In my last post, I discussed the way in which moral contrast is set up in some games, and I talked vaguely about the players' perception when faced with certain circumstances. I didn’t go into too much detail, but it occurred to me that I left out a game I just love to go on about. The Beginner’s Guide. At this point, you should all know my feelings and thoughts on that emotional masterpiece.
The reason that game, in particular, would’ve been a great talking point in my last post is that Davey Wreden, the in-game narrator and the real-life creator, is a perfect example of how morals often don’t even occur to players until a certain point. In the beginning, Davey comes across as an innocent tour guide, a bit like a teacher encouraging show and tell. He is friendly and disarming, addressing the player in a way that immediately allays any sense of falseness. He’s showing us his friends’ games, and telling us various details about each one.
There are hints from as early as the first level that Davey is not all that he seems to be, but we pay no attention to that because of the way he introduces himself. “Hi there, thank you very much for playing The Beginner's Guide. My name is Davey Wreden, I wrote The Stanley Parable, and while that game tells a pretty absurd story, today I'm going to be telling you about a series of events that happened between 2008 and 2011...” Davey then goes on to explain how he met Coda, the original creator of the games he's showcasing. This interaction leads us into a false sense of security. We believe Davey because of his tone and the way in which he presents himself. He hasn't yet given us a reason to disbelieve him. Don’t get me wrong, he isn’t a liar. That’s not the type of moral I’m talking about.
I'm not going to tell you what Davey does, or what his purpose is. I’m a massive advocate for finding this game yourself and playing it, or at least watching a walkthrough of it so you can experience the story for yourself. Davey the Narrator is very special to me. I can relate to what he is seeking for himself personally, and the purpose he serves. He is there to tell a story, to get you to believe in something and in a sense he’s looking for your company. Telling you what happens would be depriving Davey of that.
What I will tell you is that Davey is troubled, and it is his issues and the problems on his mind that cause his morals to be misplaced. He knows what he's doing, but he just can't stop himself. Trying to subdue what he's feeling clearly outweighs his sense of right from wrong and with every apology he attempts to make, he digs himself an even deeper hole. By the end, you realise how much Davey is hurting, but also how seriously he was damaging somebody else. It's at this point that you start questioning everything you thought you'd learned and re-thinking your opinion of the game.
The Beginner's Guide is a work of art that will cause you to perpetually and painfully ask yourself what you're doing with your life. It has done so much for me both mentally and emotionally, minus the existential crises, and gotten me through so many difficult nights that I hope to one day personally thank Davey Wreden for the hard work he put into it. Do yourself a favour and find this game.
Signed,
Elijah.
Meta Sentience.
22/03/2018
"The time I spend with Mountain feels slightly more real to me than anything else inside my computer."
- Leigh Alexander, Gamasutra
"Mountain breaks the mold of video games."
-Ian Bogost, The Atlantic
"Welcome to an existential nightmare."
- Patrick Klepek, Giant Bomb
Mountain is a game that opens up to you with the phrase, "welcome to Mountain, you are mountain, you are god," and immediately drops you into your personal, ambient little zen garden. Created by David O'Reilly, Mountain is a simulation 'role playing' video game released on July 1st, 2014.
I originally downloaded the game on Steam after seeing NerdCubed upload a video on it, and I was immediately enamoured. There were many videos attempting to talk about whether Mountain is in fact a game at all, which then leads into asking what a video game even is, or is supposed to be. It all comes back to subjectivity in art as a whole, and we all know by now that I have a special place in my heart for that conversation.
But anyway, back to the task at hand. Your mountain will slowly rotate, face the seasons, collect pieces of furniture and other every day items, and occasionally offer it's thoughts every now and then as time progresses. When you pull up the controls in the options menu, it lists as 'nothing'. The only controls are that you can zoom in and out, and rearrange your collection by holding down on the items.
There are many... displeased... written reviews on the IOS app store complaining that Mountain is a complete waste of money, but David describes his creation simply as a mountain simulator, a 'relax 'em up', of sorts. I've never heard that terminology before but boy do I love it. The key to Mountain is patience. It's a simple concept. You leave it on in the background while you do other things, and slowly become obsessed with checking in on it. It's not complex, it's just... pretty.
Playing games like The Stanley Parable, The Beginner's Guide and Getting Over it, (the latter I've only seen footage of because there's no way in hell I'm putting myself through the frustration of that game... damn you Bennett Foddy), remind me of this game. They all have something similar in common and it's that they give you the glaring desire to ask, is there something these games are trying to say? Are the artists trying to communicate a specific point? With Mountain, I'm not so sure of that. I think it's just a very charming little game that can aid you on a particularly stressful or lonely night.
