I think in this thread there's too much of the following:
"Braid had a bad story or bad grammar or was badly written." That's all that person is saying -- they aren't saying anything good or bad about the gameplay.
"But how could you think Braid is a bad game because of that?" Wait, they didn't say Braid was a bad game.
"Wait, are you defending Braid's story or grammar or writing?" No they aren't.
And the argument continues, neither side really seeing what the other side is saying.
This is actually really common on Internet forums. X__X
mspencer on
MEMBER OF THE PARANOIA GM GUILD
XBL Michael Spencer || Wii 6007 6812 1605 7315 || PSN MichaelSpencerJr || Steam Michael_Spencer || Ham NOØK QRZ || My last known GPS coordinates: FindU or APRS.fi (Car antenna feed line busted -- no ham radio for me X__X )
Am I the only one who didn't have any problems with the puzzles in this game? They were pretty easy.
Yes you are the only person in the world that had no problems.
Seriously though some of those took me a long time to figure out, one of the time bubble ones had me stuck for at least an hour or two. Then on my second play through I had to youtube it because I forgot how I did it the first time.
Am I the only one who didn't have any problems with the puzzles in this game? They were pretty easy.
Yes you are the only person in the world that had no problems.
It seems like it.
It's weird, I usually suck at puzzles.
Exactly. I almost ALWAYS have to look up an FAQ, and I didn't for this game. I was confused. And then I went online and saw everybody complaining about how hard it was and how they're having so much problems. I thought I was in some kind of bizaro world.
Am I the only one who didn't have any problems with the puzzles in this game? They were pretty easy.
Yes you are the only person in the world that had no problems.
It seems like it.
Actually I was serious, not sure why I put that second comment like that.
I found the game incredibly difficult once I had discovered the secret meta-end game thing.
Also, for anyone out there who doesn't get it or know what Braid is about or thinks its all up to speculation is really just losing out on a lot of the game's depth and meaning. The Witness will hopefully be like that too. Light story shell on the outside, deep soulcrushing void on the inside.
You joke, but if you read about what gameplay theorist types (ludologists, whatever) write, in books like Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals and What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy, they talk about meaningful play. Why do I care about playing this game? What motivates me to keep playing?
Well, some of what adds meaning to your play experience is social significance. If I play a lot of FPS games and post about it on the Internet, and I self-identify as an FPS gamer, new FPS games have an added significance for me: I can report on my experience playing them, and other people I care about will want to read what I've written.
So yes, talking about the game's ending can be considered part of the game. If you enjoyed discussing this game's ending, you might consider future titles from this developer more favorably because you may have an expectation that the future title's plot will also be discussion worthy.
mspencer on
MEMBER OF THE PARANOIA GM GUILD
XBL Michael Spencer || Wii 6007 6812 1605 7315 || PSN MichaelSpencerJr || Steam Michael_Spencer || Ham NOØK QRZ || My last known GPS coordinates: FindU or APRS.fi (Car antenna feed line busted -- no ham radio for me X__X )
If anything, the plot of Braid showed that things can be left a little too open to interpretation. It's okay to be a bit enigmatic, hell even very enigmatic, but go too far and you can alienate your audience.
That said I'm happy to embrace what the lack of clarity leaves behind and just enjoy weirdness for weirdness sake even if that's not what the creator intended.
I highly enjoyed Braid and am very much looking forward to this, though I'm intrigued by what kind of game we're getting:
Monkey Island-esque 'USE obscure metaphor WITH enigmatic writing'?
Something with a bit of platforming in still? Ooh, maybe like Dizzy Egg? That would be awesome and now I'll be sad if it doesn't turn out to be that.
I just stopped paying attention to the story about half way through. I think I enjoyed the remainder of the game more as a result. It was a good puzzler with weak platforming. I know, I know. "Platforming wasn't the point, its about the puzzles." But why not be good at both?
I love the pretentious-self-defense mechanism. If someone points out that your work is not very good, you just turn it around on them and explain how they failed as a viewer. I recently went to the local contemporary art center, and there were so many pieces that were visually uninteresting and required little or no actual skill from the artist. I'm sure if he/she were present, I would have been told that a much deeper meaning was completely lost on me.
Dirty on
0
RentI'm always rightFuckin' deal with itRegistered Userregular
Am I the only one who didn't have any problems with the puzzles in this game? They were pretty easy.
I didn't have a hard time (usually) figuring out what to do. I almost universally had a hard time pulling off the solution once I figured it out. From then on it felt like I was fighting the controls or the physics weren't quite right or something. Whatever it was, it made the game more frustrating than it needed to be.
