The game is extremely darker than you thought, the ending is not a positive one at all. If you look closely, you can see the hill the blob falls down is exactly the same as the diorama from earlier. It's yet another constructed area by the system, it did not escape.
@Danny BRITZMAN Sure the whole "you were acting according to plan all along"-ending is pretty cliche but I think in this case it actually fits pretty well thematically as a remark on how a system of control can become so total that it even incorporates controlled avenues for descent. To the point where you could easily close the game and think that you have broken free and only if you look closely enough might you notice that perhaps every seemingly transgressive action you took was actually still well accounted for by this system. Of course this might be just some reused assets in a game but I think it's also quite fitting as a conclusion how there really is no hope for an individual to escape a sufficiently advanced controlling structure.
You might find that the higher powers are actually impossible to get away from. At the blob part there is a small-scale mockup of the final scene with the cliffside inside the laboratories. This alludes to the fact that the entire scenario was fabricated and controlled from start to finish. This makes the other ending the good one as it is you the player opting to not succumb to the whim of the higher power.
Yeah.. I interpreted it as collectivism vs individualism. Being a part of the blob (the collective) feels powerful but that turns you into a very useful tool when manipulated. You will be made to believe that becoming part of the blob is actually your idea even when you quite clearly are becoming a monster in the process Only by questioning it, making an effort and seeing past that can you actually "escape the game" and really be free
Came here to comment this. Add to that that, taking it as one contiguous progression from start to finish, there is actually no conceivable way for the player to still be above sea level at the end, considering how far you've descended. So, at the very least, the ending is probably an artificial environment.
Yep, the final scene is an elaborate simulation. You can even see that the wall you break through curves around it- implying that "outside" is circularly enclosed.
I do really like the removal of identity that happens when you join the blob. After spending so much time with this kid, you're gonna project a bit of personality into him and taking that all away was a really cool idea.
Yeah! I think the relationship between society and identity is symbiotic; notably counter culture may not condone or consent to the actions in which their society partakes; but nonetheless, they are informed by each other: 'Counter culture' is not the "us" (The Last of Us, ES-vid) which embodies all the values of their society but are those [values] contrasted by them. And Society responds, in one fashion or another, too to the actions of the people who comprise it. Which makes the individual at an interesting divergence, not necessarily a choice but collection of choices to seek their ends, assimilate with society or challenge society: And so as an individual the kid is confined to two options of loss (of their autonomy/agency over their own identity)(I find). And so we may project and personify, but I wounder to what extend can the boy know thyself[?] (Also thinking about Westworld, PBSIC-vid)
Any comments on the part around 60-70% through when the boy is effectively drowned? I've seen some say that he's 'saved' by the underwater creature but to me I saw it as, no, he dies. I think this because a) in every other scenario in the game being caught by one of those things equals death so why would this one save him, and b) *how* exactly are we meant to believe he was saved? Some new magic gills implanted in him by a monster? No, in my reading, for the rest of the game it's a worm (or w/e) inside* the boy doing the 'thinking' (for want of a better word) and inhabiting the boy's body. This is why you no longer need to worry about oxygen, as he's literally no longer breathing. Of course the player control remains unchanged. *geddit?
You actually missed a few things. It could be argued that the blob doesn't actually escape the facility and simply believes it has escaped. This can be shown if you look at 12:43 in your video, the "outside" is perfectly modelled, with the god-beam coming down on where you land and everything. Which sort of make sense, because, why would the scientists and everyone be trying so hard to help you escape? They give you the means of escape multiple times. Also, you say that the blob survives it's escape, I would say otherwise, as it simply sits there, essentially motionless after escaping. The way I interpreted it was sort of the same as the fan theory for the Matrix, that the "Real world" that Neo escapes to is not actually the real world but instead another Matrix for those who became dissatisfied with the first one.
Think of it in the sense of a mental imprint saftey protocol. If we implant a specific location as a sense of hope or beacon of freedom and safety then it will try to 'escape' there and stay. Where it then can be collected again and returned to the facility. Basically the diorama is a trophy display case to that idea. 'look what the engineers in team B did? Oooooweeee'
Maybe that lamp thing that gave the boy to breathe majorly affected the blob in a more focused light stream at the end because the mermaid would freeze in light so if the boy could breathe he had a fragment I guess.
