unforum

[Strikethrough]

[EMAIL] Mike Grabel

[alrun]

And the credits:
http://virtuquest.com/6-5post.html
Congratulations to the winners

Edit: Wasn't this finished kinda ... fast? Mind, I last played an ARG over 4 years ago, so my expectations might be wrong, but 2 weeks for a game?

[aislyn]

Yeah, I was kinda surprised that it ended so soon. I expected a bit more to be going on, but it was fun anyhow.

[Russell]

 

[RedHatty]

I found it rather disappointing, especially for a game that was advertised as 1 year in the making & a pay to play on top of it.

I won't play anything else by them after this.

[WolfHawk]

I'm playing a couple of free games that have had a LOT more action than this did.

[enaxor]

Wow, I blinked and it was over.

[lelepooh1]

I can't beleive I made 2nd place! That's cool!

[Mountain Girl]

Virtuquest's previous games may have only lasted a couple of weeks, but this time they gave prospective players cause to expect an in-depth immersive experience. They did so by advertising the upcoming game as a carefully constructed adventure, " a year in the making." Virtuquest furthered this belief by implementing a pay-to-play model, asking for donations to an in-game event, creating multiple websites, and introducing varying plot lines. A combination of advertising and prototypal techniques denoted an ARG traditional of the genre. Instead, players were given an atypical 11 days of scattered play resulting in characters that failed to develop, and mysteries that failed to resolve. The story had no discernable climax, or design.

Why emphasize the importance of an event and then not incorporate it into play? (Township Days)

Why would one introduce a new antagonist then fail to justify the character? (Ms. Stone, Layton Caldwell)

Why fail to explicate the protagonist's (Robert Ridge, Jay Blankenburg, and Ms. Kravits) fate?

Why create a site (The Bill Brazel Band) then not utilize it or the characters associated with it?

Why use obvious untruths, inevitably suspending belief, to explain planning/timeframe issues? ("The Establishment Lounge is always full of residents. It's hard to get a spot in there" )

Points?!? What are these points they speak of? How did we earn them or lose them?


The only logical answers that come to mind are
1. Sponsors pulled funds or
2. Lack of concern/respect for players (I shudder to think) and/or
3. The initial intent was to generate enough interest to continue a pay-to-play model with a sequel or serial game.


It's a shame, I was really wanting to see this story unfold. In my opinion it was a great idea and the initial play was promising and professional.

It's like nails on a chalkboard when........

characters show little to no interest in deviating from a script to interact with players, it appears as though the pms don't care if their audience is enjoying the experience (see everything above). Why even bother having a "chat" if a character just comes in, spews out some info and leaves?

time is not taken to edit for spelling and grammar, especially if there is a paying audience.

Congratulations to the winners! Prizes are always a positive thing.

[Russell]

I can only echo MountainGirls post, the most annoying part of this game and the reason i largely tuned out was the fact that every email sent to characters was either ignored or autoreplyed.

This came to a head when we solved the puzzle implicating Ms Kravits was in trouble, I sent an email off with the solve and a warning that she needed to be gotten to before devcorp got there. The next day I received an email from the character which completely ignored my email and sent the same info that we received the night before.

This Arg has definitely not done them any favours.

[WolfHawk]

This is only the second ARG I've finished. Heh, the first one had a pretty crappy ending, too (if it is indeed done). I hope the others I am taking part in do better!