctive and different. I like experimenting with strange looking and interesting graphical styles, and I think it’s easier to do this at low resolutions. These days I almost never do anything above a resolution of 320×240. I don’t really have any interest in sticking rigidly to the limitations of any specific machine, but I do like working within graphical constraints.

RPS: In passing, while the game screams fun, I found myself Awwwing at the romance between two of the Vs. The emotional response to these really simple characters is cartoony, but strong, if you see what I mean – certainly more than many cut-scene heavy games. It’s an interesting counter-point to the whole Molyneux idea that you need to see the eyes dilate to really relate with something. What do you think about that?

Terry Cavanagh: My approach to VVVVVV’s story isn’t that far off my approach to its graphics – I think its one dimensional characters sorta work for the same reason that low resolutions graphics do – if all the details aren’t there, you fill in the gaps yourself.

Generally, I think there’s a lot to be said for threading lightly with videogame storytelling, and not forcing the player to engage with the story any more than they want to – personally, I just find that sorta thing far more immersive than drawn out cutscenes and epic backstories and whatnot.

It might surprise some people how much dialogue there actually is in VVVVVV, by the way – you can talk to the crewmates back on the ship over and over again, and they have different things to say depending on when you talk to them and who you’ve rescued.

Exploring how you can use games to tell stories in interesting ways is something I care a lot about, and something I want to do a lot more of this year.

RPS: The price has proved contentious. Could you explain your thinking behind the fifteen dollars? Any thoughts on Indie pricing generally?

Terry Cavanagh: Well, the bottom line for me is that I want to be able to afford to keep making games, and almost everything I read and everyone I talked to before the launch said that I’d have a much better chance at that if I charged $19.99. But that felt a bit expensive to me – I went with $15 dollars because that’s about 10 euros, and that seemed like a nice round, fair price.

What eventually made my mind up was reading Jeff Vogel’s series of articles about indie game pricing, “Why Indie Games Should Cost More” (Part 1, Part 2).

RPS: And – hating to be obvious – what next?

Terry Cavanagh: I wanna go back to making smaller games for a while! My big plan for this year is to try and make a game a month – though I haven’t had a whole lot of time to work on my January game yet. I’ve got a lot of unfinished prototypes from last year that I finally want to finish, and lots of ideas for new stuff too.

RPS: Thanks for your time.

VVVVVV is available to purchase for 15$. You can download a demo version from here.


  1. kyrieee says:

    Normally I’d be pissed off at the price but I’m fine with it in this case for some reason
    I had a lot of fun with the game

    • Dood says:

      There is no way to be pissed off at a game like this. Even seeing those few screenshots here make me want to go back and play it again.

    • Wulf says:

      I agree, dood.

      …and now I feel like a prinny.

      Was that the intent?

      This has totally derailed my train of thought.

      Oh yes, okay, right! It’s all down to people beginning to understand that value isn’t defined by size, I know it’s subjective but I never agreed with that idea, I think it’s utter nonsense.

      For example: £5 would get me a massive tray of junk/fast food, filled to the brim with grease, dripping with grease, maybe a shake too, some greasy chips or fries, and basically just a large pile of grease with bits of food inside the grease. And more grease. With grease. It looks a lot, and you might be able to put some of it in a doggy bag to eat later, but nutritionally speaking there’s less than 10 per cent of a real meal in that pile of grease. Or you could use that £5 to get a healthy, well-rounded meal, sans grease, perhaps a varied salad, some properly cooked meat, and nutritionally that’s worth more than £100’s worth of the aforementioned junk food. It doesn’t look as big, but it’s better for your body, and generally you’ll feel more enriched and healthier.

      Entertainment mediums can be like that too, but gaming even more than any entertainment medium, because people will ask how many hours they’ll get to the pound, and they’ll figure out the value that way. So if a game has perhaps six hours of content and costs £10 then that doesn’t look like great value to them, but if something has 60 hours of content and costs £40, then that’s going to appear to be better value for money because there’s more–how they say–bang for the buck.

      But from my perspective, keeping in mind the junk food example, this is flawed.

      The 60 hours could be 60 hours of slop, it’s not enriching, it’s not going to challenge you on an emotional or intellectual level, it’s not going to provide you with any sense of fun, but hey… it lasts for 60 hours, right? And therein lies the problem with the general perception of value in gaming. The good thing, however, is that this is slowly breaking and people are beginning to realise that the equation of value isn’t as simple as all that.

