Sluggs on 24/3/2009 at 17:05
I'd have thought it would enable/disable shader effects, (like reflective materials), on the characters.
I don't actually have the game myself yet, so I can't really help you there, but I can ask the developers for you, as I do keep in touch with them.
Will come back when I have an answer.
Sluggs on 25/3/2009 at 09:16
Quote Posted by Jason Moyer
Hey Sluggs, what does "shader characters" do in the options? It's disabled by default, I've been running with it enabled, and I can't really see any difference in appearance or performance one way or the other.
Here's your answer...
Quote:
The characters can be rendered in software (by the CPU) or in hardware
(by the GPU). For hardware rendering the shader is required. This shader
is not optimized for speed or anything. It was only developed for Mac OS
compatibility, in fact. But we included it as an option in the PC
version, just in case it would make a difference for someone. We
personally find the non-shader rendering prettier and haven't noticed a
big performance difference between the two.
Jason Moyer on 25/3/2009 at 09:18
Thanks!
Yakoob on 25/3/2009 at 11:14
Wow, in most games anything to do with shaders is usually better, so they probably made that option confusing for many.
Angel Dust on 29/3/2009 at 11:15
Well I picked this up during Steams indie game sale and just finished it last night.
Firstly though, visually and aurally the game is very well realised and both elements combine to create a very unsettling atmosphere. The writing is generally pretty good, although I was certainly rolling my eyes at some of the immature cynicism but that is perhaps the intended response for some of the characters. Of particular note is the writing for the youngest character, Robin. I really felt they nailed the child world view and it was a delight to play as her.
I quite liked the variation on the 'wolves', with Ruby's being quite brilliantly realised and a moment that I'm not likely to forget, and the
FPP trips though grandmas house where well done also . I found the overall the themes of growing up and it's various stages quite affecting even though they are often from strongly female prespective.
However the game has some slightly clunky controls and collision detection problems. I really don't know why they didn't go for the more conventional control scheme. The game is also undeniably boring at times, the painfully slow walks to grandma's house being notable examples, and the RPS review sums this up better than I could:
Quote:
To move quite so slowly suggests a great deal of confidence in the player's interest in persisting, and perhaps this isn't always deserved. I stress “always”. Often it is, but there were certainly times when I was just bored, rather than anticipating.
I also think that the idea is perhaps streched to thinly and some of the girls could have perhaps been cut or combined. The criticism of games and their trappings, eg the collectable flowers, seems out of place and to be honest quite condescending to the player.
All in all a good game that goes into some interesting places, and well worth the 10 or so dollars I payed for it, but I think it's self-importance, and the decisions made because of that, keep it from being a great one.
Toxicfluff on 29/3/2009 at 18:02
The Path's main failings are all to do with the game side of things. It becomes formulaic in that [spoiler] for every girl (dunno about silence in white yet) it's the house or the wolf. [/spoiler] That kind of repetition in goal says game loud and clear, and I think they should have added more in the way of mechanics in this area.
Then there's the fact that the game becomes the sort of gnarly item hunt that injures any game it touches. It was OK with the first few girls I picked but then the density of stuff to find seemed to taper as I got further through them. I don't know if you write off some items for some girls with others, whether it's just perception or I simply picked the girls with more to do to begin with, but treks between things of interest were becoming interminably long and I just haven't bothered to finish it now.
It falls on its own sword really. In its desire to be unusual and ungamish - slow game, no-game exploration thang - whatever - it eventually succumbs to an AWFUL example of poor game design that's not uncommon at all and could never be uncommon enough: an excruciating hunt for fresh morsels of a game world that is now otherwise barren.
Still, theres enough good stuff that I won't just remember clawing at the walls after 6.5km of trundling with Scarlet.
