One of the games I don't like, but did play, was Super Meat Boy. There's lots to like, don't get me wrong, but SMB falls for me on two issues. One, I find it pretty outright boring. Two, it's just ugly. There's care and detail put into the sprite work, but the puerile love of raspberry jam upon every surface just felt like something a 13 year old would dream up. When I was 13 I thought rare steak was icky cuz blood came out! At this age, that protein saturated solution - Not blood, by the way - Just looks very dull indeed. I've read it's a really popular indie game, but I have a feeling it's popular in that way that doesn't matter to me. There's games people like, and there's games people like but talk about. You'll see a common thread in the latter group are, from time to time, that they feel accomplishment in finishing a difficult game.
I don't care if you've ever done anything in any single player game ever because it was difficult. What you do in your own time, man.
Anyway, I have no idea why I'd want to buy They Bleed Pixels. I thought the game's art assets looked neat, but I knew full on it was described as "like Super Meat Boy, but there's some combat". Does that sound good, knowing I didn't like the other game in the mix? Does adding combat to anything you don't like make them good games?But then they added steam cards to They Bleed and it went on sale on GMG (which finally works with my visa, I don't know what changed but hurray!) for a price that when you get like 50 cents a card ends up mostly paying for the game. I think I'll try anything at twenty five cents. Hell I bought the RIP trilogy for a dollar and I can't even amass the effort to be mad at that.
