L’Abbaye des Morts

By: Derek Yu

On: September 15th, 2010

L'Abbaye des Morts by Locomalito

[Note: Paul covered this game in his Weekly Report #2, but I had already written my review. Anyway, it’s worth another mention!]

Locomalito and his companion Gryzor87 have released L’Abbaye des Morts (download mirror), a Jet Set Willy-inspired platformer based on the persecution of the Cathars by the Catholic Church (read the Wikipedia entry – it’s pretty horrible stuff). Despite being labeled “a minor game” by its creator, L’Abbaye is well-made and very fun, with great challenge and lots of secrets packed into a small package. The limited graphics and audio actually do a lot to bolster the creepiness of the game’s occult theme.

One thing I like about Locomalito games is how they handle game overs – whereas with this type of game I feel like a lot of indie game developers might offer the player either a cruel one life or a feckless infinite number of lives, L’Abbaye offers you reusable checkpoints and nine lives which can be replenished at certain points during the game.L'Abbaye des Morts by Locomalito This system worked great for me, and while it was frustrating at times to have to restart, the level design is such that you can beat the game very quickly when you know what to do. By the time I won, nine lives felt quite generous.

I also like the historical setting for the game, inspired by a vacation to southern France, that lends the game’s fantastical story more depth. The cover art, by musician Gryzor87, is a wonderful bonus. These are the kinds of small touches that make playing L’Abbaye des Morts, and Locomalito games in general, feel meaty and satisfying.

If it sounds like I’m a fanboy, it’s because I am one! These guys are awesome.

TIGdb: Entry for L’Abbaye des Morts

  • Paint by Numbers

    This game is awesome.

  • rAzzB1tCh

    As I said in Paul's post, awesome game. I like how the one [spoilers I guess] room with the guys hanging doesn't have any music. It fits the mood really well.

  • Alomard

    eh, i think infinite lives or one life are better options in general, myself. a game with infinite lives and checkpoints may have you doing the same hard part several times yes. thats nice and challenging. the price of finite lives is that hard parts may force you to do all the easy parts over again, which is not challenging, unless you slip up out of hurrying due to boredom, and is quite often annoying. unless the gameplay is randomized, where the option of 1 life forces you to be careful, which really shines in roguelikes… but i'll see how they apply it here.

  • http://www.derekyu.com Derek Yu

    Well, let me know what you think. In my opinion, if a game's well-designed, the easy parts will still be fun because you'll find faster and better ways to get through them. If the lives were infinite, you'd have no incentive to try. Just do it well enough to get through once.

    And I think that's my problem with infinite lives – they make both the players and developers lazy. The latter group doesn't have to worry about pacing because who cares? You'll never have to play the same part after you've beaten it once. Make it super hard, super easy, it doesn't matter.

    Just my opinion, though!

  • AGuy

    This game is rad. So rad. :')

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UO2Q5OLCIUBJSMQVLDQXYZZRVY f e

    No game for me. :(

    > “The file # has reached its download limit. Files in non-premium drops can only be downloaded 1000 times, both to prevent abuse and because at very high download rates our service becomes prohibitively expensive. If you need to download this file, ask the drop's administrator to remove this download limit by upgrading this drop, either through drop.io manager or a one-time upgrade.”

    Anyone know of a mirror?

  • http://www.derekyu.com Derek Yu
  • rinkuhero

    is it necessarily wrong to do something that makes the developers and players lazier, though? i mean, we don't require players to use command line options anymore, either. or force the player to change autoexec.bat each time they play a new game. sometimes things which make people less lazy are just part of progress

    that said, i think there will always be a place for games with limited lives, i just don't think it's lazy to use unlimited lives

  • http://www.derekyu.com Derek Yu

    No, it's not necessarily wrong! But I think your examples are kind of off… when I say laziness, I mean laziness in terms of understanding and getting better at the game. If L'Abbaye had infinite lives, I imagine you'd push your way through it and eventually win without getting that good. Maybe the challenge could be increased to compensate, but it's still not nearly as exciting and satisfying as making a complete run, from start to finish, with a limited number of lives.

