Jonathan Blow's Next Game - The Witness

beeporama wrote:

I sure hope Mr. Blow doesn't come over to my house with a gun and force me to play this game, too.

He'll be watching to make sure you don't cheat.

Waiting.

Watching.

...through a scope.

Switchbreak wrote:

If dealing with pretension is the price I have to pay for people creating games that try new and interesting things (even if they fail), I don't really have a problem with that.

Agreed. I'm willing to deal with stupidity and even Jehovah's Witnesses, the idea of people praising the next generic space marine FPS makes me cringe. Give me something else, no matter how much it sucks.

Here's the problem that I had with Braid's "meaning": The story had absolutely nothing to do with the gameplay. The text of the game could have been removed completely, and I honestly don't think that the game would lost anything at all.

I tried to understand the story, but it really didn't do anything for me, entirely because it didn't make any sense from the beginning. It didn't make sense when I beat the game, and it really wasn't until I read a FAQ that it began to make sense. That I had to go to an external source to make sense of a self-contained story is, for me, is a huge failure on Blow's part.

cube wrote:

Here's the problem that I had with Braid's "meaning": The story had absolutely nothing to do with the gameplay. The text of the game could have been removed completely, and I honestly don't think that the game would lost anything at all.

I tried to understand the story, but it really didn't do anything for me, entirely because it didn't make any sense from the beginning. It didn't make sense when I beat the game, and it really wasn't until I read a FAQ that it began to make sense. That I had to go to an external source to make sense of a self-contained story is, for me, is a huge failure on Blow's part.

Exactly. That was my main problem with it, too.

I kind of agree with you on that point. I think the narrative does connect to the gameplay on a lot of intellectual levels - the ideas of time representing memory, forgiveness, consequences, delusion that arise from the gameplay are integral to the ideas in the text portions - but I didn't think that the narrative hooks into the actions of the player on any emotional level. The gameplay is abstract and distant, and it doesn't give you a sense of place or connection to your actions beyond cold symbolism. I kind of consider Braid to be a noble failure in this sense, where I can see the ambition and the thought and care that went into it but I just can't connect with it. It's enough to get me interested in what Blow does next, though.

TheArtOfScience wrote:

Quoting the Tao Te Ching? C'mon, that's more college coffee shop talk.

Why? Is the Tao Te Ching itself college coffee shop talk? Or is the idea that it could have something meaningful to say about the game absurd? Neither premise seems remotely right to me.

The man is identifying a high ambition, but it is wildly premature to assume he has already failed.

grobstein wrote:
TheArtOfScience wrote:

Quoting the Tao Te Ching? C'mon, that's more college coffee shop talk.

Why? Is the Tao Te Ching itself college coffee shop talk? Or is the idea that it could have something meaningful to say about the game absurd? Neither premise seems remotely right to me.

The man is identifying a high ambition, but it is wildly premature to assume he has already failed.

It's more vague, ambiguous, "deep" thoughts.

I'm not dissing the Tao te ching. I've read it many times and there is much wisdom to be had from it. That said, you have to go into it with the knowledge that everyone gets something different out of the Tao.

What I'm saying is that it is safe. It's safe because it is vauge and ambiguous. It's safe because it is the sort of thing that people quote all the time without really having thought about it or understanding it as it applies to them in their individual life.

It's the sort of thing that people like to debate about which defeats the purpose because the Tao more or less eschews debate.

People often discuss that sort of stuff to sound smart as opposed to actually learning something or enlightening themselves.

If Mr. Blow wants me to think then give me something meaty to think about in context. I like games that give me pause.

I think the post explaining how the gameplay and the storyline aren't contextually linked is a good one and mirrors how I feel. The story adds artificial depth. In order for it to be thought provoking it should be woven throughout the gameplay so that the player feels a sense of ownership in the plot.

TheArtOfScience wrote:

I think the post explaining how the gameplay and the storyline aren't contextually linked is a good one and mirrors how I feel. The story adds artificial depth. In order for it to be thought provoking it should be woven throughout the gameplay so that the player feels a sense of ownership in the plot.