I'm glad you mentioned the trial and error elements of Limbo and Inside. I played Limbo, and watched a Let's Play for Inside, and decided I kind of hate these games because they basically seem constructed to kill you for not knowing what to do at any given moment -- but the only way *to* know is to die and retry. That frustration overrides anything else enjoyable (or otherwise) about this game for me.
You don't really address the fact that it all seems to quite clearly be a test. We have the diorama that looks exactly like the ending shot and the (presumed) scientists are literally pointing you in the right direction at times. The fact that people are basically running to get a good spot for the show because they know what's coming (even if you don't) would also seem to support the "you are being controlled" theme to me. Even when the boy is inside the facility, you have people either ignoring him or running past him to get a good view of the blob. Earlier we see people running into the facility itself, clearly in a hurry. Also while I agree about the puzzle design, the narrative conceit makes sense of them all. Yes it's quite convenient that you have exactly the things you need to solve this puzzle - because this is a test that's been deliberately set out for you. I don't know if they could get away with this style of game a 3rd time, but I think Inside is a pretty tight package - the narrative retroactively justifies the gameplay, and you see it all with a different eye on a second playthrough. I was pretty impressed.
This is an old comment, but I couldn't help but wonder why you thought this was "clearly" a test? The ending sequences have you literally run over other humans in your path as they're running away from you in panic. If they saw all saw the signs of the blob coming to life and knew what it meant, they would've evacuated the facility earlier to prevent any casualties. If anything, this was a very badly thought-out test. It makes more sense in my opinion to see those final sequences as "just" a contingency plan going into motion when they realise the blob is actually free. I'm actually curious because I haven't really seen anyone else bring up that specific theory.
I feel that on some level I should hate the cheap deaths in this game (and Limbo), but I don't. I agree with your well made point about the tension in the chase sequence, but as a whole i guess I just looked at the sequences as puzzles, not action set pieces. Which may be a cop out but hey ho. I began to equate dying with the noise from The Witness when you answer a puzzle incorrectly. I would just shrug it off and say "ah well that wasn't the answer, let's try again". This mind-set seems to be helped by the super short load times and lack of meaningful penalty when you die.
each death animation is also extremely rich and emotionally powerful and alarming -- they highlighted the brutality of the environment, the vulnerability of the boy, and the stakes of his mission
I disagree with the notion that Inside (and Limbo)'s trial-and-error approach to puzzle solving is disruptive. For me these are very deliberate design choices that hark back to 1980s platformers -- the notion that some puzzles have to be brute-forced and that your character will die a dozen deaths in order to learn information about how to overcome those puzzles. I couldn't help but think of Rick Dangerous (a game that very obviously inspired Spelunky too) while playing Limbo and Inside. For every success state that's attached to a puzzle in Inside, there's two or three equally interesting fail states -- so much so that it can be just as rewarding to discover as many of those as possible and gain an insight into how they inform the narrative and world building. If I found myself breezing through a (potentially lethal) puzzle on my first attempt, I'd invariably feel that I'd missed some of the game's content and thus restore a checkpoint to see how things could have played out if I'd failed. That the fail states often outnumber the success states -- and that so much time and effort went into conceptualizing, storyboarding, and animating them -- is endlessly fascinating to me and suggests Playdead are perhaps a bit more willing than other developers to play around in that space where mechanics and narrative collide. Whether or not they fully succeed is open to debate, but the glorious fail states in both Limbo and Inside were what made them such fascinating experiences for me.
I *totally* agree with you here Mark. I've seen argued elsewhere that INSIDE's failstate production quality is cultivated to the point of fetishizing child-death. I found that somewhat extreme, but I think it resonated with the idea that death, or fail-states, should be part of the experience. that even intelligent critics feel their ego being threatened by such an uncompetitive experience as a cinematic platformer is hilarious to me -- death is a way of life, especially when the story so strongly implies you are not the only red-shirted little boy in the world -- you're one of many, and most of them die along the way, chaff to this sprawling industrial machine. that held serious narrative impact for me.
