Did anyone else think Braid sucked?

[zelda2fanboy]

I know this is old news about an old game, but I finally got around to playing Braid and I really didn't like it. It's baffling to me why so many critics loved it. Even Yahtzee didn't rag on it too harshly. My main problem was that it was designed as a puzzle game where there were very specific rules and ideas in place and you had to use them to solve puzzles. That would be fine, but the game keeps making up rules on a case by case basis without telling the player.

A few examples (spoilers):
1. The second level of the game is impossible to beat unless you beat all the other levels in that world first and then take advantage of an exploit the game never told you that you had, and never utilized in any capacity again. You're given no clue about this at all.

2. Eventually you come across VERY faintly glowing objects, enemies, and platforms. These are not affected by your time reversing. Also, sometimes you glow when standing on this platform. Sometimes you don't. This is also never explained.

3. There's a world where you have to pull a lever and drop a ladder, reverse time, and ride the ladder back up. The thing is, the trick only works if you somehow manage to turn glowing green while riding up the ladder. They don't tell you this and there's absolutely no reason why time should stop in that particular spot. It just does.

There's some more I've already forgotten, but for the most part, the game felt cheap. Lots of cheap deaths and dirty tricks. I did like World 3 (I think) where you have to work with a double of yourself. I didn't need any help with that. The rest of the game I gave up on and just went to youtube to get me through most of it. I know you'll accuse me of being lazy, dumb, casual, or wanting my hand held. That's not the case. I just hate when games make up cheap bullshit rules and don't tell you about them in advance. It would be like in some levels of Super Mario, the fire suit didn't kill piranha plants, or the only way to beat Castlevania 2 was by collecting a bunch of pointless hidden bullshit that requires a guide to find (oh wait, they did that).

I also thought the storytelling sucked. Large, vague text boxes given no context whatsoever, and then we're expected to be "surprised" by the ending.

 

[chromewarriorXIII]

I didn't really enjoy it either. The puzzles got boring, a while before just becoming annoying. The way they told the storytelling with large bodies of text just bored me even more, to the point where I didn't bother to read them, which is rare for me.

I never saw why it got the praise it did. I beat the minimum that I had to for me to have "beaten" it and never played it again.

 

[DEAD34345]

I played the demo and was greatly disappointed, then I saw the price tag and just laughed. It's entirely possible that the hype led me to be disappointed in the game, but to me it just seems pretentious, shallow and un-fun. It's also possible that the demo wasn't indicative of the rest of the game, but quite frankly I'm never going to find out if that's true because I don't intend to buy it.

 

[Zhukov]

I agree that the storytelling was crap.

But the puzzles were brilliant. If you couldn't figure them out then, well, I don't see how that's the game's fault.

Although, granted, a couple of the mechanics were introduced a bit clumsily.

 

[Lukeje]

Those are the same reasons I loved it. You learn by doing, not by being told how to play.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

The game didn't suck, but it the puzzles definately started to bore me around halfway through the game.

it lost steam really quickly.

 

[grumbel]

The rest of the game I gave up on and just went to youtube to get me through most of it.

And that is your problem right there, its no surprise that you don't understand the puzzles when you don't actually take the time to figure them out yourself.

My biggest issue with Braid was simple that it was 100% puzzles, I would have like a bit of regular (ultra hard) jump'n run in the game, as the time rewind would have made that quite interesting and fun.

 

[bfgmetalhead]

yes I agree with you

 

[FoolKiller]

Actually, you couldn't be more wrong.

The information that is required to play the game was given to you in the how to section of the game and during the gameplay. I am sad to hear that someone disliked the game so much but it is ignorant calling the rules "cheap bullshit".

The rules that are needed are given to you and you are given a basic level to test out how it works. After that, all of the things are puzzles that you have to solve. At no point is it arbitrarily difficult, illogical, or random. It just requires more thought than most puzzle games do. This was a very specific type of puzzle with a very specific rule set that was there from the beginning. In fact, you could progress through the majority of the game without finding puzzle pieces.

The main point was to challenge players to think outside the box. I'm sorry that it wasn't your cup of tea but that in no way makes the game bad or cheap.

Oh... and one last thing. I recommend you also stay away from anything in the Myst series as those also don't give you any information other than what the controls are.

 

[gussy1z]

yeah i bought it a while back.. i couldn't play more than about 40 mins of it. Didn't like that game at all.

 

[viranimus]

Hallefriggenlujah

Honestly braid is my most regretted game purchase ever.