  • rinkuhero

    i actually welcome a 'skip level' button, and not even with the requirement that they try and fail a certain number of times. tale of tales is one of the big promoters of this idea, and i think it'd be a welcome change to games, and a step in the direction of games being about more than challenge or skill.

    i can see how that can be thought of as a “fear of frustration”, but isn't aspirin a “fear of headaches”? isn't a farm a “fear of starvation”? if frustration is a bad thing (and it is to many people), wouldn't things which reduce frustration be good?

    having the option to skip a level doesn't actually hurt those who want to play through every level, they can still elect to do so. even having unlimited lives doesn't harm people who want to play through the game with limited lives, they can still artificially limit themselves to 10 tries before starting again at the beginning. so i don't see it as taking freedom away from the player, but giving the player more control over the game.

  • Scotty

    Awesome game.

  • http://www.derekyu.com Derek Yu

    Well. I think anyone who's tried to get good at anything or understand something at a high level has felt frustrated at some point in that journey… so to me it's not something to be afraid of, no, so long as it's for a good reason (e.g. the game is challenging, so some people are inevitably going to get frustrated). Whereas headaches and starvation are not really consequences of anything positive.

    Regarding the options… yes, hardcore players can always artificially challenge themselves if a game's not hard enough, but beyond a certain point it gets a little ridiculous. It'd be like putting an elevator up the side of Mt. Everest – sure, people could still climb up the mountain the old way, but the experience would feel diluted somehow, less inspiring. Not to mention that the elevator then becomes a temptation for people who might otherwise challenge themselves to learn to climb. (I had this experience with someone while working on Spelunky – if I had offered an easy mode they would have taken it, even though they ended up managing without it just fine.)

    But I'd love to see people make more games that aren't skill-based, and I think those types of games (art games, or whatever) will become more compelling as time goes on. I'd just rather play a game that was focused on one thing or the other, instead of a game that tries to please everyone.

  • rinkuhero

    that's pretty fair, but at least i can say that most places in the world do have elevators whereas most games are like mt everest to everyone; the world doesn't need to be accessible to everyone, and you don't need elevators on mt everest, but it'd be stupid to refuse to build an elevator in a skyscraper because you want people to toughen up and take the stairs.

    so i'd never want skill-based games to disappear, but i think they'll eventually become like mt everest, out of the way places that few people can or will visit. once, the entire world was as harsh as mt everest, but gradually people built roads, cities, power lines, and other stuff to make the world easier to live in, and most prefer living in a city than in the wild. same thing may happen to games. it's like, a mountain and a city can both be beautiful, even if the city tries to appeal to mankind and the mountain doesn't.

  • rinkuhero

    also, to be clear, i'm not in favor of 'casualification' where games are simplified and all sharp corners are made round and there's no opportunity for challenge at all, i'm simply in favor of challenging games which have the option to skip certain parts of that challenge.

    it's like, when you're learning a new language, you don't need to get every word 100% memorized by heart and get 100% on every test before proceeding to the next chapter or next semester. real life challenges are at least a *little* lenient. whereas in a game, one mistake and you can't proceed, you need to complete all obstacles in the game 100% exactly right or you can't see the ending.

  • Dodger

    I'm only bringing this point up because you guys were talking about difficult levels and game playing skills, so please bear with me.

    I agree with most of the points you both have but one other problem I have found something else that annoys me about today's games and it has to do with Achievements and Trophies and the redundant or meaningless nature of earning most of them that has become all too prevalent. I haven't got any problems with being rewarded for good / skillful gameplay, but the nature of these rewards has become more and more meaningless. It's not that I don't think these systems of reward shouldn't exist at all, but there are two glaring flaws with them (in my opinion) – 1.) They do nothing for the gamer – giving gamers points and trophies has really only proven to help gamers be more competitive with each other by participating in an imaginary dick waving contest. And 2.) Half of these “rewards” seem like they've been put into place as a means of forcing replay value – rather than enhancing the value of a game and making it more fun to actually reach specific goals. This is kind of like making up an excuse to keep playing instead of gamers wanting to keep playing a game for the joy of it. Obviously the decision to keep playing and pursue these goals is up to the gamer, but it's hard to deny that some gamers have become a little addicted to a pursuit which is pointless – that's debatable because I know some gamers actually do enjoy pursuing those kinds of rewards, but as a gamer who grew up without the need for those kinds of rewards, I could see how they might be a nifty way to show off ones abilities to friends but the application of these so-called reward has really enhanced gaming in a positive way at all yet and I say that considering the fact that most of the achievements / trophies don't really have anything to do with skill, precision, or keen observation. I mean really, the reward used to be playing a game you enjoyed through to the end. It might be left down to personal preferences, so I don't assume to know how everyone feels about the topic, but for me the artificial flavoring of these additives has left a bad taste instead of a good one. I still play these games that have these reward systems in place, but more often than not I play through these games and points / trophies pop up on my screen for unknown reasons until I actually look up why the hell I even got them. I'm not bitching or whining about the whole idea of them, but since they are absolutely useless immaterial rewards that have no substance whatsoever, we should be able to turn them off… besides, it would help speed up online gaming in one more small way by not having to gather that kind of info when viewing other player profiles and sending invites or writing messages. Funny how these rewards actually slow down a service though, is it really worth it? I'd prefer to ask that developers simply make good games, that's the kind of reward I like for my hard earned money.

