My best description of Aquaria is:
"It's made by a programmer and an illustrator"

Seriously - this game nothing short of a masterpiece.

I'm glad it didn't turn out to be overhyped.

And it doesn't lack depth as well - the recipes (think Witcher but that game sucked), the ocarina-like song-system... Wonderful!

Wow this is so incredibly beautiful. Im already sort of stuck though, even in the demo :/. There's this one boss from the trailers but i have no way to attack yet. I think i explored all the routes possible at the moment, but i guess i missed something.

I'm stuck too. I got to the second save point and closed it to do something else. anything else.

butts

ps ozz is fat

WOOOOOOOOT

About time, I've been waiting for this game for a long time, I'll post more after I give the demo a try. I hope that the game runs at full speed on my PC.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOES!!!!!

My PC is far too slow to play the game... runs @ 30 FPS most of the time and in some areas runs@ 17 FPS
Will play it when I have a new PC, but that ain't happening anytime soon. :-( Ultra sad!

I bought it twice because I wanted to support them.

LOLz no not really. I played the demo and found the pacing off and a forced sense of atmosphere. I don't like this.

and so it came to be that the entirety of the indie community got a collective massive hardon...

"It's made by a programmer and an illustrator"

That's about right. Beautiful and well coded, but it ends there.

It's neat, but nothing special.

Strong contender for the best indie game of the year, in my opinion :) Bought it straight off the bat and am enjoying every second of it. Immersive and atmospheric.

Since the level editor is available too, it'll be interesting to see what the modding community can create.

I've seen the screenshots, and although the drawings are good, it looks sterile to me. Knytt's graphics aren't as good, but even the screenshots show deep atmosphere. This one seems... I dunno... cold, a bit forced and really plasticy.

Hah, Raf doesn't like it. Betcha nobody saw that coming! :D

It's nicely done and pretty but I just didn't find it all that fun.

Well dang, the bit-blot seems to have gone down. I'll have to wait to check it out :(.

Bit-blot went down....

I was about to buy the game.

Reminds me of Okami, in that it's just a Zelda-like, even if a pretty well-made one.

It looks pretty cool :)

My impressions of the demo:

1 minute in: Ugh, static cutscenes. As if normal ones weren't bad enough.
2 minutes: Okay, I'm hyped! Time to play an underwater Metroid-esque game! Exploration! Atmosphere! Woo!
4 minutes: I'm bored. Everything looks the same. This "main character talks to me" conceit is really, really dumb.
24 minutes: Still bored. Everything still looks the same. I want to murder the main character to get her to shut up.
25 minutes: Uninstalled.

Pro: Beautiful soundtrack. Tries to do something different. Good voice acting.

Con: Too slow-paced. Needs more gameplay. Needs more variety. Annoying and cliche story, at least in the demo.

After a couple hours playing :

+ : Absolutely gorgeous, great ideas, inventive, works on my old laptop, huge world to explore

- : Slow paced, easy to get lost, NOT ENOUGH SAVEPOINTS (that's bad)

The anonymous above must be a little bit dead inside though : /

I actually kind of like that it's slow paced. I don't like the huge distance between areas, I think movement should be a bit faster, but I like that it spreads itself out over time and gives you time to enjoy just exploring and experimenting. Ocarina of Time for the Nintendo 64 was also pretty slow-paced in that way.

Ocarina of Time was tedious.

oh come on guys, why are you so bitter?
cause this game got a little bit of extra hype? - but it's not a halo of indiegamdev by any stretch

cause it differs from what you expect from an indie game (platformer, shmup, puzzle or whatever)? - but its only a good thing that it's different. games shouldnt just copy old formula with variations
maybe its just not you type of game, but dont be bitter about it, its ok if it doesnt appeal to you
dont act like this game insults you and you feel the need to insult it back

/Spddss

If I hadn't heard of this game a long time ago, hadn't looked at screens leading up to its release and just played the demo with no hype involved, I'd feel the same way.

That is, it's extremely slow paced. I don't mind the cut scenes. I don't mind the talking. What I do mind is having NO idea where to go with a character that moves much to slow in accordance with the map sizes. Re-reading that, its not that big a complaint. Maybe I just can't put my finger on why I dont like the game, but it's just...boring.

is there any mirror for this download Aquaria ?
i cant open the bit-blot homepage ...

Those who liked the game are dead inside.

Bad comments about this game? Stop hating. Seriously, it's a bit slow paced ( I've only played for about 45 mins ), but it's just an intro. I am highly impressed, but that may just be because I realize the amount of work necessary to achieve such a masterpiece...

It really is a magnificent game. I'm now about three hours in the game and I've entered an area that leads to many different environments. That's where the frustration kicks in. In that part, you can swim for about 15 minutes from one end of the map to the other without being stopped, which gives a great sense of freedom, but is somewhat frustrating when you don't know where to go first and the speed becomes a tad slow. If there were more natural barriers like in the first section, or an (optional) arrow on the map pointing to the next objective, that would help a lot.

It's only minor criticism, still love it =)

"oh come on guys, why are you so bitter? [snip]
cause it differs from what you expect from an indie game (platformer, shmup, puzzle or whatever)? "


It doesn't differ. It has OoT-style musical instruments, with Ecco meets Metroid game mechanics. Don't kid yourself this is some super original game just because of the higher-than-standard production values.

See, to me Knytt has more atmosphere purely because rather than adding all this graphical finesse - it subtracts it.

Such a shame really. So much for this massive indie hard on we're supposed to be getting.

Obviously you haven't been watching all the IGS panels...

Forcing innovation in a game is not necessarily good. Aquaria combines known gameplay mechanics into something new.

I agree, however, that the game is a bit too slow-paced and too open-ended for me. I'm one of those strange people that like linearity in games...

