TheSteamRoller Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 Developer & Publisher : Polytron Platform : XBLA Genre : Platforming Release Date : 13th April 2012 Gameplay : Fez features 2D/3D perspective shifts in a manner similar to Super Paper Mario and Crush. The use of Escher-like optical illusions also predominates gameplay in a manner similar to Echochrome. Gameplay is similar to that of Neutronized's Sky Island, a Flash game released in 2011 which was itself inspired by the unreleased Fez. Screenshots : Trailer & Gameplay Videos : Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSteamRoller Posted April 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 The game has recieved a 9.5 from IGN and a 10 from Eurogamer. Certainly one of the best XBLA games of this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aftrunner Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 I coulda sworn we had a thread for this. But yeah, looks absolutely amazing. Hoping for a PC release as I dont have MS points ATM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheSteamRoller Posted April 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 I tried to use the Search feature as well as checked out the Sticky thread and could'nt find any threads for the game.So created one. Its available on Marketplace for 800 MS Points [Rs 500 , I guess]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aftrunner Posted April 17, 2012 Report Share Posted April 17, 2012 Ok tried the demo. This game is f**king amazing! Get a PC version out ASAP. Will buy day 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarketTantrik Posted April 17, 2012 Report Share Posted April 17, 2012 Looks fantastic. I loved Crush on the PSP and this looks like a whole another level of mindbending-ness. On my wishlist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aftrunner Posted April 17, 2012 Report Share Posted April 17, 2012 Yeah its sort of like Crush meets echochrome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyofx Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 ^^ Damn right it is. Shame the map isn't a bit easier to understand though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aftrunner Posted July 19, 2012 Report Share Posted July 19, 2012 I know MS's certification process was bullshit but wow, this is just flat out ridiculous - We’re bringing the first FEZ patch online. It’s the same patch. We’re not going to patch the patch. Why not? Because microsoft would charge us tens of thousands of dollars to re-certify the game. And because as it turns out, the save file delete bug only happens to less than a percent of players. It’s a shitty numbers game to be playing for sure, but as a small independent, paying so much money for patches makes NO SENSE AT ALL. especially when you consider the alternative. Had FEZ been released on steam instead of XBLA, the game would have been fixed two weeks after release, at no cost to us. And if there was an issue with that patch, we could have fixed that right away too! We believe the save file corruption issue mostly happened to players who had completed, or almost completed the game. If you hadn’t already seen most of what FEZ had to offer, your save file is probably safe. It doesn’t happen if you start a new game. We believe the current patch is safe for an overwhelming majority of players. The patch fixes almost everything that’s been wrong with the game since launch. The framerate issues, the loading, the skips, the death loops, everything! All that stuff is fixed! And right now, nobody can get to it since the patch was pulled. For 99% of people, it makes FEZ a better game. To the less-than-1% who are getting screwed, we sincerely apologize. We know this hurts you the most, because you’re the ones who put the most times into the game. And this breaks our hearts. We hope you dont think back on your time spent in FEZ as a total waste. Microsoft gave us a choice: either pay a ton of money to re-certify the game and issue a new patch (which for all we know could introduce new issues, for which we’d need yet another costly patch), or simply put the patch back online. They looked into it, and the issue happens so rarely that they still consider the patch to be “good enough”. It wasn’t an easy decision, but in the end, paying such a large sum of money to jump through so many hoops just doesn’t make any sense. We already owe microsoft a LOT of money for the privilege of being on their platform. People often mistakenly believe that we got paid by Microsoft for being exclusive to their platform. Nothing could be further from the truth. WE pay THEM. So we’re going to go ahead and put Title Update back online, and for a vast majority of people it’s going to make FEZ a better game. Thank you for your understanding and continuing support. Sincerely, The Polytron Team My link On one hand I feel for them but on the other hand WTF? They paid MS to not be on Steam? Were they insane? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Boss Posted July 19, 2012 Report Share Posted July 19, 2012 Stupid devs can GTFO. They are foolish enough to pay MS to be platform exclusive. What benefit do they get by paying and staying exclusive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Choron ka raja Posted July 19, 2012 Report Share Posted July 19, 2012 I know MS's certification process was bullshit but wow, this is just flat out ridiculous - My link On one hand I feel for them but on the other hand WTF? They paid MS to not be on Steam? Were they insane? Re-certification processs is what helps us from not downloading the patches every day. I don't know how Dice get away with 1 gig patches, but weekly patches screws up the game, and can change the game entirely, so re-certification is helpful. MS can't allow a game completely different than what it initially certiified, no matter what. I don't know what is the issue here regarding that. If the patch is shitty, devs should fix it at their