I wasn't intending to comment on anything on this video, but this is a tremendous and insightful response to another tremendous and insightful comment. That is a *really* interesting approach to certain characteristics of the game that were overlooked, simply because it was presented as an "intellectually-stimulating and provocative indie platformer"! Your comment shook me up hahaha.
I feel like this notion comes down to preference. There will be people who find it annoying that they have to die every time to bruteforce the solution, and would rather be telegraphed in the slightest manner to feel the satisfaction of being smart enough to figure it out on the first go. IMO, this was way more prevelant in Limbo than in Inside. And then there's the people, like yourself, who enjoy seeing all that a game has to give. I think both sides are equally worthy of pursuing when it comes to games like these, where dying is usually quite a common thing. Nice insights though.
I agree, Mark. I'd liken it to the "king's quest" era of adventure games maybe. The character's death is part of the experience. Especially with Limbo. I'd say Limbo was a series of traps as opposed to a series of puzzles.
yes, failure can be used in an interesting way in games. however, not everyone gets it right, and depending on laser specific circumstances, can instead of feeling like a growth scenario, instead feel like the game is laughing at you or just causing you to fail deliberately for the sake of it. it can be a tricky line to balance.
I'm not sure how much it was intended, but the trial and error style of limbo's puzzles played into, I thought, the general themes and ideas of the game. Causing you to die over and over provided a quick and easy window into how terrifying of a situation the kid was in. It doesn't play well, but it does get that across.
Agreed. Justification for Limbo's cruel and unfair challenge design is in the game's very title. I didn't like Limbo much but if there's ever been a game that is allowed to be abstract, vague and unfair it's Limbo.
I can't say dying in chasing sequences ever broke the pacing for me, and that's again largely thanks to the sound and music design, but also the way they animate every fail, so you see something new, albeit disturbing, even if you've made a mistake, and finally it just fades in and out of black instead of having a loading screen or a retry prompt.
1:33 But later in the game you use what you learned from your past failure to trick and kill two guys chasing you. I think the game is trying to say "you learn from your failure" and "knowledge can be used as a weapon". Which plays into the theme of the game.
I did most puzzles in the first section of the game my first try. There's really no other way to do it, they can't distill them even more without outright removing those events or trivializing player input. 3:30
I agree that if a game tries to build a sense of flow, then it's obstacles should not also halt that flow. A game like Amnesia (Dark Descent) managed this balance very well: every obstacle you encounter when you're chased in a scripted event is something that you've seen before and should be familiar with enough to react quickly and avoid death.
6:39 Very well said. I'm hoping that in the future developers will actually learn to do the reverse - figure out what kind of effect given set of mechanics brings and then derive the tone and meaning from it (or at least ask themselves if it fits). Most of the time they seem to not have enough time to do that. Isn't it like this that if you figure out this stuff properly then it creates experiences that we can call profound? It works for books and paintings. It should for games too.
Theodore Caesar Moseby Yeah, I think the story mistook being deep with being vague. It was kinda pretentious. I still enjoyed the hell out of it, though. It was great just for the visuals and atmosphere alone.
I don't think that's fair. It could just as well be argued that a great deal of thought went into conveying a range of fundamental conflicts in human society -- and then were stripped of all linguistic reference. Just because these notions are obscured, I think it's unfair to call them vague. You will find a deeper interpretation if you search for it.
buildings and food No, that's stupid. All there was is a notion of deep themes and an interesting context with no reasoning at to why they exist. There are faceless men attacking a certain boy, why? There's a facility attempting to create slaves of drones. For what exactly, world control? What are the outside forces which they would want to conquer, or defend against? Why does the blob exist? Why is there a diorama of an exact replica at the end for? A powerful weapon? Which killed seemingly the facilities' own employees? Why is a bunch of computers wired to a mind control helmet? What's their purpose for? Why does the boy seemingly act like a drone when he pulls out the cable? Is he a drone himself? Then why did the faceless guys earlier try to kill him? Why did he crawl down that mountain in the first place right at the start? Did the boy know about the facility and try to stop it? Or was he sent there in false implications? All of these questions are never addressed.