      It’s sad really, I’ve probably missed the window with my Press Spacebar game, a game which lasts for 800 hours(!!!) and involves the player sitting there and pressing the Spacebar, it’s exciting, it’s avant-garde, it utilises abstract new gaming technologies, and it sports my Show Text on a Screen 5.01 engine, which is top of the range and is able to do lots of technobabbly things you don’t understand! It’s so awesome it might even cause your desktop to quantum tunnel through the floor, vibrating with that much undiluted awesome! Press Spacebar, an 800 hour game coming to stores near you for £35!

      And how you might be feeling after reading that is what people are coming to terms with.

      VVVVVV is not an especially long game, no. But it doesn’t really have any padding, it’s made with so much love that we can feel that through its charm, every screen is fun and challenging, the story can make us smile, and generally… I don’t know about anyone else, but I felt good about playing it from start to finish. Whether I was laughing and inventing new cusses for Veni, Vidi, Vici, or whether I was laughing at the creative room names, it was almost medicine for the soul. Sometimes I felt frustrated, and then when I achieved something I felt more satisfied with VVVVVV than I’ve felt with any game in recent memory. And that is my definition of value.

      Yes yes, I know, appeal to emotion and all that rot, but the thing is, a great piece of entertainment should task people; intellectually, emotionally, or both. My definition of value is how tasked I was by any given piece of entertainment. I go with my gut.

      Conclusion: Value cannot be defined by logical means, and you can only really go with how you feel as to whether something was worth it, or whether you were ripped off. And if a game gives you a number of memories and each of those memories stir up amazing emotions (in a positive way) then you’re less likely to feel ripped off.

      This is the effect with VVVVVV, you look at a screenshot and the memories come flooding back, you do feel good, and the game was worth it.

      Some people are going to lag behind in their understanding of this, and they’re going to base value off hours gained, but eh… frankly? Their loss.

  2. Muzman says:

    Is the name of this game pronounced a certain quirky way?
    I think it should be. Much as !!! apparently means ‘ChikaChikaChik’, spiky toothy death VVVVVVs should be “grrrrrr” or something.

  3. kwyjibo says:

    Is he going to throw it on Steam and catch the impulse buying crowd? It’s bound to give him a money shot.

    • BobJustBob says:

      Yeah I was hoping you’d ask when it’s coming to Steam.

  4. Richeh says:

    Did you punch him for Doing Things The Hard Way?

  5. Meat Circus says:

    This game gave me the funnest Sunday afternoon in ages. I never managed Doing Things The Hard Way in the end. 19/20 shiny trinkets, sitting there, mocking me.

  6. Eric says:

    I loved the hell out of VVVVVV and it was worth every penny of the $15 – I got more enjoyment out of that 5 hours than I’ve gotten out of 10 hour or longer games that cost more. Like, Richeh, though, I do want to know if you punched him for Doing Things The Hard Way. I mean, you did promise.

    (I did finally manage it, though. The unlock after getting all 20 trinkets is totally worth it.)

  7. nevernow says:

    Jeff Vogel’s articles are quite arrogant and do not make as much sense as they seem to. In particular, I find a point very annoying: the one where he says he needs to sell his games at (relatively) high prices so they are profitable or at the very least he can support himself. But whoever said you’re entitled to a right to live off whatever creative hobby you spend your time with?

    “Hello, I sell necklaces made with plastic bottle caps. I create them while handcuffed and blindfolded because I like creative constraints, so it takes three weeks to make one. Therefore, I sell them for 1200$. Wanna buy one?”

    I know I’m OT, so I’ll stop here, but it’s the second time I stumble upon those articles and I couldn’t shut up.

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      Nevernow: It’s not a hobby. It’s a business. They get made because he spends full time on them. If he didn’t spend full time on them, they wouldn’t get made. You may as well ask why any business charges as much as they do.

      I mean, I’m a writer. I clearly have no moral right to support myself as a writer, but I know to continue doing it full time I must make X amount of money per week. I will work out how to do that amount of work per week, or I’ll go and do something else.

