Zero Punctuation: Firewatch & Layers of Fear

[Blood Brain Barrier]

The upshot of all this is that the experience of a "walking simulator" depends entirely on how the game is done. What it gives you to look at, think about and so on. If it does that part well, it should be a far richer experience than a RPG or shooter.

Thanks for the clarification. I agree, but unfortunately I don't see how core gamers could learn to accept what you're describing. We're both aware that thinking, searching, reminiscing or remembering aren't passive activities, after all. I wouldn't call an experience like Dear Esther passive, it's just heavily internalized. It does almost everything you're describing, the randomized bits of written letters standing in for thought processes or the protagonist's overall emotional state.

The problem is, some people would always end up looking for something more immediate, more tangible than just walking around waiting for the right memory or train of thought to jog things along. We've had decades to be conditioned to the idea of needing to run, to actively pursue a goal, to get physically involved in the proceedings or to use mechanics that simulate physical involvement - and that's something that's difficult to put aside for some gamers.

One person's introspection is another person's shallow or borderline pedantic crawl, unfortunately. A lot of what defines how a new walking sim is received by the general public is in its tone and overall artistic sense. The more high-brow, the more some people are inexplicably prone to feel like they're being talked down to.

I can sort of get the frustration, I hated The Witness. When a game exudes the impression that a specific artistic bias or personal philosophy is needed to best appraise its worth or impact, some people just default to feeling insulted. That's unfortunate, and there's still a lot of miscommunication to fix between projects with more "Arthouse" sensibilities and the general public.

Hopefully, like I told Slo, it won't involve labeling the genre only to coddle the risk-averse.

Oh. I loved The Witness and think it is the best game of the past decade. It is also the furthest you can get from a walking simulator. Why do you think an artistic or philosophical disposition is needed to appreciate it? I think everyone should be able to get something out of it.

Otherwise, absolutely agreed on everything else you said. The conditioning of modern gamers is hard to undo, and not even necessary to undo. Some won't appreciate games that lack a very specific "mission", and which ask more from you than to follow narrow goals.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

Oh. I loved The Witness and think it is the best game of the past decade. It is also the furthest you can get from a walking simulator. Why do you think an artistic or philosophical disposition is needed to appreciate it? I think everyone should be able to get something out of it.

Otherwise, absolutely agreed on everything else you said. The conditioning of modern gamers is hard to undo, and not even necessary to undo. Some won't appreciate games that lack a very specific "mission", and which ask more from you than to follow narrow goals.

Okay. Here's my experience with The Witness in a nutshell.

The first forty minutes or so were awesome. I loved the clear interface, the initially simple mechanic being slowly developed into more complex uses and patterns - I've compared it to Sudoku in describing it to friends of mine. It's a really basic setup for a puzzler, but the game provides enough variants and introduces enough mechanics to keep the challenge fresh.

The problem is that's all there is. Puzzles. Nothing but. No world-building, no theming other than in the presence of statues or weird architectural cues. If you're lucky or patient you'll come across these little recordings that are supposed to offer some insight into the area's overall theme or exposed mechanic in some allegorical fashion. The thing is, I didn't see these as flashes of brilliance or nudges in the right direction; I saw it as self-satisfaction, the game referencing its own claims to be a serious brain-teaser by quoting some of the Greats or the enlightened. Reaching the ending only furthered that impression (so I'm just going back to the beginning? Really?!) and the Easter Egg that's unlockable shortly afterwards made me feel as though Blow were busy tooting his own horn.

I won't spoil anything in case someone else reads this and hasn't finished the game, but the Easter Egg ending feels incredibly pretentious to me. There's something very... self-congratulatory to the entire experience that just raises my proverbial hackles. It's not deep thought or the game being proud of its own innovative streaks; it's pretension. Or at least, that's how it feels to me.

I mean, Portal 1 and 2 provide context and purpose while being as legible and solidly iterated upon as The Witness. The Myst games have terrific world-building going for them and puzzles that actually further the environments' sense of place. There's tons of reasons to be drawn into the experience in both cases, outside of just puzzles and vague promises that recorded quotations will suffice. I'd even recommend Fireproof Games' The Room series on mobile devices, as far as really solid Adventure Game experiences are concerned.

The Witness is just... there. I've played through it, I've tried to find as many of the recordings as I could and I spent time trying to make sense out of the statues in the courtyard or what looks like a half-finished or half-ruined small town. I've even left the game and tried to find online summaries, hoping someone else could shed some light onto it all. I've got nothing so far. It's opaque and it mistakes its profundity for deep thought.

It's all just surprising, really. Braid had a whimsical tone and a bit of an on-the-nose moral to be dug up at the end, but it wasn't this infuriating.