I think there's more of a thematic element to the "the blob was controlling the boy all along" theory, personally. If you accept the player character as an avatar of the self, it means that the blob was controlling YOU all along. And it was controlling you in a way that you likely didn't think about. Did you ever think to wonder "why am I moving right?" Maybe you did, but I'll guess a lot of people didn't. You don't ask why you move right when you play sidescrolling platformers; the instinct is so ingrained into the general game-playing public that we don't even really think about it most of the time. The blob made you move right so you could be absorbed. The message here, to me, is clear: acting without thinking, acting out of habit and nothing else, will let you be taken advantage of and the entity that does so will subsume you.
Oh shit, finally someone who agrees with my unpopular LIMBO opinion. People always argue that it's acceptable because you don't lose much progress, but that doesn't make it feel less cheap.
An interesting note as to the plot (although I recommend you watch Night Mind's video on the game to see it explained in more detail): Based on all available evidence, we can surmise that the laboratory/facility is developing the Blob as a control-node to make the use of drones easier. They have tried this before, but suffered catastrophic failure. See: - Drones can control drones (which as this notes is used in several puzzles and further alluded to in the "secret ending"), hence the blob (composed of many individuals merged into a single whole) could presumably control many drones (as suggested by the multiple control helmets attached to it) but _be_ controlled by a single individual in turn. *_The blob is intended as a force-multiplier._* - The entire flooded/underwater segment takes place in what is, upon closer examination, a heavily damaged replica/precursor of the area around the blob's silo/viewing chamber. You even swim past a number of smaller observation rooms identical to the ones scattered around the blob chamber. Furthermore, the part of the game taking place in the operational laboratory is full of signs designating it "Sector 4", whereas the flooded area contains signs designating it "Sector 3".
Another recurring theme in the game I saw pointed out by the fabulous Night Mind was _sacrifice_: nearly every encounter in which control is a topic involves someone dying to fulfill the goal. Of all the chicks thrown at that crate, _one_ of them is always motionless afterwards. Several times, there is _one_ dead drone. And in the end, it is _you_ who are sacrificed to the benefit of the whole, absorbed into the blob.
I think you hit the nail on the head with how INSIDE's tone is what makes it worthwhile. I personally thought the ending was too vague to really derive much meaning from it, but due to the tone of the game the ending sequence still managed to provoke an effective reaction.
My first play through of the first segment looked a lot like your last. I jumped over the obstacles instinctively and stopped running when I got behind the car because I thought that maybe I had managed to get away, only to keep running when I saw that I was wrong. It seems this game is getting a lot of praise, but I haven't seen anyone who claims to have experienced it as fully as I almost did. In my first run, my first death was me checking to see if I was just paranoid and these people weren't actually a danger to me. Such was the illusion of freedom the game managed to create for me.
i always thought the artifice was acknowledged, though. Limbo was a nightmarish trip through either his subconscious or purgatory himself, it's so spiritual it would be easy to attribute it all to an author or designer putting these obstacles in your way with a way to progress through them. with the fake escape towards the end of Inside, too, it's easy to imagine that it was all pre-planned, considering how the scientists grant you an audience, help you, and how the blob was obviously expecting/controlling your arrival.
Another note for the potentially bleak ending: it could also be extrapolated that in order to escape a system controlling and oppressing you, you need to control and oppress others, because if the blob did control the boy in order to escape, it had to feed into the very system controlling it in order to do so
Hi. Here's my thought on the puzzle to the 2nd ending. I think Limbo could get you really stuck on some levels and maybe, wanting to make Inside more fluid pushed them to make the puzzles easier, which they are. So, to balance with that, they created a enigma of sorts. I didn't think of it at the time so I asked the internet but truth is, there are clues all around and and it makes for a sort of scavenger hunt. The yellow wires help, sure, but more importantly, the achievements are clues themselves. There is no wire in the field but the achievement's name is "Field Research". And if you find the last one, There's a map of them. A vague one, sure but still. With the big letter E lying around which you can find next to one of the secrets with the "key" sound you need to open the final door. If you look for the secrets like you would in any other game by exploring everything mindlessly, it can feel like a grind but if you use the clues and take it as a scavenger hunt, it makes it much more satisfying. Also, I think the whole game feels like we're a disease going through the body. Starting at the bottom, through pig mud and up to the brain, passing through drowned lungs and a beating heart (beating really hard in our face) etc...