Frankly I really find this game rather enjoyable - the Mod option is really user friendly, the game engine is very pleasing to the visualy, and the music brilliant in most areas. The voice performance is pleasing as well. I have seen a few oddities in this, like the crab cave where crabs are crawling under the "Water Symbols" but when you swim over them the issue isn't present at all. And yes some people don't like games that exploration action games. I see the influence of Metroid, but frankly Ecco no - I always found controlling that dolphin a pain in the ass, and the fact that you had to ram enemies for most of the game was just annoying. Those that have purchased Aquaria have seen the extended intro, which in my opinion adds to the story - though I personally thought a bit of the cut scene quality was not up to the same standard of ingame character designs. I find the cooking a little frustration, but funny enough rewarding - especially when you create power ups.

Knytt, and Knytt Stories are both very enjoyable as well, but they really don't have any 'combat' elements, and with Knytt you collected items that you really didn't do anything with except repair the UFO. The environments suggested a story, with the various little characters in the background - but that was open for interpretation. Brilliant yes, and when Knytt Stories introduced a way to implement stories into the Knytt universe, serious fun was to be had. But the weakness of that game was simply the fact that you collected items to get further along in the game. Frankly I was hoping that Knytt Stories would have continued development, with more polish I would have purchased expansions like the author was planning to do originally. I believe though that was the issue, it no longer became his project, but other peoples - in essence he lost the initial enjoyment of the game world he created.

I don't think there should be a comparison really. Aquaria is its own animal - yes it has that retrogame feel with a lot of polish. That's part of the charm - it comes across as a game created by people that literally enjoyed playing games when they were growing up - much like me. Maybe the whole fact that there just isn't anything 'new' in the game for those old timers that want something revolutionary. Knytt was a collect quest, Aquaria is too. Sure people are going to have a 'hard on' for the graphics, but seriously the quality and the story make it a very unique experience and personally I feel the project itself will only encourage a larger audience to look at independent games more seriously - and help in the long run keep independent gaming alive for years to come.

Yes I ramble, but I kind of get to the point in the end.

Game's beginning is too slow. Almost boring. But, after about one exploration hour, the adventure becomes so addictive !

Don't give up, the more you progress, the more you'll discover the magic of Aquaria.

I feel this game is a bit of a throwback to when exploration-based games were slower paced and didn't throw an enemy or puzzle at you every 3 seconds. I do agree that character movement could be faster, but that's about it. The graphics can seem a bit on the heavy side at times, but I find them very good overall.

If you're the type that gets bored if the game doesn't throw something at you every few moments, then Aquaria isn't for you. Just go play something else.

Beautiful game but also extremely frustrating...spent half an hour swimming around without a freaking clue what to do next. Unfortunately that's exactly the point at which I felt...boredom.
Example: I swim into the kitchen and she tells me to cook food...What food, did I miss something or do I get the food later on?! What should I do next? That's a serious design flaw in my opinion...

An exploration game is designed to reward you for exploring it and finding out what's out there, not for being told what to do next with big bold letters and giant arrows.

There's a walkthrough included in the demo package, just use that if you get stuck.

Only a complete tard could play for half an hour and not find any ingrediants.

@Prospero
"Strong contender for the best indie game of the year, in my opinion :)"

Just indie game? It's a strong contender for game of the year in my opinion.

@guilherme
It's not the missing arrows that make it so frustrating. It's the lack of objectives and feedback - the game often simply leaves you alone. I'm sure that's fine in later levels...but in a demo?! I can imagine that most people won't even finish the demo.
@anonymous
...and only a dislikable person like you would just insult people without posting anything constructive.

Spoiler warning
"Sing to the egg to hatch it, and collect the life-enhancing energies contained within."

I sang but nothing happened. Does it only hatch when life energy is low?

Sing in the right color.

Whitebrice hasn't played Orange Box or Mario Galaxy it seems.


I admit it's an okay game but below par of some of the DS and other PC (indy included) games I've been playing around with this year.

Also, that might be so...but you're still a retard.

Derek & Alec have created this amazing underwater atmosphere and you ask for big shiny arrows.

What kind of argument is that: "This and that have created it" It can shine or stink, no matter who created it.

pros: i like the art style, although the design of the main character is quite silly. the music is atmospheric and is probably the best part, it's an asthetically strong game. that death scene with the close-up of namorita or whatever her name's face where she closes her eyes and drops dead never fails to make me laugh.

cons: the character moves far too slow. i've just started, but the story seems like it's going to be the typical final fantasy style magic eco-hippie gibberish. that's fine, it is pretty much white noise for me, i don't really play these kinds of video games for story. unless they're funny, intentionally or not. plus i can get into a well-crafted cliche, but i doubt that this story is going to be that. the song system is annoying.

in conclusion: it's a fun game that is very pretty, but doesn't really have much substance to the actual gameplay. it's not genius, but on the other hand, it's not garbage either. the gameplay is just ok, but it has excellent visuals and sounds. i didn't mind playing it for a little while, but i didn't jerk off while i was!

ps: everybody knows that in exploration games, when you don't know what to do next, you go to an unexplored part of the map. stupid!

@anonymous
I don't ask for arrows, I clearly stated that in one of my posts above. But don't worry, many internet kiddies have trouble reading nowadays, you're not alone.

When you encouter the egg she knows two songs (shield and bind). I sang both correctly but nothing happened...

slang:
You have to sing and hold a single note, like when you open the flowers. Sorry, I don't remember which one it was, but you'll see a resonance effect.

I'm now six hours into the game, and I am quite enjoying it. I even like that it is slow-paced, although I agree that the demo could be a bit more captivating at the start.

The game nicely conveys the feeling of being alone, but that is also one of its biggest problems. If you don't know where to go, there is nobody you could ask. You can't even review past hints, so picking up the game again after a pause of several weeks could be a problem.