It was a neat concept, and I like mucking with time, but the narrative didn't really do anything for me.
Am I the only one who didn't have any problems with the puzzles in this game? They were pretty easy.
I didn't have a hard time (usually) figuring out what to do. I almost universally had a hard time pulling off the solution once I figured it out. From then on it felt like I was fighting the controls or the physics weren't quite right or something. Whatever it was, it made the game more frustrating than it needed to be.
It was a neat concept, and I like mucking with time, but the narrative didn't really do anything for me.
That's interesting, because the general rule I found was that if your solution requires precise platforming, you're using the wrong solution.
Fickle Companion is really the only level where implementing the solution is harder than figuring it out.
Am I the only one who didn't have any problems with the puzzles in this game? They were pretty easy.
I didn't have a hard time (usually) figuring out what to do. I almost universally had a hard time pulling off the solution once I figured it out. From then on it felt like I was fighting the controls or the physics weren't quite right or something. Whatever it was, it made the game more frustrating than it needed to be.
It was a neat concept, and I like mucking with time, but the narrative didn't really do anything for me.
That's interesting, because the general rule I found was that if your solution requires precise platforming, you're using the wrong solution.
Fickle Companion is really the only level where implementing the solution is harder than figuring it out.
I may have done the first half of the game harder than I needed to, but the youtube walkthroughs that I used for the second half probably weren't the worlds hardest solutions.
Hum. If this is suppose to be a real sequel then since the first one was concievably about the main character stalking a woman, maybe this ones about him killing her.
I just stopped paying attention to the story about half way through. I think I enjoyed the remainder of the game more as a result. It was a good puzzler with weak platforming. I know, I know. "Platforming wasn't the point, its about the puzzles." But why not be good at both?
I love the pretentious-self-defense mechanism. If someone points out that your work is not very good, you just turn it around on them and explain how they failed as a viewer. I recently went to the local contemporary art center, and there were so many pieces that were visually uninteresting and required little or no actual skill from the artist. I'm sure if he/she were present, I would have been told that a much deeper meaning was completely lost on me.
My opinion on Braid was a lot like this.
It had a few good ideas but was horribly designed in a lot of ways.
The story was terrible, the presentation of the story was terrible, the platforming was terrible, the art added nothing to the game, and the PC port has no options to change graphics settings (that I know of). Also, "he should never have built the nuke because it was really hard and took a lot of time" completely shits on most scientific advancements without even realizing it. Hideo Kojima did "nukes are bad" better and I still cannot believe there is a game with a terrible enough story to make me think that.
While a lot of the time manipulation ideas were pretty cool, the fact that they never really came together in any sort of way really bugged me. You could never use the ring outside of the world it is used in, the "walk back and forth to move in time" concept is never used outside of its world, etc. This led to what I felt was generally lazy puzzle design when there was a lot of possibility for combining these concepts as they were introduced instead of just limiting them to one world (see World of Goo for an excellent example of doing this, along with getting right just about everything Braid screws up).
The music was good though.
JONJONAUG on
0
firewaterwordSatchitanandaPais Vasco to San FranciscoRegistered Userregular
edited March 2010
I think I'll wait for Soulja Boy's review on this one.
I just stopped paying attention to the story about half way through. I think I enjoyed the remainder of the game more as a result. It was a good puzzler with weak platforming. I know, I know. "Platforming wasn't the point, its about the puzzles." But why not be good at both?
I love the pretentious-self-defense mechanism. If someone points out that your work is not very good, you just turn it around on them and explain how they failed as a viewer. I recently went to the local contemporary art center, and there were so many pieces that were visually uninteresting and required little or no actual skill from the artist. I'm sure if he/she were present, I would have been told that a much deeper meaning was completely lost on me.
My opinion on Braid was a lot like this.
It had a few good ideas but was horribly designed in a lot of ways.
The story was terrible, the presentation of the story was terrible, the platforming was terrible, the art added nothing to the game, and the PC port has no options to change graphics settings (that I know of). Also, "he should never have built the nuke because it was really hard and took a lot of time" completely shits on most scientific advancements without even realizing it. Hideo Kojima did "nukes are bad" better and I still cannot believe there is a game with a terrible enough story to make me think that.
While a lot of the time manipulation ideas were pretty cool, the fact that they never really came together in any sort of way really bugged me. You could never use the ring outside of the world it is used in, the "walk back and forth to move in time" concept is never used outside of its world, etc. This led to what I felt was generally lazy puzzle design when there was a lot of possibility for combining these concepts as they were introduced instead of just limiting them to one world (see World of Goo for an excellent example of doing this, along with getting right just about everything Braid screws up).
