Comments on: Sequester (Anthony Lavelle)

By: NNPS

NNPS — Mon, 11 Jun 2012 13:35:37 +0000

I found there were many puzzles where I’d be spending way too much time slowly moving, waiting to get to some place. Maybe that’s just an inherent feature of the world’s puzzles.

The puzzles weren’t all that satisfying to solve. Maybe I just suck with memory, but I found this game relied moderately on remembering where and how a switch was placed and when you fall down a hole, you need to DI to get to the correct platform or face wasting another few minutes getting back to that point.

By: Aquin

Aquin — Sat, 09 Jun 2012 06:07:38 +0000

Hear hear. It did teach me that a good story in a puzzle game is a bad idea with me. I’d get stuck on a puzzle, but care more for the story; I found myself hitting the skip button just to keep up the narrative pace.

By: Sergio

Sergio — Sat, 09 Jun 2012 05:57:00 +0000

“Lavelle”? J’accuse! Nepotism!

By: Radiatoryang

Radiatoryang — Sat, 09 Jun 2012 05:30:48 +0000

I stopped after a few levels… I’ve already played Cardboard Box Assembler / this genre. So not much novelty in later levels?

I agree about the type of “polish” imposed by Flash game portals. I think polish is important, but I think this particular type of polish (“this is the level where you learn ___”) risks making the material extremely boring because I can make so many assumptions about the format of it all.

By: T

Fri, 08 Jun 2012 23:53:38 +0000

I still don’t understand the story and finished certain levels thru dumb luck.

By: Terry

Terry — Fri, 08 Jun 2012 20:59:21 +0000

I was on the fence about highly recommending this one, because I think it’s a bit mechanically disappointing, but I was impressed enough by the style and presentation that I decided to do it anyway.

It kinda makes me wish that this guy would quit working for Armor Games and start working on something more ambitious. I’d love to see what he’d come up with if he didn’t have to worry about all the trappings of making a “successful” flash game.