GameClub - What did you think of Transistor?

Red writing phrases in the OVQ for communication was great. You are totally right that it fleshed out her character and the relationship between her and Transistor. I too was lost in the beginning in the narrative (as mentioned by others in the discussion). I noticed that Red responded to the OVQ things directly in the beginning helping us understand the game world and her place in it, but towards the end when we already know what's going on it switches to her using the terminal just to communicate with Transistor, even submitting what she said to him despite it not being pertinent to the survey or new story. I really liked how they used that to first set up the world and then enamor us with the characters when the stakes get raised.

Gordon Freischlad

I enjoyed playing around with different functions and combinations. It felt good to have a load out of attacks and dodges that I had personally cobbled together, and it was satisfying to crush enemies with them. And the game was smart about encouraging me to try new functions. But I didn't find the actual combat very enjoyable. Using Turn() to plan out moves was cool, but waiting around and hiding until the power regenerated was less fun. I felt too powerful in Turn(), and completely powerless afterwards! This weird whiplash back and forth rhythm of careful, meticulous strategy and then flashes of goofy headless-chicken dodging just never worked for me. I suppose I should have found a way to fix this through different functions (commenters and those on Discord found combinations that somewhat fixed my issues), but I found the user interface for changing functions to be so grim that I didn't feel motivated to tinker and tweak my load out any more than I had to. Ultimately, I wouldn't have finished it if I weren't playing it for GameClub as nothing really made me want to play more. The same-y combat (there are some interesting enemy types, like cheerleaders, but every battle felt very similar) didn't satisfy my gamer brain, and the story didn't interest me personally.

Game Maker's Toolkit

I'm not sure why this game didn't grab my like I thought it would. I'm hoping someone here can help articulate that. I really like the art and music. I think the battle system should have featured more distinct functions. I found I kept using the first batch you get with very few modifications. And then I figured out you could slowly drain enemies by pairing the heart function with a quick attack like ping or the explosion one. Right now I'm leaning toward the thought that the fights didn't seem that different from each other. Other then the few boss encounters I'm not sure what the consequences of the combat really were and why that lead to unlocking more abilities and such. I did get through the game and I enjoy it, but it didn't grab me in the way Bastion did.

It's a nice idea, but Steam doesn't really do stuff like that, especially for small, exclusive things like this. I'll try to keep it to cheaper games though!

Game Maker's Toolkit

Hey Mark! U know the GMTK game club? Do u think it's possible to ask steam for a game club discount, like a few bucks off with code GMTK, since you're driving sales of particular game at a time? Just wondering! I'd never hear about certain games if it wasn't for you!

OSW Review

The story is not dark souls level of hidden, but it asks the player to make sense of it themselves, which I appreciate even if I do also enjoy the more in-your-face story telling of most games. The combat is unique and interesting. Depending on my build, I'd move into position, set off an ability, move again for another/combo, and restart if need be to be as effective as possible with the allotted stamina. Forcing the player to try different abilities after dying is a very smart way to give consequences to dying. It really begs you to experiment with different combinations of skills.

I had a limited, but interesting experience with Transistor. I got it a couple years ago, but I couldn't get into it. Though my time to play this month has been limited due to work and final semester projects (which I should get back to work on instead of stalling) I had a better time with it after dusting it off and not comparing it unfairly to Bastion. When I first encountered the modular combat system, I thought I ought to either play it like an action game or find the 'perfect' setup so that I could take on challenges quickly. When I realized that most encounters don't work that way and that I had to be more patient, I started thinking more tactically and enjoyed the success that comes from executing a good plan. One last thing: I can see how losing powers when you die is off-putting, especially when years of playing video games trains you to never let the health bar drop to zero, but I think it's a clever way of telling the player that their build isn't working.

Megabyte01

This game feels like one where the developer was caught between a rock and a hard place. Bastion was a roaring success with its inventive combination of constant narration and protagonists that were as identifiable by the music that accompanied them as their personas. The main criticism was that the combat was a little weak but overall the world building took precedent. So what do you do to follow up? You make the same game but improve where you previously failed? This as a design doctrine is where the game fails for me. In an effort to build a more expressive means of combat, they overwhelm the player with options. This in turn causes this cacophony of detail in the game that it finds hard to pull together. We have a rich combat system with a seemingly never ending churn of possibilities, a constant narrator and an ever developing beautiful world and story. None of these elements seem to link however with the narrator constantly talking over the developing story with nonsensical chatter, There is so much noise, it is hard to filer out the story. Others have pointed to the shortcuts the game uses in its storytelling - building up to a crescendo as you ride an elevator to meet your previously faceless foes. Only for this to fall flat on its face. I can only imagine this was because they wanted to maintain the brevity of the story rather than draw it out. As for the combat, I'm not the type of person who would return to a game of this ilk time and time again to perfect the systems so I'm probably the wrong person to comment but I find its complexity to reward ratio a little weak. In theory as you experiment, many of the combinations seem overpowered but in practice, they are mostly underwhelming. I think it would have been more rewarding to have fewer function but make each of their impacts much greater, allowing the player to really mix up their playstyle and feel a sense of real empowerment, rather than the awkward magician we are. As for temp losing an ability when you die? It's intention was clear. Force the player to change their abilities constantly so that they don't play the game in the one way. While it succeeds at this aim, it created an unwelcome tension for me towards the end of the game. I became more conscious of the access points and managing my loadout rather than the ramping up of the story itself. Supergiant set out to make a game that married compelling combat with strong storytellling. They failed at this for me, while still making a compelling game. The scope of the game was too short / truncated to allow the design doc to find it's feet and as such left me underwhelmed. ps special mention to Darren Korb who has now written two of the very best soundtracks in gaming history to my ears. He interweaves themes and ideas as coherentlly through video games as skillfully as any master storyteller