I could probably say more, but that's all for now. :)

@Holger

I'll try that, thank you.

It's a sad state of affair when everyone talking against this game need to be anonymous. In nearly every comment treads about Aquaria, negative posters feel the need to be anonymous lest they get flamed to death. So flame me...

I bought the game and I wasn't dissapointed per se. Right from the get go, you know the game is worth 30$. They won the IGF because for the production values, and it shows. The game is only "independant" by name, not by look.

A little on the borish side at the start, and really, anyone who comment that it is "just the intro" but it last 45 minutes should look back at their definition of an "intro". I hate this new trends in games where they feel the need to take you by the hand for one hour... If you wanna make an in game tutorial, make it optional, or just don't. This isn't a casual game downloaded by homemakers who never saw a video game! On the good side, the pace picks up real fast after the annoying "intro".

The game itself is well though of, but suffers from the same flaws as any exploration game, ie : No puzzles are hard enough, and if all else fails, just try to go to the nearest unexplored part of the map.

The story is a little too ambitious, it feels like a lame FF style "lets force feed the player half hidden lessons about the world" style of crap, but thats what you get in a game made by an illustrator and a coder. There is such a thing as "programmer's artwork" for stories, and they hit it right on the head. Condescending crap like "I'll show you the truth" just got on my nerve so fast that I was looking for a way to turn of the voice as soon as I was playing. Trying to give common game objects (like save points) fancy attributes like "This is where I choose to record my life so that other might see the extents of my fucking greatness" gets old fast.

That it gets compared to Knytt that much is not a good sign either IMHO. But I disgress...

The game is magnificient, and very deep IMHO. Once you learn to rebound everywhere (I have yet to try to play with a 360 gamepad, but the mouse works well enough), it goes much faster. It makes me think of Wind Waker, where you cursed the boat at first and by the end you just warped everywhere. Only problem in Aquaria is that the "boat" is not just a mode of transportation like in Wind Waker, it's the bases for the whole game. The main character is well animated, making you forget that you've been swimming for 15 minutes without seeing anything new, but even then... the rag doll feel of the character makes it a little weird. It feels like I am playing a flash game. For such a beautifull game, some animation seems to be missing. For example, when you move your mouse around, the character sometime just "flips" like if it was suddently mirrored, instead of having a smooth flipping animation (think Prince of Persia 2D and Another World). With is somewhat slow pace, Aquaria could've use that.

But for a game made by two independant devs, it's simply amazing and must be played by all who claim to even remontly support independant game devs. For the other, less indie oriented players, meh. I wanted to go back to Hellgate the whole time I tried Aquaria.

The hype was all true. The website claim that they won the IGF because of their "production values and intuitive controls", and IMHO, I'll add to that to make the perfect description for this game : "A game made by a talented coder and an equally talented artists, with through the roof production values and easy to pick up controls". Notice how I don't mention the gameplay or the story in there? There is a reason for that.

But "mainstream" game of the year this isn't. Not a year where stuff like Portal came out.

I'm someone to whom story is incredibly important, I'll play a tedious and horrible game just for a good story all the way through (like Kartia or Persona 1). And I don't really find the problem in Aquaria's story that your efer to.

When Naija referred to showing the player the truth, I took it like it was meant in Final Fantasy Tactics, where the narrator is saying 'this is what truly happened, don't believe those false legends'. I didn't take it as overbearing like 'this is how the truth of the universe is to be seen, ignore every other viewpoint'.

Also, I haven't yet finished the game, so I don't know how the story will ultimately turn out. The ending of a story is really the part that determines if the entire story is good or bad, and I don't like to judge a story until I've seen the ending.

But I can at least say that the writing is fair. It's not excellent dialogue by any means (actually in its case *monologue* for the most part), it's not even as good as the dialogue/monologue in Symphony of the Night, or to compare it to indie games, there are a lot of indie games with better-written dialogue/monologue -- Fatal Hearts, Aveyond 2, maybe even my own Immortal Defense (which I can praise because I didn't write the dialogue in that game), and pretty much any good interactive fiction / text adventure game. So I agree that the writing in that game isn't "great". The authors are not writers, fine. But at least it's good, and it's a lot better than most of the writing in most comparable SNES games. It has better writing than virtually all of the Zelda games for example (and I say that as a huge fan of the Zelda series).

why only compare it to the writing in other games? it's a mediocre story in the context of storytelling in general, but like i said before, it's not really a dealbreaker for me.

I'm really surprised to read so many negative perceptions of this game.

Don't see the Knytt comparison either, with the exception that neither game begins action-packed. Unlike Knytt, however, Aquaria does get better.

So imho if you've got the time to invest, its quite worth it in the end.

The Knytt comparison is easy, if you want it in easy to understand terms;

Knytt is a game with good and possibly incidental atmosphere.

Aquaria is a game with forced atmosphere.

I guess your surprised people don't agree with your opinion. That's a shame for you really. I'm with the understanding that people will like or dislike a game by playing it, not by the hype or pretty graphics.

stfu, knytt suxx.

not that aquaria is much betta

The reason I compared its story to other games and not storytelling in general is just because it's a game.

However, shortly after defending its story there I played the game a bit further and came across a cliche 'people seeking immortality leads to evil and destruction' backstory segment, which is one of my pet peeves. What's so wrong about seeking immortality that 99% of the time it's portrayed negatively in games?

But that one part doesn't invalidate what I said, I still really like the whole idea of going from being feral to intelligent and after doing that realizing you're alone in a huge underwater world without anyone else intelligent to talk to.

I'm sorry sir this game is boring.
Bought for no reason. :(. Excuse me while I go play Knytt.

although the dialouge is really good

This is a pretty good game. Not quite as amazing as some might have hoped, but pretty damn good.

