More Braid
August 23rd, 2008I finally played through Braid (my short verdict: interesting, admirable, and challenging, but also inconsistent and overbearingly pretentious), although I can’t help but feel that I missed out on the moment while overseas. Fortunately, The Brainy Gamer has sponsored a Vs. Mode-style dialogue on the game with Vs. Clu-Clu Land, which you can find the start of here.
Posted in Geoff, Xbox Live |
August 23rd, 2008 at 8:54 am
There’s a lot of talk lately about different kinds of gamers. It sounds like Michael Abbott may just not be the right “type” for Braid. Most of us who loved it would be horrified at the prospect of looking up the solutions to the game’s puzzles — the whole point, gameplay-wise, was to figure them out. It sounds like Abbott just gets frustrated with brain teasers and gave up.
Here’s an article on Insult Swordfighting, where Mitch references a Penny Arcade post (they didn’t include a link and I can’t be bothered to find the original, as they’ve quoted the relevant part). In it, they divide players into two groups: “skill players” and “tourists.” I won’t get into more detail as the linked article does so already. I think there are more than the two groups, but I do think that the tourists are an important group that people who aren’t in that group don’t necessarily understand. Michael Abbott didn’t play Braid for the challenge. He wanted to see it all, and when his inability to solve the puzzles got in the way of that, he got frustrated and cheated, and in so doing, missed the point of the gameplay completely.
August 23rd, 2008 at 8:55 am
I should clarify that I don’t think there’s anything wrong with being a tourist. I just think that’s why he didn’t like Braid.
August 23rd, 2008 at 12:05 pm
I got frustrated with a few puzzles as well, but it’s not because I was a tourist - it’s because the game didn’t do a great job of actually presenting options effectively. On several occasions, I solved puzzles by accident because even after having won I failed to understand *why* the game should behave a certain way. This was particularly true of Worlds 5 and 6.
Take, for example, the last puzzle in World 5 - which I think completely violates the internal logic of the game’s “shadow” mechanic. Once I resorted to a walkthrough to figure this puzzle out, I was actually *more* frustrated because the solution seemed contraindicated by Braid’s design.
Now, I resorted to a walkthrough on perhaps 4 occasions overall - and in 2 of the 4 situations, I was doing what I was supposed to - but the game made actually accomplishing that objective so difficult that I wasn’t sure if what I intended was even possible. I view this, along with the overly pretentious exposition style, as game design flaws.
To be sure, these are relatively minor flaws… I liked Braid more than Abbott. But it’s not at all obvious to me that you can’t look for a challenge and still be frustrated by problems in the game that impact your ability to enjoy those puzzles.
August 23rd, 2008 at 1:11 pm
Unlike Abbott, I recognized early on (via the demo) that I was not the right type of gamer for Braid (whatever that is).
“I was actually *more* frustrated because the solution seemed contraindicated by Braid’s design.”
I felt the same way about contradictory mechanics that were simply arbitrary “breaks” in the established universe in order to create a challenge.
I’m somewhere between Abbott and Geoff I think. Not so much disliking the game as much as just not seeing anything particularly amazing about it. I’m not sure if I said it on this site or not, but I LOVE puzzlers that stump me…..with a caveat. I love puzzlers that stump me such that when I finally get the answer, I experience a small moment of wonder and awe at how I could have missed the solution. I don’t like puzzlers that stump me such that when I finally get the solution, it’s an “Oh, well duh!” moment.
I definitely got the impression that for me, Braid would be much more of the latter than the former.
August 23rd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Cisco-
I’m not sure if you saw, but there was no flaw in the internal logic of the game for your original complaint (a few posts back). The key came with you after reversing because it had a green glow. Green objects are not affected by any of the time distortions in the game.
There is, in fact, a level that very cleverly (and frustratingly) gives you a regular key that actually behaves completely independently from you, and you have to figure out how to get it in the right place at the right time for you to use. =)
And for the record, I didn’t have a problem with any puzzle except for 1… though I can understand the complaint Geoff has about the one he refers to on World 5. When I played that one, I was perhaps slightly confused, but I managed to give the solution a try so quickly that it didn’t bother me. In other words, I saw the puzzle and immediately recognized a way to try and tackle it, and in many ways this is the point of the game.
The one puzzle I had a problem with is one where I had no prior idea of why something would react the way it did. I suppose it was another thing that I was just supposed to try, but it certainly was unclear as to why I would even want to try it.
August 23rd, 2008 at 7:52 pm
“The key came with you after reversing because it had a green glow.”
That’s exactly my point. Arbitrarily allowing objects in the game to ignore the “rules” is a bit lame to me. Oh, so it’s green therefore time doesn’t effect it, why didn’t I think of that!
You actually said it better than me here: “The one puzzle I had a problem with is one where I had no prior idea of why something would react the way it did.”
Kind of like how you’d never know green items don’t follow the time effects unless you try it?
Anyway, I’m glad to read Abbott and Geoffs impressions so I don’t feel like I’m completely out of my mind.