P.S.: Did it bother anyone else, how just as you open a terminal Transistor instantly comments on what the terminal says? Before you even have a chance to read anything?

The combat in Transistor is actually a lot of fun. I don’t like turn-based combat in CRPGs, but here the clever mix of turn-based and real-time combat gave me the feeling of constant movement. Outside of a few optional challenges (screw them), the combat never felt like slog, but rather a fun puzzle for me to solve. And the final boss is just beyond cool. A duel between two similar fighters in equal conditions? How come it’s so rare in games? There are a few issues with the system, though. There are bad builds as well as good builds, and even builds that totally wreck everything. The game encourages you to experiment by teasing you with lore in the function files, which only unlock after you’ve used the function in various combinations, and the fact that functions also act as lives. I think that idea is great - combat encounters in Transistor can be quite punishing, especially near the end, and thanks to the 4 lives limit you won’t see the game over screen that often, if ever. And then, at the next access point you have to create a different build to patch the holes in your arsenal. Great stuff. Now, the thing that disappointed me was the narrative. I’ve heard criticisms that this game actively tries to be vague, but oh boy. SPOILERS and amateur whining/criticism ahead. Like Bastion, it is a game with a silent protagonist and an always-present narrator. In Bastion the main character built relationships and made choices WITH the player. The ending was so powerful, because you’ve experienced the whole relationship with Zulf just as The Kid did. Here, we play as Red. It is established from the start that she’s lost her voice, and that gives her the motivation to pursue the Camerata. The narrator is Transistor itself - what, at first, seems to be a talking sword. Then you quickly understand that it’s not that the sword is sentient, but that it’s the voice of the person killed in the opening. And then you realise that it’s Red husband, but there’s no single moment in the story when that information is brought to you. Instead the game actively tries to make a mystery out of who that voice is, so you’re very confused by the relationship between the characters early on. There’s a clear disconnect between Red and the player. She knows whose voice is talking to her. She knows what the Camerata is. She knows where she’s going. The player is oblivious to all of these things and because of that can’t empathize with her. I remember the moment when a pair of villains you’ve been chasing through the level is found dead. Both Red and Transistor felt sorry about them, but I felt nothing. A subversion of my expectations, maybe, because I thought I would have to fight them. But I can’t possibly care for them, because I’ve literally known them for only half an hour, and only one of those people even talked to me. And in the end it is clear that Red makes her choice, not the player. And without the connection to the characters it felt like I was just along for the ride. Supergiant clearly created a complex, believable universe for this game, but then they make you work hard and build conjectures just to get a basic understanding of the setting and the backstory. I mean, there’s a big chance you won’t even read the couple last function files, because you won’t get enough experience to unlock them by the end. Transistor is an game filled with exciting and fresh gameplay ideas, but I don’t feel like going back to it.

I'm just about to finish the game (I guess, reached Farview). I think the most highlighted features of the game are the storytelling and the functions. It's kinda like a main concern of SuperGiant, as they did on Bastion, to have a diegetic storytelling, and in this game once again we have a talking narrator interacting with the player actions. Sometimes, though, the talking sword, well, talks too much. But it never striked me as annoying to the point of being angry, just a little bit too talkative. The OVC entries do a great job to the narrative, too. I like how the functions first and foremost act sort like coding functions, as they allow us to recombine them as primary, secondary and passive. This makes room for a lot of experimenting, and this is also a storytelling strong point, as you need to mix the functions and have them used in all roles to unlock more details on them. This also applies to the limiters, as they need to be activated and "survived" in other to unlock more codex stuff. It's like everything is encouraged to be tried with a small reward expanding the game's world. The score is also very pleasant, specially as you can stop and appreciate it with Red humming along the background music. This creates some special moments, where you kind....bond with the song, and hold the button/key to follow it until it loops. I approached the game mostly on Turn(), due to some special timing moments, where I needed to dodge stuff and also getting behind enemies to backstab them. Most functions have a delayed activation, so it's very hard to perform this without Turn(). I was using some limiters, and needed to quickly get cells to avoid them to respawn, so another reason to use Turn(). About the UI, I agree with people who says it's needed some more work to make it more pleasant. Changing them from active to secondary to passive needs them to be completely removed to be added again, with another role. No "change role" button existed, and could have made things much smoother. About the dying mechanic, I've got mixed feelings. I didn't quite liked the idea of how they are repaired (any visit to a save point could do it, instead). It's great, tho, inside the same battle, to be losing functions and being forced to adapt and find a way to solve the conflict with limited resources. After you finish it, you have to build your setup again, without the functions lost, and then again when you recover them. Without a "quick setup" feature, it was a bit boring to rework the combination setup to get back to my original one before overloading functions on battle. Not a major flaw, but I would say this is one of the UX problems in the game. And this is it! Thanks for the Game Club idea. I think I'll skip Sexy Brutale due some personal schedule problems, but I'll be back to the next game. I guess I'll return to Psychonauts, as I didn't got very far.