Managed to free some time to download and try this one. Purely based on the screenshots and trailers, it looked a bit plasticy. In-game, it does a little bit less, but does still feel like Playmobil world. The character animations are about as fluid as a Flash animation's, as said before. Especially the mirror-flip thing instead of a proper flip animation show that, and the foot/leg movement in the intro (but also the legs in the rest of the game)

I had a hard time getting that first plant open, and couldn't get the shield song thing right until far later, when I saw that you can see it in the menu too. I'm colourblind, and to me, about a third of those song colours look alike. There're about 2-3 colours there for me. That's highly frustrating. If the song things had the same images in them as the spell suggestions and the plant bulbs, it'd be bearable, as I could go for the pattern, and not guessing the colour.

I got bored quite fast, as you're pretty much tossed in a world, got some talking you can't skip, but it doesn't explain what to do, what your goal is, or anything. You start the game with no objective, neither short-term nor long-term, which leaves me uncaptivated. I don't really feel like I have a reason to play because of it. It doesn't change through the game itself. It just gets confusing, like with that black creature that tosses you into another place, and your controls are suddenly completely different. That leaves one giant: "What the hell?" feeling. After a while, I simply got bored of that, and finally decided to quit the game when I did get the shield song to work and its effect lagged the game.

The music is good, though, and I didn't find the travel speed such an issue. Felt like traveling was prolongued due to extra-long corridors, but with that thrust move thing, it went at a fair speed (that somersault move at the end of it started to be a bit too much of the same after a while, though)

it's not even as good as the dialogue/monologue in Symphony of the Night,

Wow, OUCH right there lol!

I downloaded the demo, and I think it's incredibly polished and looks very awesome, and it sure is unique IMO. I guess I wanted to like it a little more than I do, because I'm all about exploration games in general.

You have to admit that they do have a winner though, even if it isn't for everybody.

P.S: After seeing a few comments about that "mirror flip" I went back and played it again to see for myself. That is pretty surprising that something like that would be in a game that looks so great everywhere else. Odd.

I didn't mean it as an insult, SoTN had some great lines (like that miserable little pile of secrets line in the intro).

The colourblindness thing is definitely definitely an issue. The colour-coding should be matched with the different shapes in the menu and in the world. Just using coloured balls isn't enough. I'm not even colourblind and I have trouble.

@ Paul Eres:

Ah I see, no problem. I always figured that most people knew the dialogue in SotN was pretty bad, but that it's one of the things that everyone (including me) loves about the game anyhow.

WHAT DO YOU HERE? (Maria)
WHAT IS A MAN? (Big D)
WHAT!? (when Alucard gets his stuff taken away by Death)

I think they were on some crazy "what" kick.

i just played the demo, and i was shocked to discover how boring this is.
the graphics are beautiful, but so zoomed out that you can't enjoy the detail in dereks great work unless you stand still for like 2 minutes for a close up.

this game has everything except "the feeling that your playing a video game" it's jaw dropping but incredibley dull. like playing a glorified screen saver.
it feesl like a "interective screen saver" more than a game with excitement and purpose. it's a whole lot of nothing, and it's making players doze off and become uninterested.

it's "very good" but by no means cave story, chalk, or even knit stories.
dude, this is worth like 10 bucks tops!! 30 bucks!!?
ummmm......no

good game, though. but no where near two years of solid hype.

For those who think travelling from place to place is too slow, if you persist with the game, you'll find plenty of ways to travel faster. Without giving too much away, at least two of Naija's forms (along with... er... certain "reptiles" dotted around the world) make long trips much more bearable.

As for the "I want more idea of what to do!" crowd - look, it's an exploration game, for heaven's sake. You explore. That's pretty much the whole point! Whether this suits you is down to your patience and how much you enjoy Aquaria's atmosphere; personally, I'm happy to see that thorough exploration does tend to get rewarded.

Ah yes - now, I'm probably being thick here, but I don't understand how a game's atmosphere can be "forced". Atmosphere is something that is created through a combination of narrative, sound and vision. This applies to Knytt just as much as Aquaria, and similarly just as much to John Smith's Generic Exploration Game 3: Return to the Evil Dark Place of Doom. So, my somewhat long-winded point is that if you say Aquaria's atmosphere is forced, I'd argue right back that so is Knytt's (if that's the game you choose to compare to).

@Prospero:

tl;dr

> What's so wrong about seeking
> immortality that 99% of the time
> it's portrayed negatively in games?

Paul Eres, your bias is showing :D (Still loving Immortal Defense, by the way)

Happy you're enjoying it.

i never realised the importance of a good game designer.
should have realised it already at eternal daugther. i still cant get past that 1st frog boss.

Even when hacked to have maximum HP and maximum possible of secondary weapons, the bosses in Eternal Daughter (and just generally the levels, at that) are near impossible. It took me about 3 days to get past that first frog boss, so yep, very important, good game design. Eternal Daughter simply was too frustrating due to the unbalanced gameplay.

Are you guys kidding?

The first frog boss in Eternal Daughter was EASY. Granted the game starts getting a tad frustrating once you arrive in the robot factory place to fight your half-brother whatshisname (been a while since I clocked the game), but it's by no means impossible.

For comparison, ED was no harder than say, the first Super Mario Bros.

I don't understand why for the most part of you this game is so frustrating.
I know that the initial monologue doesn't explain your purpose, but IMHO this is a will of the author, that in his mind had thought that the plot needed to be explained later in the game, not at once.
I haven't still finished the demo but the game after the first difficulty (the door to open) it's great!! You get some new abilities that allows you to open blocked passage, and a new world open ahead of you!
The game is not only exploring as you think, there is a great shoot'em up part later.
Play it, it worth your while!