    How is this relevant? I have played two games now by Locomalito and both of them were extremely well made and fun to play (in my opinion), there was no need for any artificial reward system and exploring hidden areas was fun all on its own. I believe that the quality and enjoyment of gaming has made the use of those rewards redundant and obsolete and almost proves that a scoreboard is a far better measure of skill (for those games that keep score – such as shmups). If I really want to show off my skill at a particular game then I'll play a game in front of the people I want to show off to and hope that they don't get bored to death with the experience. It really is a meaningless pursuit though. The enjoyment is all in the experience. I find it hard to believe that anyone else could see it differently, but I must be wrong because these “rewards” still exist in gaming and are only becoming a mainstay by gamers who seem to be addicted to the collection of these rewards rather than the experience of the game. I'm not saying these reward systems don't have a place – because individual games containing them can be fun, for example – playing games like Dr. Lunatic Supreme with Cheese and Looneyland (1 or 2) the hidden bonuses are both fun and silly, and that's how they're both presented and delivered – they actually add to the gameplay by giving extra options as well… the problem I have seems to be somewhat limited to mainstream games (right now) and the uselessness of how these rewards apply in their current state since they do not enhance or actually prolong a games value or experience. As limited as the problem is, Steam has adopted the same sort of reward system and that means a lot of indie games sold through Steam (and other portals soon) might ultimately all have the artificial reward system. It's one of the reasons I prefer to buy indie games directly from the devs site, but I'm worried that the gimmick will take over and that eventually devs might forget that rewarding the gamer is all about the enjoyment of the experience, not how many hard to reach or obscure achievements are obtained or left to be obtained. This might not apply to indies yet, but that doesn't mean it won't end up happening when these big portals start making more agreements and deals with developers where part of the deal is that the indie developer makes sure to to have a certain amount of obstacles and scenarios so that the players can be awarded with an achievement or badge every 5 – 10 minutes.

  • SirNiko

    Some of this is a problem with the types of things that are rewarded – some games reward you for mindless tasks, others reward you for difficult and clever tasks. A challenge to complete a game using an unusual weapon or character that changes the gameplay is fun and difficult, a challenge to kill 1,000 monsters is dull and time consuming. Achievements are just another tool that can be used well or poorly by designers.

    Using the Mt Everest analogy, just because you took the elevator to see the peak does not mean you can't come back later and try to climb it anyway, just the same as you can play a game on easy, shelve it, then come back and play on hard another day when you feel more confident. I am okay with content being locked behind barriers that encourage you to overcome challenges, but it can be done in moderation. Give the player options that let them see 99% of the game even if they can't beat the first level. Give them the choice to tone down difficulty to explore the world. Save that last 1% as a prize to only those that choose to achieve. I think that's ultimately fair and amiable to even the least skilled players.