Hmm, I felt differently about Braid. But at least we should agree that the story was trying to be about the game, and vice versa. Getting involved in the time travel puzzles was supposed to open you to thinking about the ways in which people "time travel" in their minds, which seemingly was the subject matter of the stories. The questing in the stories -- whether for a girl or for SCIENCE I guess -- is meant to comment on the questing in the game, and in other games -- hence the appearance of the brown dinosaur quoting Mario lines. Etc.

It worked for me, but it was definitely more associative than logical, and when you reason by association you face the risk that you won't take everyone with you.

It's the kind of thing -- and here I am freely imagining -- that will work for you if you like A Lesson Is Learned, or Haruki Murakami, etc., but not everyone does.

I didn't see anything wrong with Braid's narrative elements. It would not have made sense to construct a coherent linear narrative; that would have diminished the otherworldly aspect of the gameplay. Think about it.

Hot techie female on radio: "Hey John, you better hurry up! The battery in your time watch is running low!"

John Fenicks: "I NEED A WEAPON. WITH A CHAINSAW ON IT."

Hot techie female on radio: "What? No, you just have to find some puzzle pieces and then go through the door at the end. Then you can do the One-Winged Princess Bomb Boss Fight of Tedium, but not before we make a half-assed effort at inserting a false crisis and then two minutes later deus ex machina that sh*t into oblivion using Geotimebots and/or a giant sliptime portal."

John Fenicks: "SWEET."

I'm with others here: I felt that Braid's vagaries gave the story its strength. It's an associative, tone-based piece, and I expect that The Mission will be no different.

Out of curiosity, for those of you who felt that the narrative and gameplay elements should have been better integrated: what games do you consider to have successfully managed that interweaving? I can't think of many games, if any at all, that successfully combine their gameplay, narrative, and symbolic meanings into a coherent whole.

grobstein wrote:

It's the kind of thing -- and here I am freely imagining -- that will work for you if you like A Lesson Is Learned, or Haruki Murakami, etc., but not everyone does.

Thanks for the link to A Lesson Is Learned. For those of you who are curious, I suggest reading the comic in reverse order. The first few comics are the worst, so by the time you finish it'll be time to leave.

adam.greenbrier wrote:

Out of curiosity, for those of you who felt that the narrative and gameplay elements should have been better integrated: what games do you consider to have successfully managed that interweaving? I can't think of many games, if any at all, that successfully combine their gameplay, narrative, and symbolic meanings into a coherent whole.

For me, I would compare Braid with Flower. Flower never takes you outside of your actions to expound on what it means, but it contextualizes them with an idea of place. The game expresses itself and makes it feel effortless. In Braid, I constantly felt that there was symbolism there, that one could read into the gameplay, but never felt that there was a reality to it. All of the basic elements to it, the enemies, the cannons, the keys and doors, were abstracts. You get this text that is flowery and full of feeling, and this impressionistic art and evocative music, but then you get into the game mechanics themselves and they are simple, analytical and distant. The mechanics symbolize a lot, but evoke nothing.

This is pretty funny.

adam.greenbrier wrote:

I have no beef with Jonathan Blow. All of my interactions with him have been pleasant, and he responded to a fairly critical piece about his game here with a lot of class.

Is a link floating around somewhere? I'd like to read that.

93_confirmed wrote:
adam.greenbrier wrote:

I have no beef with Jonathan Blow. All of my interactions with him have been pleasant, and he responded to a fairly critical piece about his game here with a lot of class.

Is a link floating around somewhere? I'd like to read that.

Do a search. He actually came on GWJ's message boards.

Rabbit's article - http://www.gamerswithjobs.com/node/4...
Blow's response - http://www.gamerswithjobs.com/node/4...

PS - Now that I re-read it, Blow's response isn't to Rabbit's article itself but to the discussion in the comments.

Actually, I see now why people hate Jonathan Blow so much given that he said the following...

Jonathan Blow wrote:

I philosophically support the campaign of Pol Pot

I don't think the internet necessarily misuses the word "pretentious," but I think it is thrown around as a cudgel far, far too often. There seems to be a paranoia on the internet about elitism that may not be completely misplaced but which has the unfortunate effect of stifling creativity and ambition. If dealing with pretension is the price I have to pay for people creating games that try new and interesting things (even if they fail), I don't really have a problem with that.