P.S. Knytt is only exploring and atmosphere, not Aquaria! Anyway I like Knytt very much, too.

I finally finished the game and updated this entry with a proper review, even though most people won't notice it :D

I'm pleased a DEMO was released, otherwise I think I'd be dissapointed after spending thirty dollars (way to much for a digital download) on this! I really cannot fault Aquaria really, it does what it does perfectly well, just not in a particularly exciting way. The DEMO was OK while it lasted, but it didn't really grab me enought to want the FULL game.
It's a very safe middle of the road 'casual' game. I bet houswives and women in general would love it!

Takes it's cues directly from several classic games, Exile and Ecco the Dolphin, with a little Ocarina of Time thrown in, but not as good as any of them.

Suprisingly unoriginal considering Derek Yu's comments of late regading innovation!

I'm just off to play Mount & Blade. Now there's a fantastic indie game! Well worth the cash ;)

I truly do not understand the negative responses to this game - even when directed solely at the content of the demo; maybe it is true what has been said for a few years now, the "Adventure game" is dead. Yet I always thought that applied to the point & click variety. This truly seems to borrow inspiration from not Zelda or Metroid alone - but that of Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver 1.

To compare this game to Ecco the Dolphin is truly a laugh in my opinion - is it simply because the game takes place underwater? Soul Reaver is more appropriate - the flash backs, the introductions to various new areas and then the dark twists at the end of the game brings forth a more interesting Dark atmosphere that is more akin to The Legacy of Kain. Frankly when I first loaded the demo up and entered the Temple, I literally thought "Soul Reaver." And again this thought came to mind when I purchased the game only to continue on to the Cathedral - that just screamed the segment in Soul Reaver with the Spider Vampires. Soul Reaver was slow paced and was literally a adventure exploration game too. I remember a lot of back tracking and getting lost in that game. And the biggest disappointment I had with SR was the ending to the first game - at least this game gives you the option of multiple endings with the more accomplish - which is rewarding and makes it worth it to replay the game (that and the creating of your own mods add to the replay aspect of the game). I frankly don't remember seeing so many negative reviews about Soul Reaver at the time, and when I played that game on my PC (I didn't buy the Playstation version) I felt like I was playing a truly epic and fun experience.

Aquaria, for some reason gets a lot of 'boring, slow paced,god the dialog is poor, too expensive' comments. Boring, yeah hoping you make it to the next save crystal because your health is low and you don't seem to be getting any ingredients for recipes - yeah that's boring. Much of the boss battles depending on you figuring how to best approach beating the big bastard - yeah that's boring when you are getting pummeled. It is the boss battles that again show roots to Soul Reaver - you tended to have to think how to beat the bosses in that game - much like this game. There are some blatant finger mashing thumbs soar battles too - Jelly King is a righteous pain in the rear - but the reward is so worth it. Overall I loved the mixed approaches to the bosses.

Price, seriously the more I see complaints in this department the more I grow angry with the people that moan about such things. Does Independent Games mean it has to be free to you people? Yes, apparently. Knytt Stories was supposed to be developed into something to create a small profit if I remember correctly. Can some of you think for once about the hard work that goes in such products? Yes most of these are produced by individuals the get their name out in the field - get some notoriety, or simply to test the code they are trying to refine for something much larger. Sure I would have liked the game to be like 24.95 or even 14.99 like Wadjet Eye Games' Blackwell Legacy. But that's something to point out - I like Blackwell series - should I complain that I have to dole out 14.99 then 9.99 for the two games in the series so far? But if I want Blackwell Legacy Limited Edition CD I have to pay 25 dollars... my god. The expense. Why should I? Oh that's right because I enjoy the game series and frankly I support Dave Gilbert. And I Support Alec and Derek for making this fine game (and the wonderful voice of Jenna).

The dialog in areas is not up to snuff I have to admit - mainly due to the fact that Naija needs to be more animated in those scenes (Sunken City Climax) - though I do think it is above average. The only issue I have to say about the game is the lack of secondary character dialog - there is another character in the game which I thought would have been more interesting if they added their bit of information along the adventure - but when you come to the end of the game you realize why a majority of the game is narrated by the main character. Other than that, and a few odd ball bugs (like the giant turtle running away when you move a rock near it, and then showing up in the upper area of the Viel - yeah that looks buggy) at least I know that with the money I spent on this game the updates will be encouraged. When this game comes out on CD, I think I will put down more money - especially if there are more bonuses included - even if there are not I will happily pay the difference (which they said they would honor).

Oh boy 'housewives and women' man someone is going to stay single forever. Seriously you think your Mom would play this game? The fact that you can literally kill any creature in this game (excluding the forest sprites). Yeah that seems like a winner for Mom. Seriously this is an excellent game that deserves the attention. Maybe I'm just falling into a trap because people seem to like to advertise other games on this comment section.

How about Psychonauts - that was awesome, and frankly I think Aquaria falls into the same category - action adventure with a good story. Not funny like Psychonauts but really a detailed world with many interesting and unique aspects added to it - cooking, mini games, puzzles.

I think Derek Yu's opinions on innovation apply - we should look at the Independent Gaming community for the worthwhile games. The community is frankly the only place I go to when I really want to experience what is fun about games - instead of playing the rehashed gameplay of constant sequels that saturate the market.

Yes I know, many of you will be like 'oh too long didn't bother to read,' but frankly I think you need to reanalyze your view point of the Independent Gaming community - and maybe the games you play and who you think should play them. Mount & Blade - 22 dollars if I preorder? 29 if I don't? Man that is too much money...