  • Dodger

    I see what you're saying SirNiko, but I don't agree on the analogy or the idea that you keep even 1 percent of the game hidden from players, especially if people paid for the game. Instead, why not use a system of rewards that when earned enhances the gameplay, much like I mentioned earlier regarding Looneyland 1 & 2. You can still play through the entire game, and there still are secrets to be found, but along the way if you do meet certain objectives or accomplish certain goals you unlock the ability to use enhanced features, and at almost any time once they've been accomplished or discovered. Having secrets in a game is fine and fun, but actually keeping parts of the game locked away for all the but the most hardcore of gamers doesn't make any sense to me and it shouldn't make any sense to anyone who pays for their games. A good example of reward through progression (again this is just my opinion) would be the megaman series and how you get to choose almost any level you want and when you defeat a particular boss you earn their weapon or special abilities. Same thing goes for games like Metroid or Castlevania: Symphony of the night. You could follow particular paths through the game but by defeating enemies and exploring you earn weapons and abilities that enhance the way you can play the game. It's actually all very limited, but keeping a percentage of a game purposefully locked away from gamers and punishing them in order to unlock those areas by making them either extremely difficult or frustratingly challenging doesn't benefit anyone really – and I think paying for any game in particular means we shouldn't lose any percent of the product we've paid for… unless, the entire game is about progressing or unlocking things at a high difficulty level at almost all times. I think a good example of a game that really challenges players and rewards them through gameplay would be Demon's Souls. The good thing about the game is it is presented up front that this game will be challenging. The front cover of the game basically tells you that you are going to get your ass kicked, so there is no deterring from the fact that this game might not be for everyone, but for those who are up for a good challenge come on in and test your mettle. This is how the game is presented, because this is how the game is. If you don't like a game that forces your to play carefully, work on your timing, and also grind, then you will not like it – and the game has been promoted as nothing less than that. There are trophies for defeating the bosses, and for crafting the best weapon types using each of the crafting materials, but they are entirely superfluous and they add nothing to the gameplay. The game itself rewards gamers for persistence. So I think it just backs up my earlier thoughts on why achievements and trophies don't matter or at the very least, gamers should be given the option to turn them off.

  • Vania

    Yeah, I was having so much fun but then… Game Over….

  • Dodger

    I should clarify what I mean even more by saying that I don't mind being challenged through gameplay, but I don't want to be bogged down by objectives that aren't attainable by the majority. As an example of challenge that doesn't subtract from gameplay I'll use Super Mario World (for the SNES). You can complete the game without discovering or completing the hidden levels, but the finding the hidden levels and then completing them is both fun and an attainable objective by the majority of gamers.

    Hydorah (locomalito's great shooter) is another game that i can use as an example in a different way. It can be difficult, but the whole game is like that. There are rewards for practice and persistence, but the game doesn't take anything away from the players. The levels are meant to be challenging but they can be completed. There are secrets, but nothing is taken away from the game for not finding the hidden levels and on top of all of that it is free. An individual game such as looneyland having trophies or badges is a good thing because you actually get to enhance your gameplay experience with them. My big problem is having games and game play revolving around the system of rewards – rewards that don't do anything such as the Achievements on XBL and Trophies on PSN with the same problem extending to Steam now. Nintendo, thankfully hasn't picked up platform wide system of trophies or achievements. Instead, if a game has a reward system of that kind it is limited to that particular game, and that's how it should be, if at all, when those rewards don't actually give the player anything besides saying how special the player is for collecting 100 samples of fecal matter.

    Hopefully I've expressed what I mean so that it's easy enough to understand what I'm getting at.

  • Klabelkholosh

    Fantastic game!

    I thought there might have been multiple endings after I finished it, but it's actually an awesome ending and makes complete sense :)

  • Jasper Byrne

    Yeah I love it!

  • SirNiko

    Finished it! Short and clean, great visuals and music. The short intro where you are chased by the soldiers is my favorite part. The puzzles and enemies are short and varied, so each room feels fresh and different. Jet Set Willy style room titles, in my opinion, should be a regular part of all games.

    It is unfortunate if you run out of lives towards the end, as backtracking through the game doesn't present any new challenges or different tricks. Knowledge of the puzzles doesn't increase your survivability very much, as your deaths come from reflexive challenges more than an inability to solve the mysteries of the church. Thankfully the game is short enough that I could pick up again from the start with little difficulty and complete it.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_UO2Q5OLCIUBJSMQVLDQXYZZRVY f e

    Thanks. Next time I'll CTRL+F “mirror” first!

