Отзывы о Event[0]

Подпишись на КУРАТОРА
Смотри прохождения игр о выживании на YOUTUBE КАНАЛЕ

Русика нету, но моего английского оказалось, как ни странно, достаточно, чтобы оценить все прелести общения с машиной. Больше всего понравилась именно переписка с компом - он с характером ;-)
Я сам не прошел пока, но игра, говорят, короткая. Но на распродаже она стоит как билет в кино и, в сравнении с ним, отбивает себя полностью и по увлекательности, и по времени.

Автор сообщения: ☢ Выживатор ☢

10 из 10!!!!!!! потрясающе!!!!! впервые я вижу как легко и непринужденно ломается 4 стена, ключ на лицуху в пиратской версии на стене, это потрясающе, трогательно и душевно, ну а о самой игре - посылать на 3 буквы AI бесценно)))) и корабль управляемый Гладос) и "The Cake is a lie" просто супер!!!!! 10 из 10, браво!!!!!!

Being stuck on a space station called ‘Nautilus’ and having to deal with an emotionally unstable AI is a pain in the Hazmat. Wait a sec. Who programmed that AI? Kill THEM TOO.

Short is this 3D Space SF title; What if Microsoft discovered a better way to travel between galaxies? What if Apple discovered a better way to between galaxies? Who would you Kill?

A little bit of old school ‘point and click’ and a little bit of ‘text adventure’ and a little bit 3D flying around in space with zero gravity. (Hit ‘space bar’ to stabilize).
Puzzles? check. Calm? check. 100%? Check [11 hours].

This is why I continue to receive the curated Humble Bundle monthly. Add Humble to Cart.
[Oops is this a plug? mY bAD]

9.1/10 Event[0]
My Scoring Method
10 / exemplary execution of the genre with compelling innovation
9 / exemplary execution of the genre don’t miss out; for fans and the curious alike
8 / for well done not a must play, fans of the genre and newbs will be happy it is well done
7 / for calibrated expectations only, fans of the genre would not miss out if they skipped this
6 / only for serious fans of the genre for whom game play with bugs is acceptable
5 / enough bugs to make me unhappy

August 2017

Artificiality and purpose are not only themes of Event[0] but they are also central to the illusions it creates in terms of innovative gameplay, which is a whole lot of smoke and mirrors to disguise tech, old and new, to create an actual companion who appears to have learning capabilities. The mechanics are taken from games like Wasteland and many Infocom text-adventures where player inputs are conveyed through typing responses with the modern conventions of walking simulators to add audiovisual elements and immersive qualities to enhance its gameplay. It is essentially a glorified ChatBot given its own game, but simply saying it repeats what has already been tried and true with the same benefits and flaws would be a mistake.

The genius element behind what makes E0 believable is not so much its accuracy in imitating intelligence but how it creates a persona to a degree that excuses its shortcomings. Knowing that the only character you associate is an A.I., this fact gives the player enough suspension of disbelief to work around the game’s shortcomings, which is the A.I itself. Kaizen, the ship’s A.I., manages to communicate with enough variety of his responses as well as demonstrate the illusion of understanding the connotations of words that you would have to intentionally type out responses to at its weakest moments to break the illusion. It demonstrates the ability to make inferences from sentences (ex. mentioning a name and then referring to that person as she/he) as well as building some sort of long-term memory about your interactions in its database.

Honestly, the illusion itself is so sophisticated I would have never understood it without the help of Mark Brown’s video, which explains how the A.I. responses operate under the guise of context clues that associate tags (nouns, locations, etc.) generating a list of variable sentences. Games of old were limited by their memory constraints to make these responses anything less than scripts that searched for keywords, but these additional changes is what makes the false appearance of human intelligence feel real. The limitations of Kaizen is similar to the Moravec Paradox mentioned by Steven Pinker, which in layman’s terms describes that it’s not teaching A.I.s how to respond that is the attribute of intelligence but providing the “fundamentals” we take for granted like the senses and applying them to make conclusions that demonstrate real cognitive thought. This method of learning, however, is the basis of imitating human thinking, and it’s the problem of creating these “fundamentals” (ex. How do you program the ability to see?) that is the next challenge. It’s a shame then that E0 is over before the game can really explore just how far it can keep up its pretenses.

There Is No A and I in Team, Only Me