On the price issue: no, indie games do not have to be free or cheaper than commercial games, but I don't see the reason to rush shelling out 30$ for a zelda-like exploration game, either. Even if the presentation itself is very nice. You could look at it this way, if you will: would you sooner buy Aquaria for 30$, or The Excellent Game Psychonauts for 20$ ? :P

Yes, yes, support the indies. Of course. But does it necessarily have to be 30$ or nothing? Were a variable pricing scheme implemented here, I'd think this would be less of a complaint. Well, at least I doubt that the production of the game cost so much that there'd be no way to break even if it sold for ten bucks less. (confirm/deny?)

Minor aside, regarding innovation: the game isn't innovative, so what? There's many other ways to capture the players' interest. Sacrificing a coherent design for the sake of "innovation" (more like "gimmickry", actually) would be outright foolish.

@ShadowKahn : "But that's something to point out - I like Blackwell series - should I complain that I have to dole out 14.99 then 9.99 for the two games in the series so far? But if I want Blackwell Legacy Limited Edition CD I have to pay 25 dollars... my god. The expense."

25$ for a enhanced Limited Edition CD compared to 30$ for a game that doesn't even come with a manual?

Good work there Lou, you have us convinced. Is that the best you could comewith?

Aquaria's pricing was presumptuous, and for the "indie game scene" desastrous. I said it before, and I'm saying it again, it should have been 30$, but "on promotion" until after x-mas for around 20$. This would've created a far bigger buzz about the game (because of the limited time offer) AND it would have been a way to thank the "early adopters" and the indie scene that supports and created _tons_ of free publicity for the game.

@jean-sebastien
Actually I had more in that quote - and no it isn't the best I could come up with. If you go out to the local game store you will easily find something that had multi-million dollars to produce a product that costs you 65$ dollars or more which in reality ends up being either really buggy - or a carbon copy of another game. My point is that if I feel the price is justifiable to my enjoyment of a game I am really willing to spend money for it. Thirty dollars does not seem like a lot to me, in this day and age.

I do agree with you though that it may have been presumptuous or even disastrous for no discount for early adopters especially with the Season at hand. I am simply pointing out that what many I believe is true - the Independent Scene is really where the innovation is at - and supporting it is the way to go. The price to me is not an issue simply because it is only five dollars more than a few other independent games. And still 20 dollars less than commercial games.

Louis Kahn I suppose never cared much about the end cost as long as there was plenty conquer.

Wow that Kahn guy just spouts so much whilst preaching to the choir. You're not going to change my opinion that this game is poorly constructed, has weak and uninteresting plot and some serious design issues.

For an illustrator the art sure doesn't look good after a while. Towards the end of the demo I was getting fed up with the overly shiny rocks, which I thought was isolated to 3D games and overuse of bump mapping.

A weak carbon copy of a game that I won't be buying.

I'm not really interested in defending our decision, I just feel that independent developers should charge what they feel their game is worth, and I don't want anyone to be dissuaded from doing that because of misinformation.

So far, we've been extremely happy with the sales of Aquaria, as well as the attention it's gotten. Perhaps we could have done even better at $20, but I honestly find that hard to believe. Our expectations were surpassed. Definitely.

Anyway, I appreciate the comments, both positive/negative. Thanks for your interest. I realize the game's not for everyone, but we put a lot of hard work into it. :)

@ShadowKahn : I'm not saying that the game is not worth 30$.

Aquaria is without a doubt going to be on XBLA someday (or whatever direct-to-the-users money cow they can find) and this is amazing IMHO. While the 30$ price would be suited for those platforms, I am not sure it is suited for an independent game. Plus, judging by available titles on those platforms, I'd be surprised that it stays at 30$ if it happens, which will make it awkward for early adopters. You keep comparing it to commercial games, but Aquaria doesn't have the same exposure on commercial websites as even the worse commercial XBLA game out there.

A google for "Arkadian Warriors" (an awfull game for XBLA) returns about 10 times more reviews than for "Aquaria +PC" (and thats including all the Aquarium and fish site). The IGF prize is great and all that, but it is an obscur prize for the mainstream customers, and it goes only that far around x-mas.

And Derek, no one is taking anything away from your hard work, believe me. Aquaria is a solid piece of awsomness and everyone realize that IMHO. I'm probably commiting a terrible sin by not stopping there, but I just feel that making independent games =/= a free for all, and making business decision based on guts feelings. They might not have a suit behind them, but as soon as an independent coders makes a commercial title, they are still subject to the same realities as anyone else on the market.(and yes, I have a couple of independent games to my name. But I'll keep quiet about them, I won't find any pixel artists to help me anymore :) )

eh, maybe I am just more a fan of games like FastCrawl (which I bought within 4 minutes of playing) than Aquaria. But congrats on the good sales, I feel that they are deserved even if I have a loud mouth :) I'll shut up at this point, I realize that this is quickly becoming a rant, and it wasn't my intention.

Aquaria is a well made game. It's competent, it looks nice, it sounds nice, and definately worth more than $30 (I would've paid $60 for it.)

It isn't for everyone, specifically if you're an unattentive braindead high schooler who can't figure out the pure basics of the game, and then turn around and complain about how it hand-holds you.

It isn't for a bunch of jealous indie developers either.

It's not like fucking Ecco the Dolphin and the comparison is retarded at best.

Should you support indie developers, yes. If you feel $30 is too much, then don't buy it. If you played the demo, was disappointed and bought the game anyway, you're retarded. If you played the demo, liked it, then bought it, then disliked the rest of the game you're either a liar, retarded, or a retarded liar.

Is the game perfect? No.

Has it been over-hyped? Maybe.

Should you base your judgements on the vocal minority of indygamer who seem really pissed off for no reason other than obvious jealousy? No. Play the damn demo, and if you find it slow and boring uninstall it and go back to masturbating furiously to Cave Story or Knytt or something.