The music was good though.
Careful with the spoilers, I think there are a few people who haven't played it yet.
I thought braid was successful as a game, as a puzzle, as a story that got me to think, and as a story told through gameplay. That last one, I'm not sure I've seen successfully anywhere else. The gameplay mechanics are all metaphors for the idea of the current chapter, and playing the game makes you think about and experience the idea of the chapter. I can't think of any other game that connects gameplay to story that way. Maybe Hard Rain, which works hard to make you feel what your character(s) are feeling through the gameplay.
I just stopped paying attention to the story about half way through. I think I enjoyed the remainder of the game more as a result. It was a good puzzler with weak platforming. I know, I know. "Platforming wasn't the point, its about the puzzles." But why not be good at both?
I love the pretentious-self-defense mechanism. If someone points out that your work is not very good, you just turn it around on them and explain how they failed as a viewer. I recently went to the local contemporary art center, and there were so many pieces that were visually uninteresting and required little or no actual skill from the artist. I'm sure if he/she were present, I would have been told that a much deeper meaning was completely lost on me.
My opinion on Braid was a lot like this.
It had a few good ideas but was horribly designed in a lot of ways.
The story was terrible, the presentation of the story was terrible, the platforming was terrible, the art added nothing to the game, and the PC port has no options to change graphics settings (that I know of). Also, "he should never have built the nuke because it was really hard and took a lot of time" completely shits on most scientific advancements without even realizing it. Hideo Kojima did "nukes are bad" better and I still cannot believe there is a game with a terrible enough story to make me think that.
While a lot of the time manipulation ideas were pretty cool, the fact that they never really came together in any sort of way really bugged me. You could never use the ring outside of the world it is used in, the "walk back and forth to move in time" concept is never used outside of its world, etc. This led to what I felt was generally lazy puzzle design when there was a lot of possibility for combining these concepts as they were introduced instead of just limiting them to one world (see World of Goo for an excellent example of doing this, along with getting right just about everything Braid screws up).
The music was good though.
Careful with the spoilers, I think there are a few people who haven't played it yet.
I don't think those are actually spoilers.
I think that's his idea of what the story is, grafted to the game. Which is weird, because I don't know why you'd attach a story you think is really bad.
I just stopped paying attention to the story about half way through. I think I enjoyed the remainder of the game more as a result. It was a good puzzler with weak platforming. I know, I know. "Platforming wasn't the point, its about the puzzles." But why not be good at both?
I love the pretentious-self-defense mechanism. If someone points out that your work is not very good, you just turn it around on them and explain how they failed as a viewer. I recently went to the local contemporary art center, and there were so many pieces that were visually uninteresting and required little or no actual skill from the artist. I'm sure if he/she were present, I would have been told that a much deeper meaning was completely lost on me.
My opinion on Braid was a lot like this.
It had a few good ideas but was horribly designed in a lot of ways.
The story was terrible, the presentation of the story was terrible, the platforming was terrible, the art added nothing to the game, and the PC port has no options to change graphics settings (that I know of). Also, "he should never have ________ because it was really hard and took a lot of time" completely shits on most scientific advancements without even realizing it. Hideo Kojima did "____ are bad" better and I still cannot believe there is a game with a terrible enough story to make me think that.
I agree the story was terrible, but the gameplay mechanics, music, and art were all excellent. Well... Some of that precision jumping was pretty shitty, but other than that.
And yeah, that PC port was shameful. He took all that time to bring it over and I don't think it even had gamepad support.
Posts
That is what the story is all about. The nuclear stuff is just one aspect of the princess, there are a bunch of others.
You can't hug a princess with nuclear arms.
and the princess said, "Now we are all sons of bitches."
"Braid had a bad story or bad grammar or was badly written." That's all that person is saying -- they aren't saying anything good or bad about the gameplay.
"But how could you think Braid is a bad game because of that?" Wait, they didn't say Braid was a bad game.
"Wait, are you defending Braid's story or grammar or writing?" No they aren't.
And the argument continues, neither side really seeing what the other side is saying.
This is actually really common on Internet forums. X__X
XBL Michael Spencer || Wii 6007 6812 1605 7315 || PSN MichaelSpencerJr || Steam Michael_Spencer || Ham NOØK
QRZ || My last known GPS coordinates: FindU or APRS.fi (Car antenna feed line busted -- no ham radio for me X__X )
nail on the head
Seriously though some of those took me a long time to figure out, one of the time bubble ones had me stuck for at least an hour or two. Then on my second play through I had to youtube it because I forgot how I did it the first time.