Wow Chris, this is one of the best episodes you've done so far. A perfect balance between analysis and opinion, considering very accurately both positive and negative aspects of the game and a perfect duration. I really enjoyed it, thanks!
I believe that the boy begins as one of the last not controlled humans (maybe even chasing after his family being taken in the truck in the beginning), but drowns in the middle and becomes a drone being controlled by The Blob. Notice that something is being injected into him and from that point onward he doesn't need to breathe. I haven't seen the secret ending before and it does throw a wrench in this theory, but I'm willing to believe, that the facility, clearly trying to create a biocomputer, is started by a man controlling others. Maybe it's actually him who wants the boy to kill the electricity? The game is ripe with possible intepretations, though I must say that I love how the 2D perspective meshes with themes of control. All those "crafted" puzzles are exactly that, they are crafted by the entity controlling the boy, as it is actually the most efficient way to merge with the blob.
Never actually comment (although I'm a HUGE fan). I just have to say that actually the setting of the game does make sense to me way more than Limbo's wishy washy afterlife since for me it felt as the whole process was designed as a 'trial' for the blob and its extension (the boy). This I believe is made clear when you end up in this space that resembles a stage and you, the blob, are being watched by a lot of people. You were being expected to arrive at some point. And all the trials to reach that point were designed to test the capability of the blob (must admit mermaid boy does not fit into this). And even the scientist are kind of guiding/aiding you out of the station in a non-agressive way. I'm really not a fan of going into details and fan-fic things but even dying and repeating feels as a part of the story and not just a mechanic. Maybe you are kid #908 who finally managed to reach the blob and merge with it. Or maybe others have reached already and you are just the drop that spilled the cup. In that context it also makes sense for you as an extension of the blob to have the choice to opt out and finally break the cycle of control once you are aware of the final result through several attemps. Collectively the blob has completed several cycles and managed disconnected the network all around it so that it needs one more step to fully be free/die.
I guess I'll only address the intro for this video. I really hope you touch on similarities between Dishonored 2 and Thief 2. Like how Delilah and the witches are Victoria and the pagans, or how Jindosh and his robots with his voice are the builder and his robots with his voice. And how they cast Stephen Russel. With maybe a call back to the recent Thief and how not to revive a franchise.
2:58 "He's gone down the slop...damn it we've lost him" lol I too hate the trial and error system of the puzzles, but over all for some reason this game really hit a nerve with me. It was definitely one of my top experiences via game in 2016
the end of INSIDE as a ray of hope? you are so sweet Chris :') I see it as the absolute most depressing note of the sordid tale. there is no escape from the systems of social control.
you didn't mention that fact you passby a room that looks super close to the place the blob stops at, implying even when he 'escaped' he didn't really and it's believed throughout the entire thing you were always 'inside'
I know that for some people this is blasphemy, but I have the same feeling with the puzzles on ico. maybe is because I finally played it on this weekend.
I think we all fell on the optimism trick at the end. You even made this video about it. And for this fact, that Playdead even manipulated through the game narrative to make us think we were free (when we were not), I just stand up and clap. This game goes far beyond any game I´ve played.
i feel like the game was designed to give us the experience of power dehumanizing others and even ourselves. so we can experience this change and reflect on how even we are guilty of it and what that means for society. its not making a specific claim about this power or that power but about the nature of power in general, so i feel that the vagueness was definitely warranted.
That tangled script from the beginning of the episode sounds pretty impressive. Considering that you finished "Everything" before finishing that script, I'd say it has a lot of potential.
There's still a positive read on the ending even after you see the diorama that implies the ending is faked by the higher powers. While the ending does show that you haven't escaped their control, the scenery and lighting and color still imply happiness. so I'd argue the ending could represent the idea that if you can accept where you are in life and make peace with the powers that control you, you still have a shot at happiness
theres a piece to the story that completely goes against your take away - the grass and the beach are shown as a model inside the lab, as if the blob was only ever manipulated to crave that specific ending. so even though you escape, you were never pursing your own dream so much as your programming. even in your escape you are still a slave.
What happened in 2017 that was terrifying and sad? I can't even remember any more. It has always been the Backstreet Boys Reunion Tour and it will always be the Backstreet Boys Reunion Tour.
