There's no shortage of amazing games that were not met with the financial success they deserved. But which one has the greatest split between artistic excell...
Bought it when it came out! Great game. The antialiasing is really funky, though. There’s a lot of ghosting no matter what antialiasing option you use. I suspect it’s probably a software bug. It does kind of detract from the visual quality aspect of its marketing.
Regardless, I don’t think puzzles sell well in general - bit of a niche genre
That’s our hated TAA for you. It’s always on. And its especially bad in this title unfortunately. As talos1 was really great and I asked for talos2 to the devs for not forced TAA.
I really want MSAA back in modern games, always looked great even though it costs some performance. I feel like Anti Aliasing really doesn’t cost that much as it used to do anyways
But I agree with others that are saying it’s just niche. It’s a pure puzzle game. There’s no exploration, crafting, combat, survival, etc. You have to really like puzzles to play a pure puzzle game.
I do, and I’ve still been struggling to make it all the way through. I’m just starting on the last of the first 12 sections, and some of them have kind of been a slog rather than a joy.
I can’t even give any particular complaint, though. Each puzzle really is different from the others, so they aren’t duplicated in any way that was obvious to me. It’s just a lot, I guess.
Mechanically - both games are puzzle games in the same rough 3d-platform-puzzler vein as Portal. Instead of solving puzzles with teleportation however, you’ve got laser beams and force fields.
On a more metaphysical level, the first game is a philosophical investigation of what it means to be human - to be alive and an individual.
The sequel is a meditation on what makes societies succeed or die.
Both games are fun, the puzzles are just hard enough to be interesting with a sprinkling of well-hidden secrets. But the real reason to play The Talos Principle is if you’ve got an interest in philosophy - the storylines are deeply interested in asking some very big questions. … and they don’t provide answers either - the game poses questions and allows you to answer as you see fit.
Yeah, puzzle games usually don’t do too well, with notable exceptions like Portal, but the philosophy is really what both killed but also gave success to the series. It uses Christian symbolism in a way that could out some people off, and it really wants you to think, which some people may not want to do. If you don’t participate in that aspect it’s a somewhat mediocre puzzle game. With it though it’s one of my favorite puzzle series.
I don’t think it will very see large scale success, but I also don’t think it needs to or has ever aimed for that. It wants to do something and do it well. It wants to talk about philosophy with people actually interested in philosophy. If that isn’t for you then it’s going to leave you behind and that should be OK. Not every title needs to reach for mass appeal.
Also, if anyone’s wondering if you should play the first or just go to the second, it’s fine to start with 2, but I think 1 is the better game. The graphics are worse obviously, but I think it’s a better package. 2 doesn’t follow the same character and there’s not much story from 1 you need to know for 2, but 2 does use the mechanics for 1 and adds to it, so 1 may feel worse after. 1 takes the more limited mechanics further I think though. I never struggled with 2, even after 100%ing it, but 1 is more challenging, especially with the DLC which takes all the mechanics to their furthest reaches.
The first was amazing as well, but I always figured its niche type of problem solving and philosophical subjects didn’t really appeal to a wide audience. When the second one was announced I immediately wanted to play it, but I think once again a small target audience is its crutch for mainstream success.
His metric of underrated seems to be comparing the artistic quality of a game with its sales numbers, and I guess Talos II was a poor seller.
Bought it when it came out! Great game. The antialiasing is really funky, though. There’s a lot of ghosting no matter what antialiasing option you use. I suspect it’s probably a software bug. It does kind of detract from the visual quality aspect of its marketing.
Regardless, I don’t think puzzles sell well in general - bit of a niche genre
That’s our hated TAA for you. It’s always on. And its especially bad in this title unfortunately. As talos1 was really great and I asked for talos2 to the devs for not forced TAA.
Rather have jaggies than being blurred out.
I really want MSAA back in modern games, always looked great even though it costs some performance. I feel like Anti Aliasing really doesn’t cost that much as it used to do anyways
That’s “hidden gem” rather than “underrated.”
But I agree with others that are saying it’s just niche. It’s a pure puzzle game. There’s no exploration, crafting, combat, survival, etc. You have to really like puzzles to play a pure puzzle game.
I do, and I’ve still been struggling to make it all the way through. I’m just starting on the last of the first 12 sections, and some of them have kind of been a slog rather than a joy.
I can’t even give any particular complaint, though. Each puzzle really is different from the others, so they aren’t duplicated in any way that was obvious to me. It’s just a lot, I guess.
I honestly have no clue what it’s even about or what kind of game it is. I’ve seen it on steam regularly, but it never interested me to investigate.
Mechanically - both games are puzzle games in the same rough 3d-platform-puzzler vein as Portal. Instead of solving puzzles with teleportation however, you’ve got laser beams and force fields.
On a more metaphysical level, the first game is a philosophical investigation of what it means to be human - to be alive and an individual.
The sequel is a meditation on what makes societies succeed or die.
Both games are fun, the puzzles are just hard enough to be interesting with a sprinkling of well-hidden secrets. But the real reason to play The Talos Principle is if you’ve got an interest in philosophy - the storylines are deeply interested in asking some very big questions. … and they don’t provide answers either - the game poses questions and allows you to answer as you see fit.
Yeah, puzzle games usually don’t do too well, with notable exceptions like Portal, but the philosophy is really what both killed but also gave success to the series. It uses Christian symbolism in a way that could out some people off, and it really wants you to think, which some people may not want to do. If you don’t participate in that aspect it’s a somewhat mediocre puzzle game. With it though it’s one of my favorite puzzle series.
I don’t think it will very see large scale success, but I also don’t think it needs to or has ever aimed for that. It wants to do something and do it well. It wants to talk about philosophy with people actually interested in philosophy. If that isn’t for you then it’s going to leave you behind and that should be OK. Not every title needs to reach for mass appeal.
Also, if anyone’s wondering if you should play the first or just go to the second, it’s fine to start with 2, but I think 1 is the better game. The graphics are worse obviously, but I think it’s a better package. 2 doesn’t follow the same character and there’s not much story from 1 you need to know for 2, but 2 does use the mechanics for 1 and adds to it, so 1 may feel worse after. 1 takes the more limited mechanics further I think though. I never struggled with 2, even after 100%ing it, but 1 is more challenging, especially with the DLC which takes all the mechanics to their furthest reaches.
The first was amazing as well, but I always figured its niche type of problem solving and philosophical subjects didn’t really appeal to a wide audience. When the second one was announced I immediately wanted to play it, but I think once again a small target audience is its crutch for mainstream success.