Felipe Lins

I got a lot of mileage out of the charm function (I forget the name; it's been a few months). Not only does it give the other monsters a tempting a target to kill for me, but it's also great for using on those devices that heal and give shields. Early on I didn't use turn() because I much prefer action games to strategy games. Later on I found I really liked it. It's a great way to ease a strategy n00b like me into the genre. It was simple to use and it feels great to line up the perfect combo that hits a lot of enemies hard and watch it unfold before your eyes. Losing a function on death is a great idea. First of all it's a clever way to punish you for losing all your health without killing you and making you waste time doing the same things again. And it forces you to not be overly reliant on just one function because that's the one it'll take from you. You have to have a good backup and you have to become familiar with your other functions. I like that there's a dedicated button to just stop and sing along to the music. It has a good soundtrack.

cptnoremac

- I felt a bit lost with the functions at the start, the combat tutorial is a bit poor for me. On my first playthrough i almost ignored the backdoors and that was a big mistake. I learned a lot about the different function combinations in there. - One thing I loved about the game is how it gives you information about the world through things like the OVQ, or Transistor Voice. It gives the feeling of being a living world. Those moments in which Red began to write a phrase and erased it gave much credibility to the characters. - Forcing you to use different functions to discover the whole story of each character is a really ingenious mechanic. How each function relates to the character is a very good idea too. The Purge() function is from a character who abuses drugs for example. Really, really good.

About the problems switching functions, you were playing with a gamepad? On mouse+keyboard you just need to drag and drop the functions to the boxes at the bottom.

Been in a design mood recently (working on a new game myself), so I'll focus on the core gameplay elements: I took the combat on through a primarily turn-based mode, using big burst attacks / setup (things like stacked Crash(ping_spark) combo'ing into Breach(cull_purge) to finish) on 2 of my functions in Turn() and then using support skills like Mask(), Jaunt(), and Help() to buy myself time in the action period. This worked out really well, and was quite consistent and fun: There was a good tension between periods of number-crunching and positioning vs. periods of dodging and recovery. The UI had a few issues here and there, mostly when you wanted to move a Function from sub to primary or from sub in one move to sub in another quickly. I dealt with it despite those, but I feel like the Function UI specifically probably needed the most work out of all the sections in the game. I never died in my original run of Transistor so I didn't actually have to deal with that mechanism at all. I did a re-run recently (showing it to a friend over Skype streaming, not related to this discussion, although it accidentally synched up) and did bite it twice due to being distracted. It's not a bad idea, but I think for some builds it would end up being far too punishing. The way that each ability unveils the history of the character it is derived from really 'makes' Transistor the game it is, to me.

Ariamaki

Also to add, attaching pieces of the story to each function and unlocking them by utilizing the function as an attack, passive or modifier gives more reason to move the functions around and try them in different ways, but that's much more of a conscious effort on the players hand than it is the guiding hand of the developers.

Scott Masters

The temporarily losing a function works really well to encourage the player to move away from their comfort zone. Taking away what the game objectively considers your "most powerful" function and it's components temporarily encourage use of different abilities, and try out new things that the player otherwise wouldn't have. With so many possibilities available in the ability mixer, it's a natural way to help guide the player towards different play styles that don't work in the situations they lost them in. Personally towards the end of the game, I found myself using some of the first few functions I found in the game and boosting them with late game functions and found myself not ever changing them until I started to play new game plus where things were more challenging, and I had to plan out my actions more carefully, and comboing attacks in interesting ways.

Scott Masters

I thought the final boss was very cool and unique mechanically. I wonder if that was originally prototyped as a multiplayer mode but was scrapped. If it were available as a local multiplayer mode I'm not sure whether it would be fun or really frustrating. I always love when games do something to turn things around and pit you against an enemy with the same abilities as you, like Dark Link in Ocarina of Time, or the Octolings in the Splatoon singleplayer campaign.

Tim Romero