It seems like it.
Except for the one where you have to
Exactly. I almost ALWAYS have to look up an FAQ, and I didn't for this game. I was confused. And then I went online and saw everybody complaining about how hard it was and how they're having so much problems. I thought I was in some kind of bizaro world.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYb5ql2zYyg
ARRRRRRRRRRT!
...
I hope there are dinosaurs in this one too.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMDEmbhjfnY
Wondering if this will be a real retail release.
I found the game incredibly difficult once I had discovered the secret meta-end game thing.
Also, for anyone out there who doesn't get it or know what Braid is about or thinks its all up to speculation is really just losing out on a lot of the game's depth and meaning. The Witness will hopefully be like that too. Light story shell on the outside, deep soulcrushing void on the inside.
Very intriguing.
The meta ending is talking about the ending on internet forums.
That's really cool. Sort of a LoM feel to it.
On the black screen
:Applause:
Well, some of what adds meaning to your play experience is social significance. If I play a lot of FPS games and post about it on the Internet, and I self-identify as an FPS gamer, new FPS games have an added significance for me: I can report on my experience playing them, and other people I care about will want to read what I've written.
So yes, talking about the game's ending can be considered part of the game. If you enjoyed discussing this game's ending, you might consider future titles from this developer more favorably because you may have an expectation that the future title's plot will also be discussion worthy.
XBL Michael Spencer || Wii 6007 6812 1605 7315 || PSN MichaelSpencerJr || Steam Michael_Spencer || Ham NOØK
QRZ || My last known GPS coordinates: FindU or APRS.fi (Car antenna feed line busted -- no ham radio for me X__X )
Problem is I really dug Braid as a game and thought all the story shit was really pretentious
Very not looking forward to hearing about all that again; if anything, it's serving as a reason for me not to get it
That said I'm happy to embrace what the lack of clarity leaves behind and just enjoy weirdness for weirdness sake even if that's not what the creator intended.
I highly enjoyed Braid and am very much looking forward to this, though I'm intrigued by what kind of game we're getting:
Monkey Island-esque 'USE obscure metaphor WITH enigmatic writing'?
Something with a bit of platforming in still? Ooh, maybe like Dizzy Egg? That would be awesome and now I'll be sad if it doesn't turn out to be that.
I love the pretentious-self-defense mechanism. If someone points out that your work is not very good, you just turn it around on them and explain how they failed as a viewer. I recently went to the local contemporary art center, and there were so many pieces that were visually uninteresting and required little or no actual skill from the artist. I'm sure if he/she were present, I would have been told that a much deeper meaning was completely lost on me.
This has some amazing music, holy shit
It was a neat concept, and I like mucking with time, but the narrative didn't really do anything for me.
That's interesting, because the general rule I found was that if your solution requires precise platforming, you're using the wrong solution.
Fickle Companion is really the only level where implementing the solution is harder than figuring it out.
I may have done the first half of the game harder than I needed to, but the youtube walkthroughs that I used for the second half probably weren't the worlds hardest solutions.
My opinion on Braid was a lot like this.
It had a few good ideas but was horribly designed in a lot of ways.
The story was terrible, the presentation of the story was terrible, the platforming was terrible, the art added nothing to the game, and the PC port has no options to change graphics settings (that I know of). Also, "he should never have built the nuke because it was really hard and took a lot of time" completely shits on most scientific advancements without even realizing it. Hideo Kojima did "nukes are bad" better and I still cannot believe there is a game with a terrible enough story to make me think that.
While a lot of the time manipulation ideas were pretty cool, the fact that they never really came together in any sort of way really bugged me. You could never use the ring outside of the world it is used in, the "walk back and forth to move in time" concept is never used outside of its world, etc. This led to what I felt was generally lazy puzzle design when there was a lot of possibility for combining these concepts as they were introduced instead of just limiting them to one world (see World of Goo for an excellent example of doing this, along with getting right just about everything Braid screws up).
The music was good though.
Braid was awesome and I can't wait for this.
Careful with the spoilers, I think there are a few people who haven't played it yet.
I don't think those are actually spoilers.
I think that's his idea of what the story is, grafted to the game. Which is weird, because I don't know why you'd attach a story you think is really bad.
I agree the story was terrible, but the gameplay mechanics, music, and art were all excellent. Well... Some of that precision jumping was pretty shitty, but other than that.
And yeah, that PC port was shameful. He took all that time to bring it over and I don't think it even had gamepad support.