      My dad’s a builder. He has to make X amount of money a week. Clearly, he’s got no moral right to work as a builder – but he knows he has to charge a certain amount for jobs to stay solvent.

      I mean, this is obvious, innit?

      Point being, he can support himself by charging these prices. Reducing them, he believes, he wouldn’t. If you’re talking about running an indie-games company as a business, you’re talking about that.

      If you’re talking about indie-games as a delightful hobby, it’s a different kettle of fish. But you telling my Dad that he should just go and work in development and then go and do your patio at the weekend as a hobby for kicks is plain mental.


    • Brog says:

      Um. Not sure why I’m dignifying this with a response, but here we go:

      a) He’s not making games as a hobby, but as a full-time job. There’s a big difference there in terms of how much work you have to put in. I’m currently making games as a hobby, and finding it’s very difficult to actually complete a full-scale game; you really need to spend a while working full-time to get it polished and ready for release, which is time not spent earning a living. And once people are paying money for your game, they expect a level of support that they otherwise wouldn’t; you have to fix bugs quickly etc., whereas for a freeware game nobody can really demand anything because it’s free.

      b) It’s the people who buy his games who are saying he’s entitled to live off them. It’s perfectly logical to reason “enough people are willing to buy my games at a high enough price point to support me, therefore I can live off this.” If nobody bought his games, he’d have to go “alright, I’ll get a new day job”. (and on the topic of entitlement; nobody’s entitled to get games free/cheap, it’s the developer’s choice how much to sell them for.)

    • Brog says:

      (beaten to it by Keiron; ignore my post)

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      Brog: No, I think it’s worth repeating. I’m totally bemused. Especially with Vogel. Who in the indie-field is making full-size RPGs? No-one does this as a hobby and actually releases games.


    • Meat Circus says:

      Iron Tower?

      TBH, I can’t remember if irrascible pal of RPS, Vince D. Weller is working full-time on Age of Decadence or not.

      I plan to set up an Indie game studio one day, and it’ll totally do RPGs.

    • Kieron Gillen says:

      Meat: Vince has a full time job.

      And also, it should be noted, not released a game.


    • invisiblejesus says:

      “But whoever said you’re entitled to a right to live off whatever creative hobby you spend your time with?”

      Whoever said you’re entitled to buy games at low prices? Game developers/publishers will put games out at the price they think people will pay for them. People will either pay that price, or refuse and the developer/publisher will have to consider lowering the price. If the guy can put his games out at what seems like a high price and people feel they’re good enough to buy, what’s the problem? Personally, I don’t think VVVVVVVV is my thing so I’m not going to pay the asking price for it. A lot of other people feel differently. That’s business. I don’t understand why this is so hard to accept, either for the “indies are too high priced!” people or the “you must buy indie games or you are an asshole and PC gaming is doomed!” people. If it appeals enough to you to pay the asking price, buy it. If not, don’t. If the guy makes a bucket of money off of it, good for him, he earned it. If he goes out of business, tough luck, it happens. That’s how business works.

  8. adana oto kiralama says:

    hi very nice article tanks

  9. bookwormat says:

    I’m patiently waiting for the Linux version, but I have great fun with the demo so far.

    • fishyjoes says:

      I hope you already know this: link to distractionware.com

      Terry – “I’ve got some bad news for Linux users that I was hoping I wouldn’t have to announce – I’ve tried everything I can think of, but I can’t get a version of VVVVVV working on Linux. I’m out of ideas and it doesn’t look like it’s going to happen. Believe me, I’m as annoyed about this as I’m sure you are.”

    • bookwormat says:

      I hope you already know this: link to distractionware.com

      No, I did not. Sad :(. But it is nice that the game seems to run on wine.

      It is true that Adobe does not promote flash well under Linux. The plugin is still quite buggy, and they also need forever to get flash on Android.

      I’m glad we are now able to replace most flash applications with real web applications, thanks to HTML5. http://www.VVVVV.ftw

    • Hodge says:

      There’s always VVVV.

  10. linfosoma says:

    This reminds me, I need to beat the last level. I’ve been working so hard lately =(

  11. the wiseass says:

    I seem to have developed a hate/love relationship with this game. I love the style, the pixelwork, the 8bit sound and of course the sleek gameplay. But I loathe the game’s difficulty making me die a billion times a minute.

