Braid Comments by Dan Whitehead

alas too poor to afford this at the mo (damn you london rental prices!) but the demo had me entranced. Read the review, thought it a little deep but all is clear when you have played just a bit of it. I second Morztan's comments above.

The cloud bridge section was killing me for a bit but when you work out the puzzle A- you feel like a genius and B- you feel that whoever made this is a genius.

Plus I even liked the bit with all the text about the princess- and im as cynical as they come.

I will buy when im able to afford more than bread and water.

Played the trial last nyt, the jumpman level made giggle like a school kid!

Question, why is Barny in it?.....

/rewinding around 10mins of gameplay at 8x speed is the most fun ive had lying down all year...except for sex.....maybe.....

OK!

The game is now completet!

Verdict: 9/10.

It is really really good! A must buy! And now... time to move on.

This is one of the few examples of games as art in my opinion.

Far and away my GOTY so far, and I expect it will be once 2008 is over. I'm just disappointed that the gaming community is so divided over this one. Apparently a lot of people don't get it, aren't giving it a fair chance, or just aren't as impressed as they should be.

That's a lot of comments.

For me I agree with the review, when reading it I found myself at times thinking of past relationships and how they went and the ideas the game threw around. The soundtrack is also amazing and the whole mood of it incredible. Well done indeed to Jonathan and whoever else worked on it.

Easily easily game of the year for me so far. Killing my 19th out of 20 Rabid Bears, scoring in the top corner from outside the box with Messi, head shotting a grunt from behind cover; this kind of stuff isn't even on the same planet as Braid as far as I'm concerned as far as what it achieves and what it's trying to achieve goes.

Dan, I'm extremely critical of reviews, tending to believe that typically most games cannot be summed up adequately in less than a few thousand words minimum. Part of my objection is that I believe that (from the consumer's point of view) certain more mundane things should be included in a review, things that don't sound so flashy; technicalities, or even things that might be ripped and reworded straight from the instruction manual. Ironic that it is because of such consumers that reviews are typically so short - attention spans and all that! Anyway, as I began to sink into Braid's spell, I found myself wondering how on earth I would actually go about conveying the experience in a review. By the end of the game, and after dwelling on the experience as a whole, I thought it perhaps impossible.

That you have come up with one of the best reviews I have ever read, for what I would consider one of the most difficult of games to review adequately, and in under what, 1000 words? That has really blown my mind and inspired me about as much as the game itself! Had I not already played Braid, your review would have given me every sense of what to expect that I would have needed. It is fluid and functions fully as a piece of consumer information. But I HAVE played Braid, and reading the review again still inspired me. The parables, the language, the depth, breadth and precision of your summary and analysis really amounts to that rarest of non-forms "videogame criticism". To those who may not "get" or rate Braid, such things will indeed make you sound like the hyperbolic jaded critic you describe, but I for one see in that review a work of love, truth and distinction. Highest praise!

Perhaps the only thing you lack is to express something about the speedrunning potential of the game. I was bewildered by the presence of a speedrun element in what seemed to be part super-basic platformer (not much skill required), part puzzler (i.e. once solved = game finished), yet the scope for creativity in timeshaving and the depth of variety to navigation, and ways of solving puzzles tests and re-tests your skill (to some degree) and your lateral/creative thinking (to a much more impressive degree). So it's as though, as well as the sublime coherence between narrative and first-time gameplay, there is yet another layer of depth in the fact that you can approach the puzzles in so many ways, creating links and shortcuts that are often as rewarding as solving the puzzles the first-time around.

In response to a comment made some time ago by Mortzan "guess games never should have gone 3D". I can't say I completely agree; afterall the third dimension has led to its own unique opportunities and provided a much more profound scope for immersion. However, the way that 2D was so swiftly and utterly relegated to homebrew oblivion has been a constant source of frustration to me. Games like Braid or Wik or indeed LostWinds have more intelligent design and creativity than anything I've come across in 3D thusfar. They're more unique, more interesting, quite simply more sophisticated creations. The problem as I see it, is that 3D games are still extremely difficult and complex to create (in some ways increasingly so, depending on the platform), requiring a number of large teams. Between those teams are divisions, and unless you have one extremely decisive, driven, capable and multi-talented person stringing it all together, then compromises will be made and cracks will always appear. More often, those cracks will be crevices. 2D on the other hand = small teams, and usually the vision is of one man's design (most truly great creations are), and the vision is realised accurately.

I'd understand 2D disappearing if its well of creativity had run dry, but it most certainly has not. A videogame can be almost anything the human mind can conceive. That there are so few genres, or so few games which exist outside of such obvious genres is an unfortunate testament to the lack of creativity in the industry; not just now, not just because of 3D, but because videogames have been big business for over 20 years now. It's still a fledgling industry relative to comparable entertainment, but it's scope and potential is so great, that I would have expected much much more from 20 years of creative efforts. Interactivity is an extremely powerful tool for the purpose of both play and narration, and videogames embody that quality better than any other medium. Braid is a huge breath of fresh air on that account, doing as perhaps only Ico has done before; creating a narrative experience that could in no way be represented in any other medium.