Exactly my thoughts. I know as soon as I step into any Jonathon Blow thread that half the posts will include the word pretetious. Whether he is or not, I don't really care. I just hope he continues to make interesting and creative games like Braid.

Ulairi wrote:
interstate78 wrote:

Pretentious?

I think the definition of pretentious has something to do with having a loud mouth but then not delivering-- Braid was mind-blowing.

I'd rather have a guy trying to make Art Games than someone tugging at my wallet with yearly sequels and DLC that should've been in the finished product in the first place.

At least someone's trying.

Bbraid was an art game? It seemed like just a Mario clone to me. Didn't Miyamoto make that back before games were ART? *making the Tim Burton artist face*

Did you not play the game? Braid is as close to Mario as Portal is to Doom.

Hey, I had a public show-piddling match with Jonathan Blow on this very message board, and I will still commit to paying 50 bucks for whatever his fractured (yes, pretentious), brilliant (yes, very self-absorbed), brain comes up with next. I don't have to like the artist to necessarily love the art, but then, my thoughts on this have been pretty well when I called Braid a "monumental work of twisted, pompous, overly-clever genius."

I'll pay to ride that train again, and I'll probably scowl all the way to the end and then replay it again,

I'd guess half the people calling Blow a bad game designer have never looked at more than a screenshot of Braid, and fully 90% never made it past the first level and rage quit in frustration. I'd defy anyone who actually played it through to believe that it was not masterful on a level to rival, not imitate, classic Miyamoto work-- wishy-washy philosophy notwithstanding.

Due diligence, fellows. Due diligence.

Schmutzli wrote:

I'd guess half the people calling Blow a bad game designer have never looked at more than a screenshot of Braid, and fully 90% never made it past the first level and rage quit in frustration. I'd defy anyone who actually played it through to believe that it was not masterful on a level to rival, not imitate, classic Miyamoto work-- wishy-washy philosophy notwithstanding.

Due diligence, fellows. Due diligence.

Exactly my thoughts. The fact that some people still think it's a game that has anything to do with Mario is tragic.

Oh look, some people see half-way decent writing and start screaming their heads off about pretentiousness. No one we keep getting served sh*t-sandwiches instead of plots in our video games.

Whoa. I'm completely lost.

interstate78 wrote:

A lot of people's reaction remind me of high school, when it was not cool to be nerdy and ask intelligent questions in class.

QFT.

From what I can gather, J.B. created a great game. From the response he left on the forum, he seems down to earth. I've never played Braid but it's not like the guy is EA or Activision.

It's a shame that no matter what he creates now, the discussion will focus on the pretentious dude who made that awesome game with confusing text in it.

Mystic Violet wrote:

Whoa. I'm completely lost.

interstate78 wrote:

A lot of people's reaction remind me of high school, when it was not cool to be nerdy and ask intelligent questions in class.

QFT.

From what I can gather, J.B. created a great game. From the response he left on the forum, he seems down to earth. I've never played Braid but it's not like the guy is EA or Activision.

It's a shame that no matter what he creates now, the discussion will focus on the pretentious dude who made that awesome game with confusing text in it.

Yeah, it is. The game became about him. That's kind of his fault, kind of our fault. I think mostly ours (gamers writ large), though. The game didn't give you a traditional narrative. We complained, he replied with an answer many didn't like and now his story is part of the story of the game. Either way, keep creative games coming. Ignore us.

So, how long you think until J-Blow shows up with a post in this thread? It's happened before, it'll happen again...

How long till msdmoney fixes his quote tags?! Grr.

If you're not sure what you did wrong, you have an extra "/quote" bit in there

Oh look, some people see half-way decent writing and start screaming their heads off about pretentiousness. No one we keep getting served sh*t-sandwiches instead of plots in our video games.