cost, not user's cost. I don't want to download a new game every time there is an update, like android marketplace. The process seems bad, but in all honesty, it is not. It just pushes devs to test everything before getting it certified. Devs seems to tend toward "release now, fix later" and therefore keep bitching. Would you prefer to pay for a 200mb large game, and download long a*s patches, only to end up with game that you never paid for? Take BF3 for example. Current version is radically different from November's version, that we all bought. I am pretty sure they did got recertified, as they can get away with high costs. But if the same happens for an Indie game, I don't think that dev will stay in business for long. With all that said, I didn't knew you had to pay for exclusivity. Even the article didn't say that. What it says is that devs end up paying cost of staying exclusive, not that they pay some hefty sum to be one. Both are radically different thing. Dev don't have to pay for exclusivity, all they need to do is not to release the game on other platform. MS can't release the game for them, on steam or GFWL, so paying MS does not make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapola Posted July 19, 2012 Report Share Posted July 19, 2012 Well... FEZ already had a TU earlier, which means most likely they exhausted their quota of free updates. This limitation is known to every dev from the beginning. Intentions are clear, release the game clean. And this guy said earlier game is for "on a saturday morning from a couch" "PCs are for spreadsheets" and after celebrating 100k sells on the platform, it shouldn't make a*s of an issue over a lousy broken patch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aftrunner Posted July 19, 2012 Report Share Posted July 19, 2012 Re-certification processs is what helps us from not downloading the patches every day. I don't know how Dice get away with 1 gig patches, but weekly patches screws up the game, and can change the game entirely, so re-certification is helpful. MS can't allow a game completely different than what it initially certiified, no matter what. I don't know what is the issue here regarding that. If the patch is shitty, devs should fix it at their cost, not user's cost. I don't want to download a new game every time there is an update, like android marketplace. Yeah. I dont know how much you know about PC gaming (I am guessing zero going by that hyperbolic statement) but no one downloads patches all day on the PC, and thats the most open gaming system in the world right now. No developer likes to spend time and resources working on a patch when they could be working on something that gives them money instead i.e games. Oh and just so that we are clear, size and frequency of patches are two different issues. Its still possible to limit a patch to a manageable size without having arbitrary limits on how many you can have. The whole reason a patch exists is to fix something thats broken. The fact that you have to pay to fix bugs doesnt mean that developers are less likely to make buggy games (if that was true then the 360 would have games that had no bugs) it just means developers are less likely to try to fix things after their free quota of patches is up. Fact is MS's certification process is broken. Someone like Dice, Activision or Bethesda can afford half a dozen patches. People who make Fez, SMB etc cant. It doesnt excuse leaving your customers hanging out to try so you can save some money. But its MS's fault as much as its the developers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapola Posted July 19, 2012 Report Share Posted July 19, 2012 Fact is MS's certification process is broken. Someone like Dice, Activision or Bethesda can afford half a dozen patches. People who make Fez, SMB etc cant. It doesnt excuse leaving your customers hanging out to try so you can save some money. But its MS's fault as much as its the developers. I agree with this. But they don't have any other way of limiting the no. of submissions, unless they allow self-cert which is unlikely to happen. Edit: Still I dont understand how they owe money to MS, apart from the usual 30%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sapola Posted July 20, 2012 Report Share Posted July 20, 2012 Gi.biz has nailed it. www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2012-07-20-fez-fish-and-the-problem-with-patching?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=european-daily Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeehunter Posted July 21, 2012 Report Share Posted July 21, 2012 Stupid devs can GTFO. They are foolish enough to pay MS to be platform exclusive. What benefit do they get by paying and staying exclusive? They don't pay MS to remain exclusive They pay MS to get their patches re-certified Btw the sales on XBLA are almost equal to those on Steam (even though there is hardly a price cut) and much more than PSN .. The recent example Minecraft selling more than 3 million copies and dev made $60 million within a month Being on XBLA they earn more money and don't have to waste time in porting to other inferior platforms like PSN Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aftrunner Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 This game is amazing. That is all. 2012 year of the indies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GameAnalyzer Posted December 22, 2012 Report Share Posted December 22, 2012 This game is amazing. That is all. 2012 year of the indies. :majesty:/> How much MSP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zen Posted December 23, 2012 Report Share Posted December 23, 2012 PC release? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aftrunner Posted December 23, 2012 Report Share Posted December 23, 2012 Yeah picked it up for 400 points. And Rayman Origins for another 800 points. Best money I spent in any sale all year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.