I could never have had the imagination or intelligence to conceive and craft anything on the level of Braid, yet I have many of my own ideas for games that I consider far more interesting and sophisticated than what is out there in the mainstream. I currently lack the tools and skills to realise them, but I'm working on it. My frustration is that many of the concepts are not even especially inspired or difficult to comprehend (indeed I'm almost horrified that some have not at least been attempted already), yet I am certain they would be revolutionary in a mainstream context. One day, things will be better, I just hope it's in my lifetime.

@ Darren - Sure, there's some very nice games for under a tenner but there's a good reason why they're priced that way. Would you pay £40 for the same game? No, of course, you wouldn't and that's the point; these games offer good value for what you pay but they cannot really compete with "proper" games. If they could then you'd happily pay £30-£40 for them, right?


I disagree. The reason people in general, and even I wouldn't pay more than £10 for those games is because we're dumb consumers and when we buy those games, we consider ourselves to be taking a risk. The more mainstream games with the bigger pricetags, some of us are prepared to pay (I don't.. I wait for those to be a tenner as well :-D) because we KNOW what to expect...or... we think we do.

I do love many many 3D games, butI can happily tell you now, that if I KNEW what to expect before buying Braid, I would trade over half my collection for it. It's hard to put in perspective, because Braid is one of those games which is an experience, so the first/second time of playing it would be the most important, after that, yeah it's maybe less valuable as something to own. I'm not saying that Braid doesn't have a lot of replay value, but yes, it probably has less long-term appeal than a good action game, BUT if I knew how much I'd love it before buying it, I'd find it hard to put a limit on how much I'd be prepared to pay, but it would be in at least the hundreds. Indeed, all of the games you mentioned "GTA IV, Oblivion, Ratchet & Clank: ToD, Virtua Tennis 3, PGR 4" - LOVE 'em! But (Geometry Wars Waves in PGR4 aside) I'd trade them all for Braid if I could only experience one or the other.

However, I'd go even further than that for games like Geometry Wars or Wik: Fable of Souls. Those games have far FAR more replay value for me than most 3D or "proper" games for me. So while having already experienced Braid I might now be willing to part with it, I would even now keep Geometry Wars or Wik over any of the games you mentioned, or 99% of 3D games that I may also love.

With most things in life, retail price does not necessarily equate to quality or worth. With videogames, this is perhaps more true than any other commodity.

"The problem with puzzle games is that once you know the solution, half the fun has gone. The fact that the review doesn't address this point (in fact, oddly for a "review" it seems utterly devoid of any criticism whatsoever) yet hands out a 10/10"

I don't know who originally wrote that, saw it quoted, with an appropriate response to the effect of "so you want it marked down because it's a puzzle game". Ok some puzzle games (err... tetris!) have infinite replay value, others have no replay value (the kind of puzzles you find in most generic 3D action games, which you can only solve in 1 particular way), and others still (like Braid) have some replay value, in that there's different ways to approach them. Beyond the fact that Braid has accomplished speedrunning potential, it also even has some of the best hidden secrets (or collectibles) ever seen in games. The stars are so hard to find, that I didn't even know they existed, and nor did anyone else I've met without hearing it from somewhere first. Normally, I despise that sort of thing and consider it an excuse just to flog guidebooks or what have you, but in Braid it really does work. It's 2D, it's a small world, it's a game about obsession i many ways, so to hide the stars SO well in that environment is not only an accomplishment in itself on this occasion, but a triumph of integrated design.

So I'd say Braid has an incredible amount of depth, and a decent amount of replay value with it, but replay value and longevity (though vital in some videogame contexts) needn't always be contributing factors in a game's worth or score. Ico would be another example of this for me; a 6 hour game that you'd likely only play through twice. very lttle replay value, very little longevity, yet utterly unmissable, and a deep, remarkable (albeit fairytale) experience that stays with you.

So yeah, in a way Dan missed out on pointing out that there IS some replay value in Braid (rather than that there isn't any) and maybe he could've said things like rewinding when you die all the time is a bit tiring/bothersome/gives you a headache. So in that sense I was wrong - he didn't provide a QUITE complete degree of consumer information. However the lack of criticism present in the review is understandable. He said he doesn't give out 10s often, and this is a 10. You walk away from Braid not dwelling on some of the more mundane aspects of its mechanics, but knowing that you've just witnessed one of the most charming videogame experiences of all time, and almost certainly THE most intelligently, intricately designed. I say that having played a hell of a lot of games of every genre, on every platform, from the pong era to the present, and I have huge respect and appreciation for many of those, so for me, as brief as it is, Braid is something truly momentous.

P.S. Yes, I know I'm long-winded and months out of date, but such is my nature :)

I love this game. Just fire it up (trial or full version), and pass the pad to someone who plays video games, but hasn't heard of this.

Watch their face, and wait for the 'Oh shit!'s as they start manipulating time to solve the puzzles for the first time.

Wonderful piece of work.

Ah! Although it is one of the best, most intelligently designed games of all time, it leaves me with a bitter/shallow aftertaste.

The reasons for that are:

- it made me think, doubt and think again, not only about the game itself, but about life. But it didn't make me happy. The storyline(s) just don't make you happy.

- to get all the stars the game demands a level of patience probably only few, very few players are able to invest

- the replay value is not very high

I admit that the last 2 reasons I gave are just there to support my argumentation, but the truth is, that I don't really care about them. I am just so unhappy with how the story (regardless of how good it is) turned out to be, what it was about and how it "ended" :/

Anyways, it's a work of art. One that I'll never touch or play again :)