  • Dodger

    Wow, this game truly is a brilliant little gem of a game. It's raw and purposefully dated graphics bring me way back to a time between the ZX Sinclair and the Apple ][+ and Commodore 64 eras in terms of graphics, style, and gameplay. The music and sounds are also pretty haunting. For a game that is so limited in the aesthetics that we've taken for granted over the years of technical advancement in gaming and the elements that leave a lasting impression such as graphics, sound, and presentation, this polished little relic is just teeming with atmosphere and character. It reminds me so much of what I loved about gaming on the old pc's, the Atari, and early Nintendo, without ever mimicking any one game in particular. I think there might be some obvious influences in terms of style, but the game itself is very unique and kind of refreshing in a backwards sort of way. The difficulty and the controls and the difficulty in making the controls work well coupled with the pacing of the game all feel like they`re straight out of a game made in the early 80`s. I I think the most important thing L’Abbaye des Morts has done for me, on top of being a fun and atmospheric game, is that it reminded me exactly how much I miss all of my old PC`s, systems and games. For me it was an era when games were starting to become more graphical (even though still very limited) and when the imagination of a young gamer (myself) could actually slay the dragon and save the princess. After reading all of the other comments I figured either the game is very good or it`ll just turn out that I won`t like it because people have started a hype on it, but I sure am glad I played it, the wave of memories is well worth the price of admission (ones free time) and being able to like a game for how fun it is and for how it makes you feel even better about remembering some of the good`ol days in gaming makes it all the more valuable for me. I hope everyone else enjoys it just as much or more if that`s possible, hopefully I`m not bias simply because I remember how much I loved those old games, but right now I don`t care. I don`t know if everyone will appreciate it but I do recommend you download it even if it`s just to get a taste of how those older games played and felt – that alone might not be enough for some of the younger audiences but this is one of those games you should try to open your mind for even if you don`t like ooolllddd games and the dated gameplay.

  • gugu

    i think accessible and easy games are good things but it shouldn't be an unspoken rule for games to be accepted. i cheered when i won this game and i can tell you that doesn't happen very often.

  • http://nuclearheart.com/ György Straub

    Must be gem'o'clock. I love how carefully 8bit-fashioned this game is (the screen has a freaking border!), but that's something other games might do fairly well. Where it stands out is being so damn frustrating yet still compelling to come back to it. I guess that means that the difficulty was right then – and also the length.

    And yeah, as others said, the ending is one of the most rewarding endings I've seen recently; I'd only add that the choice of the setting / topic is of commendable originality and significance.

  • Blackace

    I wish there will be another great game like this! Story, place and time were just interesting, and I even got chills at room with the tree. Not going to spoil, but it's spooky one, fits to occult theme of game.

    Ending was, well.. I felt quite bad, ending was good but.. You know, it wasn't nicest thing in the world, but I learned something.

    History has it's good and bad parts, we can't change it.

  • C.A. Sinclair

    i too am outraged that the chess board i just bought doesn't come with the guarantee to win against a grandmaster.

  • CocaCola

    what the? huh? who? ummm… ya… huh?

  • Dodger

    I don't think the ending of a game should always make you feel good. Not that you shouldn't feel satisfied, you should feel like you were entertained by the game and then hopefully its ending, but games that make you feel bad do have their place. Silent Hill 2 was one of those games that no matter which ending you got you couldn't possibly feel good, and yet it's considered the best of the series (statistically speaking). I think I prefer a game that has a sad or unhappy ending over a game that just doesn't have some sort of closure. I just don't like it when the ending of a game is sacrificed for a sequel. That doesn't mean I don't enjoy sequels, I just prefer that a game I have spent the time to complete satisfy me with an entertaining ending, be it a happy ending, a sad ending and have something compelling about it making me feel like I've finished the game. I could probably think of a few dozen games or series that shafted the ending in order to leave the game open for a sequel (when it was entirely unnecessary to make such a sacrifice), both Gears of War and Killzone 2 left me unsatisfied when I got to their end. It was like giving me this great game and then saying “whelp, we'll see you next game!” and in the background of the games ending theme music I swear I could faintly hear one of the publishers whispering “Suckerrrrrrrrs!”. It's not that the games weren't enjoyable, but the endings were so entirely unrewarding as to treat the player like a dummy and it's at the endings of these games where L’Abbaye des Morts does things differently. You've got an extremely well made game rich with atmosphere and by the end of it all you haven't been treated like a moron or an infant. The ending, low-res as it is, is at least compelling.

    So a game that makes you feel bad at its ending doesn't mean that it was any less entertaining. I think it's a good thing being able to appreciate the fact that a game can actually make gamers have a broad range of feelings though.

  • Blackace

    Hm, you're right about everything. I wish to make myself more clear though (as reading though that message of mine, dang, I was so unclear), I felt bad about what happened to character = “the not nicest thing in the world”.

  • Dodger

    Oh I agree with you, but it sure makes for a compelling ending. I couldn't help be find the game interesting all the way through, right up until the end.

