Games don't need stories.

[loves2splooge]

Reasonable said:

loves2splooge said:

Flower, Sun and Rain absolutely needed story because without it, it had zero value. The gameplay was awful. That is an example of story not being able to save a game with poor gameplay. Yes it has merit but is it enjoyable? No. Games are supposed to be enjoyable. I enjoyed reading someone's analytical essay on the game more than playing the actual game. I don't think it's fair to force the end-user to go through 10 hours (or however long it was) of crappy gameplay just to communicate a message to them. I don't care how much e-cred I lose by saying that Suda51 can't hide behind artistic merit as an excuse for poor gameplay design. Games are supposed to be fun. Otherwise, don't waste our time. Flower, Sun and Rain would have made a great essay, light novel, anime or movie. The video game medium isn't suited for it. Suda51 would fit right in at the Sundance movie festival.

I'd say the general consensus from gamers and critics is the gameplay in Flower was anything but awful.  The game may not have appealed to you personally, but the game mechanics worked fine and I certainly found it fun to play - in fact I still do and will re-play levels just for the fun they give me.

Flower, Sun and Rain scored 54 in metacritic. The general consensus hasn't been positive. Among critics and gamers who don't drink the Suda 51 kool-aid (not to say his other works aren't good but he does have a really cult-like fanbase that berates anyone that doesn't think his work is gold), FSR had been widely criticized for its gameplay. Among major reviewers, IGN gave it 5.5 (gameplay was rated 5.0) and Gamespot gave it 6.0. They praised the game for its story and arthouse direction (which I stated are the big positives with the game) but also criticized the game for the following reasons (all of which deal with gameplay):

• Awful camera  
• Vague directions make some puzzles a chore  
• Constant backtracking on foot is annoying.