Not because it was too hard (I thought it was honestly too easy) but because it was unbelievably tedious and filled with some of the worst gaming cliches such as constant backtracking.

Sure its made well enough, but honestly its a more tediously boring than fun game. Hell only real reason I bought it was it being on sale and because I wanted some games for my non gaming laptop / Sinewave

 

[Echo136]

I thought it wasnt as good as everyone was praising it to be, but it certainly wasnt bad.

 

[fozzy360]

Nope, I loved it. The game never felt cheap. It wants the player to use everything they learned in previous levels to get past the later parts of the game. The game itself is clear; it just doesn't hand out all the answers on a silver plate. It was refreshing. Plus, the music assembled for the soundtrack is incredible and really does heighten the mood for their respective levels.

As for the story, it's intentioanlly vague. I'm not going to say anyone is wrong if they hated the story. I can certainly understand why they might, but I found the presentation to be great.

 

[zelda2fanboy]

Actually, you couldn't be more wrong.

The information that is required to play the game was given to you in the how to section of the game and during the gameplay. I am sad to hear that someone disliked the game so much but it is ignorant calling the rules "cheap bullshit".

The rules that are needed are given to you and you are given a basic level to test out how it works. After that, all of the things are puzzles that you have to solve. At no point is it arbitrarily difficult, illogical, or random. It just requires more thought than most puzzle games do. This was a very specific type of puzzle with a very specific rule set that was there from the beginning. In fact, you could progress through the majority of the game without finding puzzle pieces.

The main point was to challenge players to think outside the box. I'm sorry that it wasn't your cup of tea but that in no way makes the game bad or cheap.

Oh... and one last thing. I recommend you also stay away from anything in the Myst series as those also don't give you any information other than what the controls are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2Nvsaq2Y1M

Watch this video at about the 3.15 mark and you'll see the ladder thing I was talking about. The guy in the video tries it once and it doesn't work, then he tries it again the exact same way and it does. This is cheap, time wasting bullshit. I did progress through the entire game without collecting puzzle pieces (because after all, it never suggests that you should) and it was pointless and boring as shit. Open one door, go into the next door, go into another. Of course, I went back and got all of them because otherwise the game is 20 minutes long. I've played Myst games and I liked them, but there was no point in those games where opening a door dropped an anvil on my head. Those games also have competent interesting storytelling mechanics. This did not.

The second screen of the freaking game is impossible, unless you do the rest of the world first. I could have spent HOURS on that screen not knowing what to do, and then I never would have figured out that puzzle / bridge bullshit because you're never told it's a surface you can jump on.

 

[lacktheknack]

The rest of the game I gave up on and just went to youtube to get me through most of it.

DERP.

Storytime! Once, I sat down and played "Syberia" from beginning to end. It took me four days (about eleven hours total), and I did it sans walkthrough (I had no internet). It was fantastic, one of my favorite adventure games.

Three years later, I had forgotten all - ALL! - of the puzzles and how they were solved. I tried to play it again, but kept glancing at walkthroughs when I got stuck. I gave up in the second location, because all the fun had been sucked out and the game became a chore.

What I'm saying is NO WONDER you didn't like it if you kept looking up the answers. You're SUPPOSED to sit there and mull over your options. You're SUPPOSED to experiment. You're SUPPOSED to search for oddities. You're SUPPOSED to know nothing in advance. That's the point.

None of the rules were "made up as it went along", everything was consistent. I honestly have no idea what "random platforms" you're talking about. Don't the normal shift-ignoring platforms glow green while the ones that affect you glow white? And as for point one:

1. You didn't need to solve all the other levels, you just needed one piece.

2. You did get a hint - The puzzle piece was out of reach, and the only thing nearby was the picture frame.

3. If you bothered looking at the picture after assembling it (if you did just continue on), you might notice: "Hey! That shelf looks VERY SUSPICIOUSLY like every single platform I've used so far!"

4. It's called a "Creative Puzzle", and it's growing increasingly rare.

I figured that section out within ten minutes, you probably would have too if you just stuck with it.

 

[lacktheknack]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2Nvsaq2Y1M

Watch this video at about the 3.15 mark and you'll see the ladder thing I was talking about. The guy in the video tries it once and it doesn't work, then he tries it again the exact same way and it does. This is cheap, time wasting bullshit.

Moar derp.