  • Dodger

    Oh and don't worry about being unclear, I often screw up what I mean and what I'm trying to express, just as I did in my last comment:

    “I couldn't help be find the game interesting all the way through, right up until the end.”

    It's actually supposed to be “I couldn't help BUT”… not “be”

    Ah well, just another goof up in my typing.

  • Phubans

    This is wonderful. Beauty in simplicity. I have a feeling this could easily rank as one of my favorite indie games of all time… But I still haven't beaten it. I could probably play this little gem all day, but sadly there's work to be done! Heave-ho!

  • Phubans

    Wow, and reading up on Catharism, I'm shocked by how closely their beliefs parallel my own. I'm glad this game introduced me to this. Freaky.

  • http://nuclearheart.com/ György Straub

    Tell me about it!=) I'm currently working on a game of my own whose core topic is, well, something that was also a central element of Catharism. Very strange encounter.

  • iffi

    I haven't beaten this yet, but from what I've played so far, it reminds me a lot of La-Mulana (my favorite indie game), in its exploration aspects and the messages left beind for you to discover, and, of course, the retro graphics.


    The invisible bridge and the spike pit you have to jump into especially reminded me of La-Mulana.


  • Blackace

    Dodger : Haha, I tend to be unclear too many times :D And for anyone who felt very bad about it, the character was actually Chuck Norris, flames burned rope he was tied at and he escaped. The rope got in heaven.. *shot* (going to get killed because of that “joke”)

    But yes, this game is splendid, and I wish we will see something similar like this again!

  • Hempuli

    We managed to get this far without a single insult, complete with some really great discussion! Thanks, everyone.

  • Eternal Man

    This is most certainly an awesome game! Music TO DIE FOR… ^_^

    Loved the difficulty! Kept me sitting on nails the whole game through. The fact that you can't defend yourself heightens the scary feel.

    This is really a game to study, because it was hard as nails – but never unfair. As soon as you get a good feel for the controls you'll only get hurt by being sloppy! So cudos to the duo! For making an absolute classic!


  • Help

    HELP! I'm stuck in a comically tiny comment box!

  • player2


  • Robbertprins

    This is like the Star Wars scene where they are in a garbage compactor, only with comments.

  • Vania

    cant get the one behind the dragon, nor the one in the lake

  • SirNiko

    Both require you to move through false walls. The Room of Illusions is called that for a reason. Two reasons, in fact.

    For the dragon, you'll need to crawl in from the side.

    For the lake, you'll need to tempt death and jump somewhere that looks deadly.

  • Dodger

    Alright, in classic gaming news – The good old GoG dot com has been shut down! This is very unfortunate especially considering they were attempting to bring back Classic Indie games as well which would have only had a positive affect on the future of indie gaming. This is a sad day indeed as one of the up-and-coming download portals has just died! This is very unfortunate news for all gamers who enjoy classic games.

    However, stay tuned, because it looks as though the new and improved version will be released shortly meaning the site is no longer in Beta! :-)

    Three cheers all around!

  • allen

    You speak as if that was coincidence.

  • Whatever

    I found this game very well done and polished. But i fucking hated and got annoyed by the purposedly random/few/wrong checkpoints crosses placement and found the game innecesarilly difficult at some places, mainly in the jumping i-must-wait-the-stupid-arrows-iterations-and-i'm-not-patient-damnit parts. That said i did not finished it, frustration gotten me earlier.
    I think this is maybe a bit of a vice in the Locomalito's games, i found very similar issues with difficulty curve in Hydorah and got ultimately frustrated with it (I get to stage 4 in DoDonPachi without losing a life, so i think i don't really suck at shmups. Maybe i just suck at Locomalito's games?

  • allen

    I would be less frustrated at his games if I wasn't forced to do the same part over and over and over.

    I could usually fly through most of Les Abbaye Des Morts but have lots of trouble in some parts. I don't mind the difficulty, but going through the whole game again is just boring and tedious. When I finish the game it's not really a triumphant “YESS” it's more like a “UGH FUCKING FINALLY”.

  • SirNiko

    Thankfully, I found the game to be easy enough that I didn't reach that point of frustration. It only took me three playthroughs to complete, though I excel at reflex based platformers and the like. Given Locomalito's credo to make games that challenge the player, I suspect he may be a better-than-average gamer, and perhaps that colors his perceptions of what is difficult. I feel like the game (and also Hydorah) was made for a player of precisely my skill level, which is unfortunate for others.