While we're on the subject, Knytt is a good game. Is it comparable to Aquaria in any way shape or form? No. That's like comparing Pong to fucking Tetris. They're both good in their own rights, but the two hardly overlap (save plotline perhaps.) Don't make the mistake of assuming Knytt's quiet abstrationist approach is somehow deep, meaningful and powerful. The creator just went with bare bones and let your own little imagination do the rest because he's a brilliant lazy fuck.

As far as plot goes I feel Aquaria and Knytt have about the same level of story depth and quality. Kyntt is a humanoid being alone in an unfamiliar abandoned wasteland trying to collect random doo-dads and throughout the whole ordeal you have no damn idea what's going on...
Aquaria is about Naija, a humanoid being alone in an unfamiliar abandoned underwater wasteland trying to collect random doo-dads and throughout the whole ordeal you have no damn idea of what's going on until the end.

Both games feature mods, are made by semi-famous indie developers and have a rabid fanbase, and there the comparisons end.

If you don't like the game, that's perfectly fine. I myself have a few caveats with it's design and presentation, but it's not some bullshit half-heated swill crapped unto a keyboard after playing the game for two seconds and whining about how boring it is because you haven't killed anyone with a BMG or seen a huge rack of tits slapping your computer monitor.

Aside from complete asshattery it seems most of everyone's problems come from "can I shoot it till it stops moving?" syndrome. Don't act, think about the game, let it's atmosphere sink into you and try to be receptive. If you're not, oh well. Just shut up and don't bring your uninformed bullshit here.

Also don't post anonymously you cowardly twats!

@dragoonixis : Posts like this probably hurt Aquaria more than single line posts about hating Aquaria.

Let the developers defends their work if he feels the need to. Derek's non-comiting post just above your speaks more to fan and haters alike than cuss filled choir preaching.

Aside from complete asshattery it seems most of everyone's problems come from "can I shoot it till it stops moving?" syndrome. Don't act, think about the game, let it's atmosphere sink into you and try to be receptive.

That pretty much sums up Knytt Stories :P And that's entirely what that comparisson's based on. In Knytt Stories, the atmosphere's done superbly. To alot, the atmosphere in Aquaria seem to be a bit forced and nowhere near the level of Knytt. That's what the Knytt comparisson is about. It's not the same kind as the old Cave Story <> La-Mulana thing.

There were some pretty atmospheric areas in Aquaria, such as [SPOILERS] a sunken human city, the abyss, and the veil. None of those were in the demo, the demo just used a lot of blue and all looked alike, so if you don't play the full game you won't get a feeling for the large variety of atmospheric areas the game has.

And I agree that posts defending Aquaria by calling Knytt's designer a lazy f*ck probably do no good for either game.

Also, saying that the reason people don't like this game is jealousy is pretty low. It sounds like the kind of arguments you'd expect to see among Nintendo vs Sony fanboy arguments. I thought the indie games community was supposed to be more mature than that.

You Aquaria fanboys need take a step back and look at this game WITHOUT those rose tinted specs on, and also stop attacking/flaming anyone who dares to do anything but praise this exceedingly average game.

It IS like Ecoo, so fuck you, and it is unoriginal, so fuck you biased fanboys again.

Give me a single example of anything in this game that has not been done before?

I'm going to mention the price again. 30 dollars is just to much. If this had been 10 - 20 dollars, I think I may have thought about buying this, even though it didn't exactly bowl me over. For 30 dollars though,(15 quid) I want something to physically show for my money!

I think what was innovative was not any one particular element, but the merging of those elements into a whole.

Also, the movement system with the mouse is pretty innovative, I don't believe I've played a game with movement that works like that before. I mean, it's a bit like Diablo where clicking somewhere walks you to that spot, but there's more to it than that: you can boost off walls to move faster, you can click twice to spin, you can avoid bullets homing in on you by moving in a circle because they can't turn as fast as you can -- all that doesn't feel like any other game I've played. I know it's a tiny thing, but I think the movement system really is one of the best things about this game.

Also I agree that 30$ is a bit expensive, I almost couldn't afford it, but I also think it was probably the price point they'd make the most money from the game. Perhaps at $25 they may have made slightly more sales, but it's hard to tell. But I think no matter what price they would have set there would be people saying it's too expensive. There are $10 dollar games out there that people complain should be $5 instead.

@blank : Shut up will you. You couldn't really move as freely in Ecco, plus the mechanism wasn't the same at all (with the sonar, and the fact that Ecco didn't really have 360 degrees of freedom). It's as much as Ecco as it is as the underwater levels in Mario Bros. It's pretty obvious after even 5 minutes of playing that movements in Aquaria are light years ahead of what Ecco was.

@paul eres : From my point of view, and the reason why talk about it, it's not so much a issue with the price rather than the reasons behind that price.

Lets say they sell 1000 copy @ 30$, they would need to sell 50% more @ 20$ to make the same money. The game probably sold more than that as we speak, but would it have sold 50% more if it was 20$? Thats a gamble that they might not want to take. And then you add the additional publishing fees and whats whatsnot (I'm sure that you know about all of that) and suddenly they need to sell 60% more game to make the same money.

The problem I have with the 30$ price tag is more of a "what will this do to independent games going commercial?"... Will every game be compared to Aquaria in technical prowess vs price? What about Bit Blot's next game? If it is anything less than 30$, does it means that the dev thinks it's not up to par with Aquaria?

And of course how people will react when Aquaria is heading for the popular console portal for half that price.

I just find that raising the "expected" price that much is a dangerous path to take. More power to Bit Blot for taking it I guess, maybe it will means higher prices for everyone's games someday.

@jean
Read it again, it wasn't choir preaching, moreso I was flaming the naysayers with weak comments that I feel make no sense. I was pretty lukewarm in my praise on Aquaria, saying it was probably over hyped, and not everyone's gonna get into it.