That's about all I have to say on Mountain. I'll leave Nerd's video down here so that you can go watch it if you fancy, but the game is only 99p so... why not go give it a try yourself?
EDIT: It's the 14th of January now, a day after this post went public, and I just wanted to say that yesterday I was trying to think of the game EVERYTHING on PS4 to add to the above list of games that Mountain reminds me of. The reason it's in an edit is because I couldn't fucking remember what it was called and I had to google dumb shit to find it.
Nerd³ Plays... Mountain
Signed,
Elijah.
Meta Sentience.
13/01/2018
As quite the prevalent gamer, somebody who has been playing video games as far back as my memory will allow me to remember, (I'm an old man), I want to pose a question to you. This blog was never intended to become centred around gaming, but seeing as it's so esoterically built into who I am, I suppose it's something I should've expected.
But yes, my question; is there a right or wrong way to play a game? Most people read that and immediately thought, 'yeah, you dumbass, of course there is. That's why rules and shit exist', but what exactly is it within the game that makes it playable? Should it depend on the level of the player, or should it be accessible for anybody regardless of their skills? Does any of this contribute to how much enjoyment can be wrenched from a game's core?
... am I making any sense at all?
You have to remember that every opinion of what makes up a good game is totally subjective, therefore the experience will be subjective too. There's always going to be somebody that believes a certain game just isn't for them, which of course doesn't make that particular game bad. Then again... it totally could be.
I think it's important to discuss the types of play styles when talking about a game's playability. For example if we look at a game like Skyrim, there's insurmountable options - plenty of classes to play as, and interchangeable aspects in how you decide to play. Every single one can lead to success regardless of the difficulty level, whereas if we look at a franchise like Dark Souls, (and Bloodborne), it's safe to say there is a way to play that is far more effective in terms of both fun and playability. The hardened strategic baseline of the Souls series I think is what contributes to a lot of people finding the games completely unplayable. But is the game unfair or are they playing it wrong?
It's possible to progress in Skyrim with so many different skill sets and builds. You can be a sneak-thief khajiit, a sword and shield wielding nord or an arrow shooting elf, and the options don't end there. Despite all the options in Dark Souls, (and believe me there are a fuck-tonne - different weapons, etc), there's only a few combinations that really get the job done. The first two Souls games give you a shield pretty much at the beginning, yet anybody that's played them learned the hard way that using it is more detrimental than anything else.
Personally I believe that a person's unwillingness to experiment and leave their comfort zone, a place usually built on so many other gaming experiences, is what ultimately renders a game unplayable for those specific individuals. It isn't necessarily the game's fault or the designer's being unfair, but the player's inability to adapt. Just, y'know, don't be afraid to parry and side-roll the fuck out of your comfort zones in order to GIT GUD!
Signed,
Elijah.
Meta Sentience.
22/18/2017
I've been having quite a bit of fun on Skyrim since last week. Me and my lovely went on a journey to the local shopping centre and I picked up the special edition as prompted by a mate. It was either that or Dark Souls III. DS was actually two quid cheaper but I've heard better things about Skyrim, and I must say I'm impressed.
The game originally came out when I was still in college, and I remember students and lecturers alike all taking days off to play on release. The same happened with GTA V and The Witcher 3, but I expect nothing less from a gaming course, honestly. Bunch'a nerds.
So what have I done so far since Saturday? Not a whole lot, really. I got to Riverwood, ransacked Gerdur's house, got lost somewhere in the mountains, threw myself off a cliff singing, "AHHHHHHH SVENYAAAAA!" because I wanted to test how far I could fall until I died, and completed the Golden Claw quest. I reckon I'm going to join the Stormcloaks because fuck the Imperials. Imperials? In a game? Never a good sign.
I also delivered a letter from Faendal to Camilla and told her it was from Sven. So now Camilla doesn't ever want to speak to Sven again. He was the one that started the whole mess of a situation though, I mean, he wanted me to take a letter to Camilla and say it was from Faendal, and I couldn't do that. I just couldn't! Faendal did nothing wrong! I know Sven played me a song when I was relaxing at the inn but I simply dislike the way he throws his weight around. If anything I feel bad for Camilla. The lady spends her days sweeping Lucan's shop and can't even get a break in her romantic life.
Not entirely sure how to go about making potions yet, but I've spent a bit of time cooking and getting a few levels up. I'm using Faendal to up my archery level, too, but because he's a follower now, I can just access his inventory, take the money I gave him and use it again for more archery training. Seems a bit backwards honestly, but it's amusing to say the least. I'm just really looking forward to getting in some decent playtime and seeing how I progress. I'm loving it so far.
See you guys on Friday, might have a few more updates for then.
Signed,
Elijah.
Meta Sentience.
12/09/2017