13:52 That's not a universal sentiment, you know. Some people seem pretty happy. Also, the tone and story of the game seem to relate to much larger events than just the past year's politics. 1984 comes to mind.
3:50 that's just not a problem I had. I died once and then I did the whole sequence. That way it flows pretty well. The Puzzles I found annoying were the ones that require you to perform the same action two or three times. After I've proven that I understand the puzzle I shouldn't have to demonstrate it over and over. That's just inconveniencing the player. I also seem to have a completely different read of the ending from everyone else I've seen? Sort of a tragic ''almost made it''. It's only a few meters to the water and you can see the sun but the blob can't move anymore.
I agree that the trial by error game mechanic in Limbo was cheap, brute forced and dishonest. That was the whole fun of it though! You couldn't trust your expectations of the level design, which only added to the over all atmosphere of the game. When it was cheap, it was cheap at your expense, yes, but in a way that let you know the designers were being cheeky, not mean spirited. For the vast majority of puzzles I found my self laughing at the deadly surprises. That platform/piston puzzle you mentioned had me cracking up big time when I first fell for the trap. I felt like it was a morbid sense of humour that drove many of the puzzle designs, which to me at least - was refreshing and fun!
If you want to play this game and UNDERSTAND THE STORY: The boy is a metaphore for the video-game itself. The bad corporation people are big publishing studios. Figure out the rest for yourself! Much more fun if you know what's goin on
This is the so manieth review about this game where nothing is mentioned about the ending possibly not being what it appears to be. During the first moments of being the Blob, you smash through the glass of a model of the exact place that you break out of (or rather, into) in the very end. Seeing I adore your videos because of the extreme insight you give to the games you review and/or talk about, I'm sad that this wasn't noticed, or perhaps talked about. I would still love your thoughts on this.
This game kills on atmosphere and damn near feels like with a few tweaks it'd a be a great way to do a game version of Stranger Things. As it is, you go though a lot just to have your time wasted on some esoteric meta statement. Deadlight may have had a pat twist, but the story and gameplay were coherent and felt rewarding enough to play more than once, rather than disincentivized.
My interpretation of the finale hinted at a much bleaker and depressing end for the boy/hive mind. As stated by others here the diorama you fall on while trying to escape the facility is an exact replica of the environment the game's final moments take place in. Even the small beam of sunlight that gives solace to the hive mind is artificial or a simulacra. Thematically I feel that interpretation of the ending fits appropriately given that Inside's tone and imagery invoke larger questions on individuality vs the collective, fate vs free will, societal/government oppression, conformity, and multiple layers of control. I kinda of got a 'Myth of Sisyphus' and 'Plato's Allegory of the Cave' mixed with '1984' vibe which is awesome coming from a game with no dialogue or text.
It seems like you'd get the exact same experience of this game just by watching another person play it, maybe even a better experience as you get to experience the atmosphere without having to deal with block puzzles.
one thing to consider: when you control the blob, you fall down this shaft and land in a minature of the ending screen, so most likely you're still doing what the government wants.
Games like Teslagrad, Out There Somewhere, Redder, Toki Tori 2+ simply bypass puzzle artificiality problems entirely by virtue of being metroidvanias, where you often will encounter puzzles that you can't even attempt to solve - yet, without either more tools or information. Of course, this has added problem of making games about a place they're taking well, place, in - so it's hardly a universal solution. I guess another approach would be to make puzzles "not puzzles" and more problems to solve, like in Zachtronics games like TIS-100 or SpaceChem - with puzzles not having necessarily a clear pre-designed 'solution' as such.
My reading of the ending was a lot darker than yours. After the blob suffered a nearly slapstick degree of bouncing down the hill, when the game stopped taking player input I assumed it was indicating that the blob had died. I'm not sure if it's grimmer for the game to be saying "The only escape is death" or "Look at this guy who tried to escape, he's dead now", but either way, dark.
Regarding Limbo, the mean trick that the designers play on you is somewhat alleviated by the fact that you get to play the exact same trick on a group of hostile kids immediately afterwards.
