I agree about the camera; each of the three modes had serious isssues.
The "adventure" mode was very uncomfortable, often blocking the view with something else; the tactical one allowed to move more than one character at once, yet the field of view was so limited to prevent me to see distant enemies (in range for my archers, nonetheless); the free look had a smiliar fault, only it was less frustrating and I eneded up using it for 95% of the game.
I completley forgot to mention that when I wrote my comment some time ago...

I didn't know about the "teleporting" characters, as I never save during battles.

Just for curiosity, which race and class did you choose?

Well, I do mostly before battles, e.g. sometimes I put my characters in a good tactical position, set a trap, prepare for the fight, save, and then lure and attack the opponents. I don't need to reload often, but it can happen that my wonderful plan is foiled only due to bad AI behavior and pathfinding and I won't have that! ;) Only when I reloaded in these cases, the careful tactical positioning was lost.

And that instance where I found out about the opponent's position was the arena fight. It was preceded by a long stretch of dialogues and cutscenes and I didn't want to have to go through them again, in case I lost the fight, so as soon as I got control of my character again, I quicksaved.

Nothing spectacular, (neutral good) female human cleric. (And my old character was the same, only aasimar instead of human.)

Part of my character choices are cosmetic (and I hate to say it, but the best looking characters are almost always human female in these games, so there's hardly a choice), part are for roleplaying reasons (some characters seem a bit more out of place in the environment the game puts them in), and part of it is not wanting to deal with disadvantages (weaker stats, slower level progression), even if means getting advantages in exchange.

The cleric choice is mostly due to the game mechanics. I'm not that fond of their religious background, but it can be easily ignored most of the time, and as a character class I find they are the most versatile and also easy to play because they're overpowered allrounders. They can wear heavy armor and fight, they can buff, they can heal, they can turn undead, they can summon allies to fight for them and they can even cast offensive AOE spells, and that's the most fun to me. In the end my party mostly consisted of two clerics, the druid and the sorceror, and they would summon devils and elementals as melee fighters and distractions and then blast the opponents with AOE spells while healing and resurrecting each other if something went wrong. Worked pretty well. :D (I even taught Qara the Knock spell, so that I wouldn't always need a rogue in the party, but when I did that, the game was almost over already ... I wish I'd thought of that before.)

Sounds like a strong team. Sounds hard to kill, in rpg's that's usually the wisest idea. I usually relegate clerics to healing and druids to second rate melee'ers. But a team made up of jack of all trades sounds adaptable.

I thought that battle was terrible, btw. *SPOILER* First they build up so much tension and then the actual duel is less than glorious, because that ridiculous "can't die during frenzy" ability of the opponent meant that the best (maybe only?) tactic for me to win this fight was to just summon an elemental, quaff a Haste potion and then run circles around the arena until his frenzy wears off and he dies a second later from the elemental attacks. I was prepared to fire my whole arsenal of spells on him or use items and try to come up with all kinds of tactics, but the only difficult part of the fight is that you need to be patient, because you can't do shit during his frenzy. Where's the fun in that? */SPOILER*

Neutral good worked for me most of the times, since the good choices always feel more natural and rewarding than the evil ones, and the neutral ones, if there are any, are boring, but the neutral good left me some room to decide for or against discipline and law depending on circumstances. I had to watch out that I wouldn't become too lawful though, with all this stupid City Watch business (that part felt like a choice between lawful and evil; I would have preferred to neither get involved with the watchmen nor with the thieves, there should have been a third way - like just climbing over the district wall or something :D).

Yeah, I totally agree. Another bad design choice is that the talking (that is role-playing) skills (Diplomacy, Intimidate, Bluff) are partly treated as class-specific.

I even encouraged the pyromaniac snob and almost became best friends with her! :D From a gameplay POV she was one of my favorite characters, but since you played a magic user yourself, I can see why you had less incentives to try and get along with her personality. :D

(She can't beat Edwin from BG though, I give you that.)

My current character is a follower of Oghma. I don't think I can change that retroactively, can I?