@kon-tiki
But Knytt was made with atmosphere in mind, not Aquaria. Aquaria set out to be a Metroidvania style game. To compare a game that sets out to be atmospheric with a game that has a little atmosphere thrown into the side is a bullshit excuse to deduct points from the game. That's like saying Castlevania: SotN games suck because you can only play as Alucard on the first play through when in Battle Toads you can choose from three characters. The comparison is weak and doesn't apply. And, quite frankly all I can see Knytt doing to cultivate atmosphere is by using subtle sounds of nature and quiet slow trance tracks every now and then. If that's what you want you can simply turn down the music in Aquaria (after a while that's what I did myself, as the looping music got on my nerves after a while.)

@paul
Hey, I said "brilliant lazy fuck", not "lazy fuck." There's a different and a dash of sarcasm. It isn't meant as a put down, as I certainly enjoy Knytt. I feel the creator of Knytt saved a lot of time and energy by wisely going abstractly. Much like I feel Derek and Alec are intensive and thorough in their ideas, but often gloss over key gameplay issues in their obsessions.

@blank
I'm not even gonna bother. At least the other posters had semi-intelligent responses.

And no, it's not like Ecco the dolphin. Go play both games, then come back and open your retard mouth.

As for one thing original: Li. If you don't know what that is buy the game or shut up.

So, passed the unintelligent diatribes, it seems the real issue here is the price, correct? I doubt, with this much voice against Aquaria's price it'll affect much of anything. Most indie-games with a price tag cost $10-$20. Aquaria is only $10 more. That's practically nothing compared to the $50-$60 commercial games we play today. If you feel the game isn't worth the price, then simply don't buy it. I however see no problem with the price, nor it's apparent affect on how indie games are made, run or sold.

@jean again
Publishing fees, what? You download the game... The biggest cost is to sever load.

There will always be free indie games and there will always be indie games that cost more money. And if people feel the cost is too high, they won't pay for it and it won't catch on (like what's already happened here.) Seems like a pretty open-shut case to me.

@Dragoonixis: The atmosphere has been one of the major advertising points of Aquaria, so having a look at what it has to offer for atmosphere, and comparing it to another indie game which has the atmosphere Aquaria advertises it has, is quite a normal thing.

Show me where it says atmospheric anywhere on this site and I'll take back what I said: http://www.bit-blot.com/aquaria/

I'm sorry that I'm so wordy in my diatribes when I take the time to actually comment on this site. To be truthful - I find it interesting that this game has caused such a stir personally with everyone.

Even though this game seems to have created a really confrontational environment in the comment area - it is refreshing to come across intelligent discussions about the issues - this is excluding the blatant attacks (you curse or make fun of someone, yeah pretty much you are going to be ignored). I think overall the dialogs in the end help (what? Oh maybe bind the community a little more maybe... it just seems to help if discussed properly). That being said, if I came across 'preaching to the choir' I really did not feel like I was - this has to be one of the first times I have posted here only because I perceived that a large amount of the negative and rude posts seemed to come from people that just 'want a free game' or for that matter didn't seem to care about what goes into independent gaming and why making a profit should not be seen (all the time) as a bad thing.

Yes, I suddenly feel like I'm preaching to the choir again - a lot of people understand that these projects reported here are created works that are both 'art' and unique gaming experiences that you cannot find normally on the shelf nowadays.

@Paul: I just stumbled over a Flash game that has the exact same kind of controls, exactly as you described. It's Angel Run. I'm sure there're tons of others with such a control scheme around, too, as it's quite a typical thing for Flash games.

@Dracoon: Well, ok. Wasn't able to find it like that specifically anywhere on the Bit-Blot site, but it's been clear enough that they've been using that to push the game, even if not said explicitely (except by some fanboy comments over at TIGSource)

The truth hurts eh super geeks!? You lot need to learn to get to the point. Some of these posts are just long tedious ramblings that TRY to make a point in a VERY roundabout way.

Some of you need to realise how unoriginal (unoriginal does not meen BAD, fanboys!) this game is. If you've been playing games for the past 20 or so years you probably will. I'm not going to list ALL the games that every little element of Aquaria reminded me of. If your a fanboy, I'm sure me listing them would not remove those blinkers!

Here's a point. I'd definitely buy a soundtrack CD of Aquaria. THe music is THE single best thing about the game.

I'm gonna say this again, but DROP THE BLOODY PRICE! It's going to put people off like me, who aren't particularly overwhelmed by the game, but still enjoy it to some degree.

dragoonixis:

LOL IT'S A WONDERFUL, INCREDIBLE IDEA TO INSULT PEOPLE OVER THEIR OPINIONS ON VIDYA GAMES!!!!!!!!

First of all I'd just like to point out that I did not read through all the comments, so I'm not sure if this has been stated yet.
To everyone before me on this long list of comments: this game's graphics are beautiful. Not in the technological way like HDR lighting and bump-mapping.
So let me point this out, video games are beginning to be viewed as an art form. These graphics are all hand drawn, not just some technology. The graphics of this game is a huge part of the experience, like it or not. Everyone who is ignoring the fact that the graphics of this game is a factor in whether it's a good game or not are simply being ignorant.
I'm not saying that these graphics make the game what it is, nor am I saying that this game deserves a high rating because of these graphics. What I'm saying is that these graphics are not good because of technology, but because it's true art. It's not much different from a painting. So anyone considering its "forced" atmosphere to be a 'con' on account of the graphics are simply insulting the game just because it looks good (which is somehow actually considered a valid argument now-a-days).
Now that I'm done ranting at the select few who expressed these opinions of whom I cannot recall right now, I would just like to add something a bit off topic by saying the following: Knytt doesn't have a better atmosphere because it has a simpler art-style. Knytt has a better atmosphere because there is basically no gameplay in comparison to Aquaria which will detract attention from it.