Braid was weird and I'm not sure I liked it.
So I finished Braid with the help of my brother, who has an eye for things that I miss. I'm not always the best at puzzle games because I get frustrated quickly with the interface. A lot of the time, I know what it is I need to do to solve a given puzzle, but I lack the input skill to be able to solve it. It's like knowing the answer to a math problem, but not being able to show my work. That's frustrating for me, and it's helpful when I can play with someone else nearby so I can get their input when I can't do something.
Anyway, I don't know if I liked it. I definitely didn't not like it. It's strange. The puzzles were interesting and I liked the time manipulation mechanics. I even liked the ending, I thought it was a neat twist on what I thought was going to happen. Not going to spoil it, since I can say what I want to say without talking about the details of the ending, so no worries there if you haven't played it yet.
There are two things that bother me about Braid. The first is that the creator is kind of a condescending asshat. He created a "walkthrough" because people were saying the game was too difficult, which basically consists of "This game is easy, don't use a walkthrough because that means you don't get to experience the game the way I want you to. Some of the puzzles may take you hours but it's worth it because that's part of the experience."
Nobody reads a book the same way. Nobody watches a movie the same way. And nobody plays a game the same way. It's a little narrow minded and upsetting to hear that the game creator wanted to dictate to people what was the "right" way to play his game. I understand that using a walkthrough can be seen as "cheating," but that's really the player's choice. It's not up to the game designer to belittle people who want to experience the game but get stuck before they can. I played each level three times before I consulted Dan for ideas, and if he was stumped after three more passes then we had to look at a walkthrough. Even then, walkthroughs don't solve the puzzle for us, they just give us an idea if we're on the right track. Skill is still needed, even if the solution is given to us. Most of the time we were right, we just weren't standing in the right place or timing jumps correctly. What I'm saying is, a walkthrough doesn't effect how I play the game. It lets me continue to play the game, because the alternative is to stop.
A few of the puzzles are not as "straightforward" and "natural" as the creator says that they are. Some of them are downright counter-intuitive. I'm not knocking the game, I love the way the puzzles are constructed, but some of them are really difficult without some kind of hint. There is one early on that blows in the face of anything that I would have guessed possible in the game, and there is no lead up to it or any indication that it should be doable. It's also never revisited in the game. It's a one-time only mechanics "joke." It bothers me that the game includes puzzles like that that literally made me shout "WELL IF I KNEW THAT WAS POSSIBLE I WOULD HAVE DONE IT," and yet the creator insists the game is a natural and straightforward experience. That it isn't about the ending, "it's about the journey."
Except it isn't.
The other problem I have with Braid is in the ending. Again, not going to spoil it, but there are two endings to this game. One ending is achieved by finishing all the levels, one ending is achieved by collecting a certain number of hidden items. The second ending has almost nothing to do with the first. The items you have to collect are so well hidden and so impossibly concealed that I am amazed anyone did find them without a walkthrough. I actually find it hard to believe. One of them involves leaving your game on for an hour and forty-five minutes without touching it. That's how counter-intuitive it is.
I like the standard ending, even if the Epilogue is a bit confusing. It fits with the game's overall tone, and there was some evidence in the game to suggest what was going to happen. It's a solid ending, even in it's simplicity. But again, it's okay because it fits in with the story the game was trying to tell. Or at least it would be, if the standard ending was actually the ending. But it isn't.
Let's overlook the fact that the creator is condescending and way too involved in how the game is played to understand how difficult some of the puzzles are, and instead think about this: the game creator expects you to collect hidden MacGuffins that are never mentioned or alluded to in-game (one of which involves you leaving your computer on for an hour forty-five) in order to see his "true ending," which is also never alluded to in game except for one of the very last lines of the Epilogue of your first playthrough.
I'm sorry, but that's just not acceptable to me.
I understand that the creator wanted to tell a very specific story, and that he wanted people to work for that ending. That is commendable. However, the ending that is supposed to be the true actual factual ending is NOT built up by the game. At least not on any level that is accessible if you didn't know it was there. I have read people's arguments that Braid is a highly metaphorical game that points to this alternate ending, but I really don't see it. I certainly never saw it while playing it, and even now that I know it's there? Nope.
The secret ending feels tacked on and confused. It has nothing to do with the way the game was set up, the way the game played out, the time manipulation mechanics, the presentation of the story, the design, NOTHING. It really reminds me of tiresome days in ENGL classes, hearing people try to stretch out a metaphor in an attempt to twist a book into their own personal meaning. Except in this case, it's the developer doing it. A reader can take whatever they want from a book. A creator can't force someone to view their creation exactly how they view it. It's painful to watch, and it sours an otherwise solid game for me.
The worst part is if it was about the journey and not the ending, then the ending wouldn't have been such an important part to understanding what was going on. But it was. In the standard ending, there is a reference to what is happening in the true ending. Which means that in order to get the "whole experience," you have to achieve the true ending, which most of the explanation of what the game was supposedly about comes into light. Frankly, this is bullshit. If it's about the journey and not the ending, the standard ending is fine. If it's about the ending and the message, then using a walkthrough shouldn't be such an offense to the creator. It's just blowing smoke.
I hear a lot of people say that Braid is art, and maybe it is. But if people are saying that purely because of the tacked-on metaphor, I'd have to disagree. To me, it feels like stapling a sonnet to a sandwich. The sandwich may have been really great, and the sonnet was probably good too, but putting them together does not automatically make them related, and it certainly doesn't make it "art."
Or maybe I don't get it.