And I do know this is terribly ironic, considering what we've discussed. I'm all for games that don't wear their theming or world design on their sleeves and I don't mind the occasional bit of opaque storytelling, as long as it's well done. See the Souls series, for instance. Despite that, The Witness was my personal limit. I started by loving it, then getting mildly annoyed not so much by the lack of direction as the lack of purpose - and then I flipped my lid once the randomized puzzles kicked in. I couldn't combine enough of the presented mechanics to make it work, the glitchy puzzles got in the way of my ability to work based on the design language the game teaches you - and none of it amounted to much in the grand scheme of things.

See the irony? Guy thinks games could do more than just toss numbers to alter or health bars to nullify, but he still loses it when iterative puzzle design proves to be too much. Same guy also feels the need to cling to the idea of world-building or general versimilitude while tackling a game that clearly doesn't care for either concepts. That's sad, and I know it is.

So yeah. About conditioning? I'm conditioned. I expected something and I didn't get it. Mea Culpa and whatnot.

 

[Blood Brain Barrier]

Oh. I loved The Witness and think it is the best game of the past decade. It is also the furthest you can get from a walking simulator. Why do you think an artistic or philosophical disposition is needed to appreciate it? I think everyone should be able to get something out of it.

Otherwise, absolutely agreed on everything else you said. The conditioning of modern gamers is hard to undo, and not even necessary to undo. Some won't appreciate games that lack a very specific "mission", and which ask more from you than to follow narrow goals.

Okay. Here's my experience with The Witness in a nutshell.

The first forty minutes or so were awesome. I loved the clear interface, the initially simple mechanic being slowly developed into more complex uses and patterns - I've compared it to Sudoku in describing it to friends of mine. It's a really basic setup for a puzzler, but the game provides enough variants and introduces enough mechanics to keep the challenge fresh.

The problem is that's all there is. Puzzles. Nothing but. No world-building, no theming other than in the presence of statues or weird architectural cues. If you're lucky or patient you'll come across these little recordings that are supposed to offer some insight into the area's overall theme or exposed mechanic in some allegorical fashion. The thing is, I didn't see these as flashes of brilliance or nudges in the right direction; I saw it as self-satisfaction, the game referencing its own claims to be a serious brain-teaser by quoting some of the Greats or the enlightened. Reaching the ending only furthered that impression (so I'm just going back to the beginning? Really?!) and the Easter Egg that's unlockable shortly afterwards made me feel as though Blow were busy tooting his own horn.

I won't spoil anything in case someone else reads this and hasn't finished the game, but the Easter Egg ending feels incredibly pretentious to me. There's something very... self-congratulatory to the entire experience that just raises my proverbial hackles. It's not deep thought or the game being proud of its own innovative streaks; it's pretension. Or at least, that's how it feels to me.

I mean, Portal 1 and 2 provide context and purpose while being as legible and solidly iterated upon as The Witness. The Myst games have terrific world-building going for them and puzzles that actually further the environments' sense of place. There's tons of reasons to be drawn into the experience in both cases, outside of just puzzles and vague promises that recorded quotations will suffice. I'd even recommend Fireproof Games' The Room series on mobile devices, as far as really solid Adventure Game experiences are concerned.

The Witness is just... there. I've played through it, I've tried to find as many of the recordings as I could and I spent time trying to make sense out of the statues in the courtyard or what looks like a half-finished or half-ruined small town. I've even left the game and tried to find online summaries, hoping someone else could shed some light onto it all. I've got nothing so far. It's opaque and it mistakes its profundity for deep thought.

It's all just surprising, really. Braid had a whimsical tone and a bit of an on-the-nose moral to be dug up at the end, but it wasn't this infuriating.

And I do know this is terribly ironic, considering what we've discussed. I'm all for games that don't wear their theming or world design on their sleeves and I don't mind the occasional bit of opaque storytelling, as long as it's well done. See the Souls series, for instance. Despite that, The Witness was my personal limit. I started by loving it, then getting mildly annoyed not so much by the lack of direction as the lack of purpose - and then I flipped my lid once the randomized puzzles kicked in. I couldn't combine enough of the presented mechanics to make it work, the glitchy puzzles got in the way of my ability to work based on the design language the game teaches you - and none of it amounted to much in the grand scheme of things.

See the irony? Guy thinks games could do more than just toss numbers to alter or health bars to nullify, but he still loses it when iterative puzzle design proves to be too much. Same guy also feels the need to cling to the idea of world-building or general versimilitude while tackling a game that clearly doesn't care for either concepts. That's sad, and I know it is.

So yeah. About conditioning? I'm conditioned. I expected something and I didn't get it. Mea Culpa and whatnot.