    When I start up the game I have tremendous fun until I reach a point where I die over and over again, then I get absolutely pissed. Sometimes I just quit the game but sometimes I force myself to keep playing and after a while I become completely lethargic, an almost trance like state.

    I dunno if I should thank Terry for making this game or kick him in the groin. Ironically my cutest moment with the game is in the early beginning when they all get teleported and the smiling captain turns his smiley face to a sad face when he notices his companions are gone. It’s just so cute and sad at the same time when his smile turns into a frown accompanied with that 8bit bleep. Really made me feel for that guy.

    So yes, this game is horritastic (or fantable, whatever you prefer).

  12. army of none says:

    Yaaaay. Terry! Still playing through the game at lunchtimes. I’ll get that Never-Die-And-Complete-The-Story one day!

  13. PsySal says:

    Haha, I like the idea of calling it “grrrrr…”

  14. Javier-de-Ass says:

    was easily worth the price

  15. Bhazor says:

    Personally I think the best bet for indies is to aim for the impulse zone ($2.50 to $6 say). Low cost/high volume seems the best bet when the people buying it simply haven’t read enough about it to pay proper money. After all unless you get in print media than the overwhelming majority of your audience won’t hear of it. So really your market is a tiny fraction (those who frequent indie game websites) of a tiny percentage (core gamers) of the population (people with thumbs). As such you really can’t risk losing a customer especially if they’re the loyal kind who’ll come back for the next one.

    Put it at $5 and you might sell three times as many than you would if you’d put it at $15.

    Besides, I really think that price cuts are the best defence against the P word.

  16. Carra says:

    So did you punch him in the face for “veni, vidi, vici”?

  17. SheffieldSteel says:


    “I found myself Awwwing at the romance between two of the Vs”

    Thanks for spoiling the game for me :-(

  18. Nero says:

    Great interview about a great game. I just love the c64 style and music. And while I died quite a few times in some rooms I never felt like some people that “ooo i die too much, this game sucks and is too expensive”. I got more enjoyment out of this than many many other recent games. Good work Terry!

  19. kongming says:

    It’s very annoying how everywhere this game is mentioned, people feel the need to chip in with their opinion on the price, as if “it costs too much” is a sentiment that hasn’t been expressed a million times already. Why doesn’t anybody ever complain that the latest triple-A titles are overpriced at $60-70?

    • Wulf says:

      Because if it’s by a brand name and/or it has 20+ hours of content, then it has to be good no matter what!

      Didn’t you know that all ready? Seriously, where have you been? The latest AAA title is invariably going to be worth more than an indie title because it has names like EA, Ubisoft, Bioware, or something of the sort attached to it. Those indie games don’t have proper big company support, therefore the big companies must think they’re shit, right? Of course that’s right! And because of that those bloody indie titles are just ripping people off.

      They should sell-out to a big company and get their game boxed and sold for a good twenty quid more, only then will they be worth it. Then we’ll know that they’ve gone through proper quality control, and any unique elements will have been ironed out to make the game completely unchallenging for the mainstream audience. Because anything that isn’t just a rehash of previous big games is experimental garbage that they have no right selling in the first place.

      Bloody indies, the sooner they all call it quits and stop developing beautifully unique and wonderful little gems the better off we’ll all be, then we can go back to being force-fed a diet of entertainment we’re completely familiar with, and we can stagnate in piece.


    • bookwormat says:

      Why doesn’t anybody ever complain that the latest triple-A titles are overpriced at $60-70?

      Are you kidding me? People complain about this all the time.

    • Wulf says:


      “Are you kidding me? People complain about this all the time.”

      This only seems to be true though with £40 titles, such as Modern Warfare 2. If an AAA title is £30 or even £35, people tend to happily fork over their money without complaint, and often if the game is garbage the price isn’t the thing they’ll complain about.

      By my own definition of value, there are a number of indie games out there which are worth more than the AAA titles, but the price tags don’t at all reflect that, which is why I’ve been veering more and more away from AAA titles, only picking them up when they turn up in utterly insane Steam deals and sales.

      And that’s why I made the point (in a tongue-in-cheek sort of way) that people seem to be happier forking over £35 if there’s a big name attached (like Ubisoft or EA) than forking over £10 to an unknown quantity, even though the unknown quantity is very likely going to provide them with a far more entertaining experience.