Anyway, I don't want to turn anyone off of the game because it is good, I'm more angry at the presentation of the game and the overall demeanor of the creator. Enjoy it, but try to avoid looking up information on the alternate ending until you finish the game, because it will really color your perceptions of the ending. For me, there is only one ending, and that's the one you get by doing what the game presented as the goal. Everything else is just stapled on.
Anyway, I don't know if I liked it. I definitely didn't not like it. It's strange. The puzzles were interesting and I liked the time manipulation mechanics. I even liked the ending, I thought it was a neat twist on what I thought was going to happen. Not going to spoil it, since I can say what I want to say without talking about the details of the ending, so no worries there if you haven't played it yet.
There are two things that bother me about Braid. The first is that the creator is kind of a condescending asshat. He created a "walkthrough" because people were saying the game was too difficult, which basically consists of "This game is easy, don't use a walkthrough because that means you don't get to experience the game the way I want you to. Some of the puzzles may take you hours but it's worth it because that's part of the experience."
Nobody reads a book the same way. Nobody watches a movie the same way. And nobody plays a game the same way. It's a little narrow minded and upsetting to hear that the game creator wanted to dictate to people what was the "right" way to play his game. I understand that using a walkthrough can be seen as "cheating," but that's really the player's choice. It's not up to the game designer to belittle people who want to experience the game but get stuck before they can. I played each level three times before I consulted Dan for ideas, and if he was stumped after three more passes then we had to look at a walkthrough. Even then, walkthroughs don't solve the puzzle for us, they just give us an idea if we're on the right track. Skill is still needed, even if the solution is given to us. Most of the time we were right, we just weren't standing in the right place or timing jumps correctly. What I'm saying is, a walkthrough doesn't effect how I play the game. It lets me continue to play the game, because the alternative is to stop.
A few of the puzzles are not as "straightforward" and "natural" as the creator says that they are. Some of them are downright counter-intuitive. I'm not knocking the game, I love the way the puzzles are constructed, but some of them are really difficult without some kind of hint. There is one early on that blows in the face of anything that I would have guessed possible in the game, and there is no lead up to it or any indication that it should be doable. It's also never revisited in the game. It's a one-time only mechanics "joke." It bothers me that the game includes puzzles like that that literally made me shout "WELL IF I KNEW THAT WAS POSSIBLE I WOULD HAVE DONE IT," and yet the creator insists the game is a natural and straightforward experience. That it isn't about the ending, "it's about the journey."
Except it isn't.
The other problem I have with Braid is in the ending. Again, not going to spoil it, but there are two endings to this game. One ending is achieved by finishing all the levels, one ending is achieved by collecting a certain number of hidden items. The second ending has almost nothing to do with the first. The items you have to collect are so well hidden and so impossibly concealed that I am amazed anyone did find them without a walkthrough. I actually find it hard to believe. One of them involves leaving your game on for an hour and forty-five minutes without touching it. That's how counter-intuitive it is.
I like the standard ending, even if the Epilogue is a bit confusing. It fits with the game's overall tone, and there was some evidence in the game to suggest what was going to happen. It's a solid ending, even in it's simplicity. But again, it's okay because it fits in with the story the game was trying to tell. Or at least it would be, if the standard ending was actually the ending. But it isn't.
Let's overlook the fact that the creator is condescending and way too involved in how the game is played to understand how difficult some of the puzzles are, and instead think about this: the game creator expects you to collect hidden MacGuffins that are never mentioned or alluded to in-game (one of which involves you leaving your computer on for an hour forty-five) in order to see his "true ending," which is also never alluded to in game except for one of the very last lines of the Epilogue of your first playthrough.
I'm sorry, but that's just not acceptable to me.
I understand that the creator wanted to tell a very specific story, and that he wanted people to work for that ending. That is commendable. However, the ending that is supposed to be the true actual factual ending is NOT built up by the game. At least not on any level that is accessible if you didn't know it was there. I have read people's arguments that Braid is a highly metaphorical game that points to this alternate ending, but I really don't see it. I certainly never saw it while playing it, and even now that I know it's there? Nope.
The secret ending feels tacked on and confused. It has nothing to do with the way the game was set up, the way the game played out, the time manipulation mechanics, the presentation of the story, the design, NOTHING. It really reminds me of tiresome days in ENGL classes, hearing people try to stretch out a metaphor in an attempt to twist a book into their own personal meaning. Except in this case, it's the developer doing it. A reader can take whatever they want from a book. A creator can't force someone to view their creation exactly how they view it. It's painful to watch, and it sours an otherwise solid game for me.
The worst part is if it was about the journey and not the ending, then the ending wouldn't have been such an important part to understanding what was going on. But it was. In the standard ending, there is a reference to what is happening in the true ending. Which means that in order to get the "whole experience," you have to achieve the true ending, which most of the explanation of what the game was supposedly about comes into light. Frankly, this is bullshit. If it's about the journey and not the ending, the standard ending is fine. If it's about the ending and the message, then using a walkthrough shouldn't be such an offense to the creator. It's just blowing smoke.
I hear a lot of people say that Braid is art, and maybe it is. But if people are saying that purely because of the tacked-on metaphor, I'd have to disagree. To me, it feels like stapling a sonnet to a sandwich. The sandwich may have been really great, and the sonnet was probably good too, but putting them together does not automatically make them related, and it certainly doesn't make it "art."
Or maybe I don't get it.
Anyway, I don't want to turn anyone off of the game because it is good, I'm more angry at the presentation of the game and the overall demeanor of the creator. Enjoy it, but try to avoid looking up information on the alternate ending until you finish the game, because it will really color your perceptions of the ending. For me, there is only one ending, and that's the one you get by doing what the game presented as the goal. Everything else is just stapled on.