August 23rd, 2008 at 9:51 pm
That’s exactly my point. Arbitrarily allowing objects in the game to ignore the “rules” is a bit lame to me. Oh, so it’s green therefore time doesn’t effect it, why didn’t I think of that!
…
Kind of like how you’d never know green items don’t follow the time effects unless you try it?
But the game is, in fact, very careful in this case to introduce you to the mechanic. Most of the worlds start off with a variation on “The Pit,” in which the mechanic is demonstrated to you.
I don’t think it’s reasonable to object to something like green keys just because you haven’t seen the mechanic before. All of the other mechanics in the game are alien to you when you first see them, too. The game makes an effort to demonstrate the mechanic in a simple way before requiring you to extrapolate it to more complex situations.
The only puzzle I really had a problem with was the one in the Cloud Bridge in World 2 by the painting. That mechanic is never seen again, before or after that puzzle.
Geoff, which puzzles did you still not understand after completing them? It may have taken me a while to bungle my way through some of them, but by the time I was done I think I always understood why it worked the way it did.
August 23rd, 2008 at 10:29 pm
“All of the other mechanics in the game are alien to you when you first see them, too. The game makes an effort to demonstrate the mechanic in a simple way before requiring you to extrapolate it to more complex situations.”
I should add that this could be a complaint for every game ever made. The “green glow” is a game mechanic that’s used in the game that works within the games internal logic in a consistent manner, and it does not cheat. The same goes for other games “mechanics”.
For instance, Bionic Commando’s claw… Some surfaces you can grapple to… but others you cannot. Should I complain that there are some surfaces that you can’t grapple to? Of course not, that’s a game mechanic, and it’s consistently applied throughout the whole game.
Different games for different people, but I really do think you’re missing out on something cisco if you don’t play the whole game. While the demo gives you sort of a general idea of how the game controls, there’s actually a lot of really clever puzzles in the game that are not at all like what you see in the demo… Unless you just don’t like puzzles or this kind of game (tourists vs. skill, etc), I don’t think it’s a game to miss.
For the record, the 1 puzzle that gave me trouble was the second piece on the level called “Crossing the Gap” . Every other puzzle in the game I solved myself and didn’t feel cheated by the solution. Believe me when I say that this is far different than understanding or not understanding green objects. It doesn’t cheat, but unless you’re lucky, you probably wouldn’t ever see the mechanic that’s used for the solution (unlike the green objects, which is a core mechanic throughout the whole game).
August 23rd, 2008 at 11:40 pm
“I don’t think it’s reasonable to object to something like green keys just because you haven’t seen the mechanic before.”
It has nothing to do with seeing the mechanic before. It has to do with whether or not someone would logically conclude that a green key would be immune to time manipulation. I don’t personally feel that they would and there was nothing given to me in the demo that makes me feel like it is anything other than an arbitrary decision to enable more intricate puzzles. I understand other games do similar things. This flaw isn’t unique to Braid. We apparently disagree on this point.
With regard to the Bionic Commando reference, I would never expect to be able to grapple to every surface. I would fully expect some surfaces to be “ungrappleable” due to the nature of the grapple. Glass perhaps? Flimsy organic material? Paper? Any material with a nature that would not be conducive to a grapple or supporting weight. There is nothing about the nature of color or time that would lead me to believe that certain colors are likewise immune to game logic. This isn’t the same at all.
It’s not constructive to argue about it anymore. We’re clearly looking at it from two different angles.
I’ll probably buy the game and play it to completion if for no other reason than to be able to speak from a greater position of authority when deflecting the blows of those who find it incomprehensible that I don’t care for it (and for some reason feel the need to argue with the things that didn’t work for me). Who knows, maybe I’ll see something that doesn’t exist for me in the Demo. That would be a pleasant surprise.
August 24th, 2008 at 1:30 am
used cisco-
Borrowing from your post on another thread… now you just have a preconceived notion of what to expect from the game, so of course it’ll be impossible for you to enjoy. =)
August 24th, 2008 at 7:19 am
@Jeff,
You honestly may be right. Once I pick up the full game, I’ll endeavor to clean out my existing ideas before tackling it. I’ll probably give it a week to let my thoughts on the experience fade a bit. Perhaps I’ll put some more time into Toki Tori to help “reset” the puzzle portion of my brain.
That being said, if I DO go into it expecting arbitrary game logic, it might actually HELP the experience since I will be less likely to get frustrated if future puzzles require that kind of thought.
August 25th, 2008 at 9:50 pm
Saw this comic on SA, thought you guys might get a kick out of it:
http://www.chainsawsuit.com/20080820.shtml
August 25th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
cisco-
I still think your overreacting to what I think is sort of one of the purposes (and core mechanics) of the game, but whatever it takes for you to try and keep a (somewhat) open mind about it when you finally decide to give it a shot. =)
August 26th, 2008 at 12:17 am
Me? Overreact? NEVER~!!!!!!!!!!!