      I honestly can’t remember the last time I heard someone say that a triple-A game costing £30-35 was too expensive for what it is, and that really it should have gone for half the price. Well, except for myself, of course.

    • malkav11 says:

      They do. $60 is way too fucking much. It just is. The only reason I would ever pay that much for a AAA game is if I were so madly in love with the idea of playing it that I can’t wait even a single second. And not always then. However. I can usually shave a good $10-15 off that nearly straight away by shopping around a bit or buying off Gamefly or something, maybe even $20. If I’ve got more patience, sooner or later it’s going to go on massive discount sale, on Steam or Amazon or whatever. I’ve paid $30 for quite a few brand new very recent Xbox 360 games thanks to Amazon. And even if by some horrible mischance none of those things happen, price points drop. All I need is patience.

      With an indie game, I simply can’t count on that. Fortunately, most indie games are not priced at $60, and the ones that are are mostly the sort of hardcore grognardy wargame that does nothing for me. So it’s never been a major issue for me.

  20. Telemikus says:

    As I play through VVVVVV more and more little details occur to me that raise a smile, and a little pop of endorphins to go with it. I’m probably a bit slow on the uptake on this one, but I’ve only just realised that the title itself, as well as representing the first initial of your crews names, also are a literal representation of your foe, the jagged little V’s that you swerve, bounce and flip to avoid throughout the game, genius!

    The rooms titles (as have been discussed elswhere on RPS) spur me on when frustration with a particular area starts to build. ‘Free your mind’ being the first that really nudged me onwards. After multiple attempts to make the seemingly impossible corrections in your trajectory, and pass through the obstacle the screen refers to, I took it’s advice. Spoilers aside, it revealed the most straightforward ;) of techniques meant it was passable each and every time.


  21. Blobotic says:

    It’s a shame that the whole gaming populous has been trained to equate the length of a game to the price. VVVVVV is much better than 99% of the RPGs out there that does nothing but force you to grind.

  22. Hodge says:

    VVVVVV isn’t like Jet Set Willy because VVVVVV is actually quite good.

    *runs away very quickly*

    • Telemikus says:

      COME BACK HERE YOU! *Waves fist angrily* … Jet Set Willy was the best game I’d ever played… Um, When I was seven. Does that devalue it at all? It still had bucket loads of explorative goodies to delve into, and a quirky, surrealist charm to go with it. Plus it seemed huge as well, much bigger than I was used to. I think that helped to cement it in my mind as something quite awesome.

  23. Lorc says:

    I just wanted to say that I got my last three trinkets yesterday (Doing things the hard way AKA veni vidi vici of course, edge games and finally prize for the reckless).

    So hard but so satisfying. vvvvvv is my best game of 2010 and I can’t see any upcoming that threaten to dethrone it.

    So of course that means the secret lab is unlocked, with amusing cut scene, super gravitron and trophy room. Eurgh, the trophies; almost all of them are surely beyond my weak, mortal abilities.

  24. Psychopomp says:

    Oddly, I would have had less sticker shock if it was $15 just for the soundtrack alone, and the few people I’ve brought this up to agree. Gamers are an insane lot, it seems.

    Brilliant game, by the way.

  25. TCM says:

    After buying and playing the game, I have to say two things.

    A) It seems short, but God it was a blast. A trip, even. I am still not sure it is worth the $15 I paid for it, for a few hours of time, but I had fun with it.

    B) If you want to make a lot of money, make Terry Cavanagh plushies so we can BURN THEM IN EFFIGY. I hate you for so many things. SO MANY. Mainly Not as I do, Panic Room, Three’s Company, and The Final Challenge.

    And Veni Vidi Vici, you son of a mother.

  26. ItsBeenDone says:

    I liked Metal Storm better (another side scroller using the gravity flip mechanic).

  27. dinorceeho says:

    Everything in the game is crisp and vibrant, providing the most colorful and visually pleasing grindhouse-style experiences out there. Hope these 4 characters aren’t stupidly stereotypical.. Asian guy with Katana.. African american Shaman who probably has a jamaican accent.. is the other one a red headed viking? Yeah i know it needs to be politically correct but maybe some unexpected originality to it might make me not so skeptical