[DISCLAIMER : I am in a miserably sh*tty mood, so don't take me too seriously]...
I don't write my thoughts in here very often, but sometimes a game so exceptionally terrible as McPixel comes along, and I have to get the miserable experience off my chest.
The "game" consists of clicking random objects on the screen until you see a "gag". Usually, you have to click two objects in the correct order, which will make zero sense at all and is horrible moon logic. If you click the wrong object, or if you run out of time (20 seconds) you lose, move to the next level, and return later.
The entire selling point of the game as far as I can tell is its random comedy. It is like playing an episode of Family Guy combined with a MacGruber skit, except it somehow tries even less, and you have to pay for it.
It might have been funny or interesting (and still bad) if it came out 20 years earlier. It's not art. It's not parody. It's a cheap trick by a developer to try to get money based on being "the most bizarre of the month". Congratulations to them for succeeding.
This was the first Steam Greenlight game. What a perfect way to sum up that horrible idea.
I paid a dollar for this worthless pile of steaming crap, which was about forty-five dollars too much.
I never tell people to not play a game, but... here we are.
This is quite honestly the worst video game I've ever played, and I played "Gods and Generals" from beginning to end.
Zero out of a billion.

No, tell us what you really think! I couldn't resist checking to see and it was there...http://www.gog.com/wishlist/games/mcpixel... one person even says it's totally awesome.

I looked too and it has 9/10 rating on Steam and "very positive" rating from almost 3000 reviews.

I expected some trash as is usual but this looks more like personal distaste.

Possibly, but personal taste is fine as he explained well enough why he doesn't like it and it's probably not my sort of game either to be honest.

Yeah, sure. I wasn't telling he is wrong or shouldn't post what he did. Just that I expected universally hated game and was surpirsed it wasn't.

Really? If you like totally random, "funny just because it doesn't make sense" type humor, you might get some laughs. If you don't, there is absolutely nothing here for you. I'd say it is a really bad game at its core, wrapped in humor which you may or may not enjoy based on personal taste.

edit : Then again, in total fairness, I am in a miserably sh*tty mood lately, so you can't take me too seriously :-p Maybe I should add that to my original post...

I've played a bit of McPixel and what AgentBirdnest says about the gameplay is accurate, and it's fair enough not to like it, so I don't see anything wrong with his opinion, even if my reaction to it was not that extreme. I didn't think it was a bad game, just a (intentionally) weird one. People find Goat Simulator hilarious too and have fun with it, while I had to find out that I can't really relate to that and found it rather "meh" and not worth the asking price.

The only issue I'd take with the review would be the notion that the developer tricked people into buying the game. If I recall correctly he was one of those who used the Pirate Bay for promotion without antagonizing its users. It also has a free demo and $1 lost isn't a good reason to complain; worse is the time lost on it if you didn't enjoy it. Since this is "Games finished in 2015", did you actually play through the whole game even though you hated it?

Crime Life 3

Just finished a freeware thing called Crime Life 3 which is a blatant GTA rip off made by a lad in his bedroom in GameMaker 3, it's very short and claims to only be a beta (0.6) but its been like that for years now
http://crimelife3.blogspot.co.uk/

What happened to the first 2 Crime Life games? Well a mission structure was never implemented in them for a start so they're not really finishable, the first one was apparently a 2d top down affair like the original GTA, I say 'apparently' because the download only seems to include the exe file without the data folder so it's not runnable
The 2nd one amuses me in that 'Sakis25' didn't implement missions but bit implement a full San Andreas style wardrobe feature with many changes to costume - priorities much?

But still, don't want to be too harsh, it's better than I could do with GameMaker 3 anyway!
He did also implement a checkpoint race (with no opponents) and a 'steal cars to order' garage in the 3rd one, which weere fun to find and mess around with too...
Anyways - full list:
http://www.gog.com/forum/general/games_finished_in_2015/post118

I didn't mean it as if they were actually tricking people into buying it, or scamming people (and you are correct, they did promote it on PB.) They made an actual product and delivered it. To me, it feels like they found the (legitimate) trick to make money without making a good game. So many developers make quality games, and this, to me, felt like they knew it was poor quality but hoped that the bizarreness would cover it up.
Yes, I played through the entire thing, otherwise I would have posted in the "Games Quitted in 2015" thread.

I genuinely liked McPixel. I can definitely understand why people would hate it, and a lot of those reasons are justified. But for me, it was irreverent dumb fun.

Opinions are very weird things. It's certainly strange to think that a game is irredeemably awful and then see that it has a "Very Positive" rating on Steam. I definitely know that feeling - one of my most hated games has a 97% rating on Steam (ugh). It makes you feel like the whole world is crazy. But I guess you just have to find a way of accepting that people have their own complex set of personal reasons for hating/loving something.