But there is actually a clue as to why the boy just stumbles upon puzzles that can be solved immediately. As a blob you fall into a model of the shore that the blob ends up on in the end. It shows that ALL of it was planned. I think that's as valid as an explanation as the one from Portal, etc.
if the theme is that everyone is controlled, this requires some kind of godlike figure who rules over this, or it is just basically determinism. and the debate about determinism isnt really as... grim, as this shows it to be. im thinking about compatibalistic theories etc, that definitely works in this kind of context. in general, the idea of free will in it self turns out to not really mean anything.
I was interested by the point you made about the dying-and-trying-again mechanic taking the tension and fun out of the chase, and it seems like (from one perspective) that’s in service to the world-building in the same way that the frustratingly unfair puzzle you mention from Limbo was in service to the world-building of that game: I don’t end up with a sense of immediate crisis and tension, but an overall sense of melancholy. (This is almost certainly reading too far into the game, but the puzzle construction that makes a world where everything is too conveniently placed [but placed just inconveniently enough that you die a few times before solving a puzzle] kind of jives with an explanation of these games taking place in a world designed by some omnipotent being that’s actively antagonistic to the player.)
You know, it's funny. The blob believes that it has escaped, but it's a ruse set up by the scientists. Likewise, Chris also believes that the blob has escaped, but he's fallen for the developers' trick. The blob and Chris, the scientists and the developers... that's some meta shit. It could almost be intentional.
Seems to me to be a modernist work of fiction. "What do YOU think it means?" I like how it looks and plays. I like the lack of conversation and visual story telling. I'm not altogether convinced this is some powerful, meaningful and philosophical ground breaker or game changer. Seems more cute and quirky than broad or grandiose. I'd say that if there are any questions of how an individual can escape a tyrannical system, its quite simple: skepticism.
I'm also interested on that (possible) video you were talking at the beginning ;0 I'm gonna watch this because it's interesting too, but i hope you haven't throwed that script, i'm really into inmersive sims.
I would argue that the criticism that the game "doesn't say enough" is kind of inane. Video games are fantastic artistic tools for exploring ideas in a way that is totally different from books, movies, and music. Just because a game doesn't take a moral stance that you agree with on every idea it explores doesn't mean it didn't successfully explore the idea.
Someone here pointed out that the model at 12:40 shows us the shoreline at the end of the game, implying that the people in the factory are expecting you to get there eventually. There is also the scene where the blob is trying to grab the box above it and there's pretty much an audience watching you do it like they had set the whole thing up for an animal in an exhibit. It's implied that the entire event is staged by the people in the factory. As vague as the game is, I think it puts forward a very bleak thesis about control: machinations of control culminate with the manipulation of the desire for freedom i.e mechanisms that make the subject believe they are free when they are not while exploiting those very behaviors for further control. It's a pretty straightforward point but I think the game does a great job of making you experience it viscerally.
the game is full of references to the idea that You, the player-character, are nothing special, nothing new. The stages prior to the encounter with the Huddle are actually numbered in order -- they are just drowned, decomposing clones of the functioning lab you finally enter, as if tragedy has struck the same project several times before, and the whole society is merely going through the motions, rebuilding atop the rubble. you can even recognize the architecture.
Maybe the game only asks questions about control and leaves the answering to the players as opposed to mediums questioning and answering their own themes to the audience. I saw a gdc video about Warren Specter saying games being a more suitable medium for asking questions on themes and letting the players answer it through their own interpretation of interactions provided by the game even at the cost of developer intent. But that's his philosophy. I really have no idea what to make make of this game other than it being good and unique compared to the mainstream ones.
I think your read is generally good on the game, though my personal reading assumes that the group that made the blob and facility orchestrated your escape intentionally, and so includes more themes of manipulation and "followers" as part of the narrative theming around power. Of particular note, you only get more powerful, the more you take advantage of the tools given to you by the organization you're theoretically fighting to be free from.
I really liked Inside. Interesting analysis. One thing though: the world has ALWAYS been sad and terrifying. You've just discovered that the world is bigger than your immediate surrounding. :/ Sorry about that but it's the first step before changing the world, so...
Fucking finally, I hate this channel so much. You articulate exactly what I'm thinking which is simultaneously relieving and frustrating because it makes me feel dumb for not having expressed myself clearly earlier. But yeah, this is exactly what I was thinking, good work.
I haven t played this or Limbo, but watching this video I was constantly thinking "this looks very much like a modern take on Another World" ("Outside of this world" if you are in the US). What about making a video on Another World and discuss its legacy?