Fair enough. I'll just say that my own experience was totally different and your ending thought of "I'm going back to the start" never even popped into my head. I think the game is quite simply a meditation on oneself ("The Witness"). That's basically it - it's the broadest and most vast subject of any possible game. And it could mean a vast range of things for a vast range of people. That's why it could not have had a narrower story or direction, because channeling your thoughts into colliding with the developer's would have meant channeling them away from the intended subject. If anything I find that the opposite of pretentious. But with that there's also the freedom to dislike it, and you're welcome to do so.

A bit more on the ending:

Spoiler

You couldn't have failed to notice the symbolism throughout the game - the "birth canal" you enter the world through, and the rib-cage like "death" at the end, followed by entering an angelic-like cage to "ascend". What is the end sequence with the monologues inviting you to do? I'd say it's challenging you to make sense of what you've just been through - a metaphor for the journey through life. The video clips are very relevant to what is being suggested with the final words of the game, especially #4 and #5. But I'm glad it was left vague so as not to be too heavy-handed.

 

[IceForce]

The best bit of this was the scary going-to-be-president lurking behind one of the walls. Excellent stuff.

I believe in the business they're called 'trump scares'.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

There's also the freedom to dislike it, and you're welcome to do so.

Basically this. I'm fine with people playing games I personally don't like, which just makes me look at some user reviews or even the new Ghostbusters trailer's YouTube comments page and just shake my head. "The Witness" isn't "SJW bullshit" because it failed to make a lasting positive impression with me - it's just a game that doesn't work with me. If it does with you, all the more power to you.

Seriously - don't look at the comments for the flick's trailer. Save yourself the embarrassment. There's more of these grown-ass men saying women ruin everything because Reasons.

*insert vague sigh of mental exhaustion and acute frustration here*

That said, thanks for telling me your interpretation of the story. I guess the last few puzzles didn't leave me much mental legwork to notice what you did, and it does give a tiny bit of meat to the game's bones - but no, the birth canal analogy never struck my mind, nor did the elevator ride strike me as being angelic or symbolic in nature. I can see how you could interpret those elements the way you did and it does frame some of the quotes in a clearer context - but it still doesn't help the sense of disconnection between the island and its puzzles.

I guess I have a certain threshold of tolerance for allegorical content and the game just went past it. Being more of a reader, I like my game worlds to contain stories and have a sense of place. With that missing, I suppose a lot of my motivation to catch these cues went out the door.

 

[Spartan448]

My only complaint with Firewatch is that I didn't realize it was building up to nothing until after I had passed the two-hour gameplay window for Steam refunds. The game is called Firewatch, I expect to be dealing with responding to actual forest fires at some point. As it stands, Firewatch actually has quite literally nothing to do with watching for fires. The two chances you have to actually spot fires, Delilah does it for you. The Narrative builds up to nothing. The game even tries to make a pathetic attempt to drive physical tension in the last scene of the game, but by then the player knows the game is full of shit, because the developer can't stand to have their precious narrative changed in any way from their perfect view of it.

Taking your sweet time and getting every conversation in the game and using your entire photo reel, there's three hours of gameplay. Not nearly worth the 18 dollar price tag.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

My only complaint with Firewatch is that I didn't realize it was building up to nothing until after I had passed the two-hour gameplay window for Steam refunds. The game is called Firewatch, I expect to be dealing with responding to actual forest fires at some point. As it stands, Firewatch actually has quite literally nothing to do with watching for fires. The two chances you have to actually spot fires, Delilah does it for you. The Narrative builds up to nothing. The game even tries to make a pathetic attempt to drive physical tension in the last scene of the game, but by then the player knows the game is full of shit, because the developer can't stand to have their precious narrative changed in any way from their perfect view of it.

Taking your sweet time and getting every conversation in the game and using your entire photo reel, there's three hours of gameplay. Not nearly worth the 18 dollar price tag.

Eh. We're at a point in Game Design history where games about nothing are positively groundbreaking - but they're not exactly for everyone. I'm also holding off on playing it or watching a Let's Play because "Denied Expectations and Banal Outcomes: The Game" doesn't really sound like fun, even if you tell me the whole banter thing with Delilah is the best piece of voice-over performance in years.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

AJ specifically said his disappointment had NOTHING to do with women, didn't stop sexist pigs from shooting their mouths off though.

Angry Joe's a pretty easy guy to respect, honestly. As you've said, though, it doesn't change the fact that some guys could do with either a shot of maturity in the arm, a few extra female friends or coworkers or some time out of their self-sustaining ideological echo chamber.

You'd think that some of these idiots have never had the pleasure of working or spending time with someone of the fairer sex.

 

[shrekfan246]

Snip

Not to parrot your own earlier post, but I like the way you think, sir.