No. People are screaming their heads off about pretentiousness because the writing in Braid was given such a prominent place in the game, struggled desperately to be meaningful, and was utterly atrocious. Braid contained the worst writing of any video game I have ever played, including Halo 3 and that one Final Fantasy game that contained the phrase "spoony bard". Let's look at some specific examples, shall we?

"Memories of their relationship have become muddled, replaced wholesale, but one remains clear: the Princess turning sharply away, her braid lashing at him with contempt."

"But to be fully couched within the comfort of a friend is a mode of existence with severe implications. To please you perfectly, she must understand you perfectly. Thus you cannot defy her expectations or escape her reach. Her benevolence has circumscribed you, and your life’s achievements will not reach beyond the map she has drawn."

"But the ring makes its presence known. It shines out to others like a beacon of warning. It makes people slow to approach. Suspicion, distrust. Interactions are torpedoed before Tim can open his mouth."

I hate it when interactions are torpedoed because rings shine out like a beacon of warning, don't you? Really, try saying these out loud in a straight face. You can't.

Faceless Clock wrote:

Oh look, some people see half-way decent writing and start screaming their heads off about pretentiousness. No one we keep getting served sh*t-sandwiches instead of plots in our video games.

Braid's narrative, taken as a whole, was not good writing. The gameplay itself, on a purely technical level, was incredibly well done, the puzzles were all, almost without exception, brilliantly designed and executed. The writing was flawed, and the fact that Blow seemed to make that the biggest point of the game is what I feel is one of his greatest failures on this project.

The narrative throughout the entire game, until the end, seems to be a love story(and if it had stayed that way, I think the narrative would have worked much better). The text on the first few levels connected to the level themes quite well. However, they didn't seem to actually do ANYTHING with regards to what the player was experiencing. Like I said earlier, the narrative does not drive the game. The player's actions do not have any effect on the narrative, and the narrative does not effect the player. They exist in completely different spaces, which, while it can possibly be taken as commentary on gamers and the games they play, it's way too subtle, and makes the game as a whole weaker.

The Epilogue is the breaking point for me. It lacks not only any resolution of the story, but it's also not even consistent with itself. Which is a huge issue, because the topic of the atomic bomb comes literally out of nowhere, without any foreshadowing.

I commit to being a fan of the work of mr.Blow, and his way of thinking. Braid was great, and the obtuseness of the written story seamed like a meaningful feature that if nothing else provided a good backdrop for the game. I never tried to decode the text in the clouds, i read them just as i would listen to someone reading a complicated metaphorical poem. I just let them flow past me, and only allow myself to create a very vague intuitive picture, without letting reasoning get in the way. That way the text provided a great backdrop to a gameplay that worked the same way for me: The mind said it was impossible, but soon you are solving the puzzle almost intuitively.

I think a great descriptor for how mr.Blow's mind works is from a great interview with him from a game-conference in Montreal.

The interview starts out with him talking about the meaning of Braid, and the development of the game. After a while though, the interview moves on to his next project and what he got out of a conference like the one he was attending. Jonathan sighed and answered something to the point of "there's just noone out there that wants to do what i want to do, that's interested in what I am interested in." The look on his face was one of slight despair, as I recall.

I'm parafrasing, but that moment really crystalized to me what he was about.

IjonTichy wrote:

I hate it when interactions are torpedoed because rings shine out like a beacon of warning, don't you? Really, try saying these out loud in a straight face. You can't.

I thought the specific examples of writing you quoted were lovely. They did make me have to think a bit to decode them, but fortunately I read at a tenth grade level.

I'm not saying "I'm right and you're wrong." It's subjective. You don't have to like the writing, which perhaps suffers from verbosity. But I think it's unfair to say the writing is objectively terrible.

I thought the writing in Gears Of War 2 "struggled desperately to be meaningful, and was utterly atrocious." Nobody bothers discussing its writing at all.

Prof.Science wrote:

The look on his face was one of slight despair, as I recall.

I'm parafrasing, but that moment really crystalized to me what he was about.

How so? I mean, that moment would make me laugh, honestly. I can understand being frustrated because there isn't more narrative creativity in video games, but it's still a medium for having fun. Not everything has to be art. So to look like you're in despair over the state of video games, that starts to become pretentious to me.