If you bothered to experiment with those platforms for TWO MINUTES, you'd notice that you stay glowing for about three seconds after stepping off. Essentially, you just needed to use the ladder trick within three seconds after leaving the platform. The guy doing the walkthrough stepped off the ladder too quickly the first time and missed, but got it the second time.

(And I was right, the platforms that affect you glow white, the ones that don't glow green. Again, could have figured that out with mere observation and maybe a bit of experimentation.)

 

[zelda2fanboy]

I beat Portal 1 and 2 without a guide. I beat the Portal 2 co op by myself, holding two controllers. I've beaten Ninja Gaiden 1 on the NES and Ninja Gaiden on the original Xbox. Anyone else wanna call me a noob?

1. You didn't need to solve all the other levels, you just needed one piece.

2. You did get a hint - The puzzle piece was out of reach, and the only thing nearby was the picture frame.

3. It's called a "Creative Puzzle", and it's growing increasingly rare.

I figured that section out within ten minutes, you probably would have too if you just stuck with it.

I gave every screen a chance. Every one.

1. And how are you supposed to know which piece?

2. The top of the frame wasn't a surface you could jump on. Why would any part of the picture work? Didn't work in any of the other worlds.

3. Yeah, because it's cheap!

 

[lacktheknack]

I beat Portal 1 and 2 without a guide. I beat the Portal 2 co op by myself, holding two controllers. I've beaten Ninja Gaiden 1 on the NES and Ninja Gaiden on the original Xbox. Anyone else wanna call me a noob?

1. You didn't need to solve all the other levels, you just needed one piece.

2. You did get a hint - The puzzle piece was out of reach, and the only thing nearby was the picture frame.

3. It's called a "Creative Puzzle", and it's growing increasingly rare.

I figured that section out within ten minutes, you probably would have too if you just stuck with it.

I gave every screen a chance. Every one.

1. And how are you supposed to know which piece?

2. The top of the frame wasn't a surface you could jump on. Why would any part of the picture work? Didn't work in any of the other worlds.

3. Yeah, because it's cheap!

It's the piece that looks like a platform.

Because it IS.

I'm not gonna call you a noob, I'm gonna call you "unobservant" and maybe "inattentive".

(By the way, you can use the same piece in the Overworld version of the picture to the same effect. That's right, consistent rules!)

 

[FoolKiller]

Watch this video at about the 3.15 mark and you'll see the ladder thing I was talking about. The guy in the video tries it once and it doesn't work, then he tries it again the exact same way and it does. This is cheap, time wasting bullshit. I did progress through the entire game without collecting puzzle pieces (because after all, it never suggests that you should) and it was pointless and boring as shit. Open one door, go into the next door, go into another. Of course, I went back and got all of them because otherwise the game is 20 minutes long. I've played Myst games and I liked them, but there was no point in those games where opening a door dropped an anvil on my head. Those games also have competent interesting storytelling mechanics. This did not.

The second screen of the freaking game is impossible, unless you do the rest of the world first. I could have spent HOURS on that screen not knowing what to do, and then I never would have figured out that puzzle / bridge bullshit because you're never told it's a surface you can jump on.

I suppose it's a matter of opinion. I don't find it cheap. Everything is there for you to solve the puzzles... the only thing required is patience and thought. I liked the story telling mechanic. It was unique, different and effective. The end was quite brilliantly laid out.

As for specifics:
The guy in the video screwed up the timing the first time around and then had no trouble with it. You could argue that it required precision timing and it should have more forgiving timing but that was part of the challenge that I loved.

The part about it being impossible. It wasn't. You just agreed that you didn't need to get the puzzle piece in order to progress. There was no reason to be stuck unless you wanted to solve it. This was your own misconception that you should be able to get the puzzle piece with only what was provided on that level. No one ever said that was the case.

Also, you complain that the solution mechanic is never used again. Why would it? I've already solved that puzzle once, I don't want to do it again. This isn't Tomb Raider. I don't need to figure out to shove a block into the hole once just to do it 100 more times.

In short:

1. The story can be enjoyed without solving the puzzles.
2. While each world had a theme with the mechanic introduced, each puzzle was unique.
3. The puzzles required you to stop using the problem-solving methods around in every other game presented.

Therefore, all the reasons you hate the game is why many people love the game.

 

[i7omahawki]

Those are the same reasons I loved it. You learn by doing, not by being told how to play.

This.

A puzzle game that required problem solving and observation.

I thought it was great, and thinking about it, it has been a while since I've played it. Hopefully I've forgotten the solutions so I can enjoy it again.