OT: The idea that Firewatch's reveal (which I'm still unspoiled on, for the record) is actually nothing actually fascinates me. A lot of people have said that it feels unsatisfying, but it also seems like most of those people feel that way because the game didn't travel along the path they were expecting.

Obviously being unexpected doesn't make something good, but I'll admit to being more interested in an ending that fizzles out in a rather plain manner than something so bombastic and overblown that it could've been part of literally any other video game.

(Also, most game endings don't really bother me anyway.)

 

[nitrium oxide]

An interesting thing you can do in Firewatch, I gather, is to NOT respond to ANY of Delilah's chats (i.e. completely ignore her). Apparently she really starts getting antsy, and you get a somewhat different conclusion.

 

[ensouls]

I *kind of* liked both of them.
Firewatch had good if slightly smarmy dialogue (as Yahtzee mentions), the pacing is a little slow but that's fine for gradual reveals. Things get really odd and interesting about halfway through, then it just peters out when everything is explained at the end and I got this sinking realization that nothing I did changed anything in any significant way.

The problem is that the camera, and the fact that you could pick up items, led me to believe it was more of a mystery/true crime game where I'd have to gather evidence to both figure things out and establish my own innocence at the end. Nope. Waste of time.

Layers of Fear has too many dumb jumpscares and really, really needs to get over the "creepy messages on the wall" thing. On the other hand, I kind of liked its use of line-of-sight tricks even if they never let up. It wasn't terribly scary, but it did lead to a few cool dream-sequence moments and hey, I just love that shit.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

Not to parrot your own earlier post, but I like the way you think, sir.

Shrekfan-senpai noticed me!

Kidding aside, thanks.

It's been said before in the thread, but Duchamp's urinal and ready-made art in general needed a while to be recognized as such. For years, people looked at the guy's disconnected piss-receiving device and wondered what the fuss was about. Anticlimactic finales in video games might have to pass through the same period of acclimatization before people look at Firewatch or games with similar aesthetic conceits and admit their endings make sense.

As I've said, I'm not interested in trying it out. Denied expectations don't justify the asking price, neither does offering patronage to a team that's pushing interactive narrative delivery down a new path. Someone else might disagree, however, and say Firewatch has enough artistic pedigree to make the price tag feel strangely low. That's fine. Art being subjective, I'd say gamers tend to put their money where their personal subjectivity happens to stand.

I mean, SuperHOT makes fun of the whole "innovative shooter" notion and really does poke fun at our habit of sticking superlatives on anything we even remotely like, but if our own critics at The Escapist can look at Layers of Fear and call it a masterpiece, then someone else liking a product that's short on traditional mechanics really isn't surprising.

The Witness sounds like a pretentious piece of crap, I avoid it for the same reason I avoid all those damn Oscar bait films.

I've already spoken at length about how I feel about The Witness, but I'll just quickly reiterate that if you want something that has a similar scope but none of the preachy annoyances, I'd recommend any one of the following:

Myst series: world-building is king, so the focus is laser-tight and there's zero pretentiousness on offer.

The Room series: see Myst, but with a darker, slightly Lovecraftian and definitely horror-inspired tone. No preachiness at all.

The Talos Principle: heavier themes, but the presentation stays clear. The game tackles heavy subject matter like the nature of consciousness and of Humanity in general, but it stays palatable. The religious allegory never feels heavy-handed and instead frames the game's structure extremely well.

Portal series: otherwise known as "The Source Engine has a Physics Engine, let's Fuck Around with It". Zero pretention, terrific world-building that's joined the Valve-verse's canon, occasionally pitch-black and sardonic humor. Parenthood and motherhood are tackled, but only in the bylines.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

Indeed, some people still have that outdated attitude that women should only be sex objects.

And that's a shame. There's nothing quite as sexy as a woman who gives good brain: a buddy who helps you work on your D&D campaign, that bright penny in your class that's not only pretty but also really awesome to listen to, or just someone from the opposite gender who happens to enjoy spending time with you, no strings attached.

There's a popular notion suggesting that men and women don't perceive the world in the same ways, or just don't flat-out reason in the same ways. You'll typically hear that being used as an excuse to denigrate the other gender (and that goes on both sides, honestly), but it can also be understood to be a compliment. I'm pretty confident in saying I wouldn't be who I am and where I am today if it weren't for several women who were there to prod me along.

Women are awesome, despite all the really facile pandering a lot of popular media seems to imagine women want or need. You don't need to be antagonistic or to bully your way into a traditionally masculine field of work to be worth a damn. Or, at least, you shouldn't have to. Being yourself, all genders considered, should suffice. Being true to who you are opens a lot more doors, in my experience, than saying it's Someone Else's Fault if you can't have nice things.