• free Free FREE Furi Demake: Get Furious!

    From rms@21:1/5 to All on Sat May 17 14:07:58 2025
    8Bit Action!
    https://store.steampowered.com/app/2593450/Furi_Demake__The_Chain/

    rms

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From candycanearter07@21:1/5 to Spalls Hurgenson on Mon May 19 14:30:03 2025
    Spalls Hurgenson <[email protected]> wrote at 15:42 this Sunday (GMT):
    On Sat, 17 May 2025 14:07:58 -0600, "rms"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    8Bit Action! >>https://store.steampowered.com/app/2593450/Furi_Demake__The_Chain/

    I never got the point of demakes; let's take a game and make it worse?
    Oh sure, from a TECHNICAL perspective I understand it. "Can I, a
    developer, create a similar experience as a modern game using a much
    more limited toolset?" I see the appeal of that challenge.

    But as an end-user of that product -the gamer- I can't imagine why I'd
    want to actually PLAY that game.

    But it probably has a lot to do with the fact that I already lived
    through the era of 8-bit* games, and my general feeling is that I
    already DID my time in the 16-color mines. I've suffered enough; I
    don't need to return to a time when individual pixels were the size of
    my thumb. You CAN make pretty games with such limited technology, but
    it was /despite/ those limitations, not because of it.

    And "Furi Demake" is definitely not one of those exceptions.
    (it's also just the single boss fight of the larger game, so its not
    like there's much content either)

    So I'll pass.




    * although in terms of visuals and gameplay, "Furi Demake" looks a lot
    more 16-bit to me. There's a hell of a lot more than 8 colors on
    screen for most of those images. ;-)


    Demakes can also be for making a semblence of a game work on odd
    hardware (see the portal 64 demake), but also people kinda just like the asthetic?
    --
    user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)