Nice looking games.

I'm a fan of pixel art, but the incongruous mixing of different resolution assets here just makes it the screenshots look like quick mockups made in MSpaint. The sprites and tiles don't look like they're even from the same game.

EDIT: It would appear my criticisms only apply to the first game. The second one seems to completely address this and looks rather nice. Very strange that the first one is apparently remastered and didn't bring it up to the standards of the second though.

25% discount to get the bundle vs the individual games, at least here in the US. Not too shabby.

Hey, thanks for the reply and reacting so maturely to my harsh words. I had assumed the first one was remastered after the second, but this makes a lot of sense now.

If/when you can afford it, getting the person who worked on the second to work on the first might be a solid investment. I may be alone here, but I'm unlikely to play the second game without playing the first and I'm unlikely to play the first game because of the way it looks. What I'm getting at is that the first one might adversely affect the sales of the second slightly. Of course, you have access to the sales data which might completely contradict what I'm saying.

Either way, I'll bow out of the thread now and await the (possible) second remastering of the first game. :)

It would be nice if the Bundle bundled the Bundle versions instead of the Standard versions. There's no easy way on GOG to complete your collection with a Bundle, making it a bit of a bundling bumble. (The listing isn't clear either way, I suppose.)

Psychologically, it's also better to include a posted discount on the Bundle price, even if only 10%. IOW, the Bundle is listed as $24. You could instead list it for $30 (the total of the two base game retails) and have it be 20% off. It would show up in Discount searches, too.

EDIT: This would be a good example to copy:
https://www.gog.com/en/game/bloodrayne_terminal_cut_bundle

Individual games: $15 each, $30 total
Bundle price: $24
Sale price currently, 10% off for $21 and change.

Sympathetic response, sympathetic developer. I like the retro style.

I'll be purchasing the bundle in the near future, but for now I've got a whole stack of games to play.

Haven't played either game yet (and haven't bought the second game), but there's one thing I'm wondering about the game design:
* Is it a high-attrition game, where much of the challenge comes from managing your resources and getting them to last until the next safe spot (like a town)? or
* Is it a low-attrition game, where the challenge is about the individual encounters, with most important resources recovering automatically?
* Or do the two games take opposite approaches?

I note that this particular decision is a rather significant one from a game design perspectives, as it has many ripple effects throughout the game. For example, a spell that can, at high cost, win most random battles with a single cast would be gamebreaking in a low-attrition game (as the player would just use the spell every battle), but could work in a high-attrition game (is it worth using it in this encounter, or is the encounter not dangerous enough to warrant it?). There's also the fact that high-attrition lends itself to longer dungeons with more encounters, while low-attrition lends itself to fewer, more involved, encounters.