Originally Posted by FrustratedAssassin
I liked the transitions, and they could've made it better if they wanted to. I can see why they changed the sensors because while the original concept looks better in theory, it looks pretty bad in 3D and the gates look OK too.
You see, whether it looks good is secondary compared to whether it *plays* good. The gates fundamentally change the puzzle to the point it's just "move while the one nearest gate is not close to you" without any sense of timing.
The screenshot is super cheap, graphically, since it's easier to just tile a conrete texture on the ground in Unity than add details such as dirt, blood splatters etf etc.
The lights are copy-pasted too. Notice that you can't see how they're connected to the ceiling because knots require effort. (Reminds me of the boulders in the temple that are magically-moved in NnT while in AO you can't see the top and assume mudokons are making them swing or something)
NnT doesn't really scream effort. You really give them too much credit thinking that they're sane creative decisions whilst it's just a way to cover their backs by doing things fast and effortlessly, sacrificing quality.
The transition is choppy because the guy scripting the camera didn't know much about animation (or didn't care), there are just amateurish linear movements, I can count the keyframes.
There's a big difference between game made by a big, dedicated team and a small indie team, despite what Lorne might lie. The times don't matter. The game design is not 100% about pure technology (I'm still pointing out that Unity is *not* the best technology around, far, far from that)