"there is hope, these systems are not permanent or omnipotent and can be held at bay with empathy and unity..." I disagree that art needs to have some kind of moral like this. I blame high school book reports for making us look for these obvious theses in everything.
It's great seeing a new episode. I also had troubles with the game, mechanically is boring and conterproductive (unless the deaths are a cheap mean to extend play time, but that's a bit cynic), the art direction has some ups and downs (while some vistas are nice/interesting/eerie, there is nothing that would make you stop moving foward), the story is a bit weird (it's an in medias res, but it never adresses why you are being chased and it keeps ambiguous to the very end) and the meaning of the game is a bit shallow (it borrows some tried and true symbolism like the conga line, the drones, the blob, etc. but I can't put my finger on what is trying to say... uncheked cience is bad? the nature of free will? death as freedom? mind controling? meta commentary about games?). All in all is not something not worth experiencing, but many things are lost in it's horrible gameplay. They should have taken some advices from Jonathan Blow and trim down some parts of the game that don't help to the overall experience.
The game is extremely darker than you thought, the ending is not a positive one at all. If you look closely, you can see the hill the blob falls down is exactly the same as the diorama from earlier. It's yet another constructed area by the system, it did not escape.
So close, yet so far...
Danny BRITZMAN I agree but technically it’s just called cliché, no “d” at the end
@Danny BRITZMAN Sure the whole "you were acting according to plan all along"-ending is pretty cliche but I think in this case it actually fits pretty well thematically as a remark on how a system of control can become so total that it even incorporates controlled avenues for descent. To the point where you could easily close the game and think that you have broken free and only if you look closely enough might you notice that perhaps every seemingly transgressive action you took was actually still well accounted for by this system.
Of course this might be just some reused assets in a game but I think it's also quite fitting as a conclusion how there really is no hope for an individual to escape a sufficiently advanced controlling structure.
That... I totally missed that. That's really cool Sardonic. (12:41)
As a wrinkle to the escape-the-system idea with the blob ending: you can see the see a model of the final shore line around 12:40.
Holy shit...
2 hours too late:)) Yepp, that makes optimistism about the ending where you ran from authorities questionble
I don't see anything there, where do you mean?
At 12:42 when the blob is in a circular thing theres the shoreline with the sunray and all.
Oh well crap then
You might find that the higher powers are actually impossible to get away from. At the blob part there is a small-scale mockup of the final scene with the cliffside inside the laboratories. This alludes to the fact that the entire scenario was fabricated and controlled from start to finish. This makes the other ending the good one as it is you the player opting to not succumb to the whim of the higher power.
Yeah.. I interpreted it as collectivism vs individualism.
Being a part of the blob (the collective) feels powerful but that turns you into a very useful tool when manipulated. You will be made to believe that becoming part of the blob is actually your idea even when you quite clearly are becoming a monster in the process
Only by questioning it, making an effort and seeing past that can you actually "escape the game" and really be free
Dave The Dwarf If only they could explain fucking why they did this in the first place.
Came here to comment this. Add to that that, taking it as one contiguous progression from start to finish, there is actually no conceivable way for the player to still be above sea level at the end, considering how far you've descended. So, at the very least, the ending is probably an artificial environment.
Yep, the final scene is an elaborate simulation.
You can even see that the wall you break through curves around it- implying that "outside" is circularly enclosed.
The facility employees even help you at certain times, opening up doors for u.
I do really like the removal of identity that happens when you join the blob. After spending so much time with this kid, you're gonna project a bit of personality into him and taking that all away was a really cool idea.
Yeah!
I think the relationship between society and identity is symbiotic; notably counter culture may not condone or consent to the actions in which their society partakes; but nonetheless, they are informed by each other:
'Counter culture' is not the "us" (The Last of Us, ES-vid) which embodies all the values of their society but are those [values] contrasted by them.
And Society responds, in one fashion or another, too to the actions of the people who comprise it.
Which makes the individual at an interesting divergence, not necessarily a choice but collection of choices to seek their ends, assimilate with society or challenge society: And so as an individual the kid is confined to two options of loss (of their autonomy/agency over their own identity)(I find).
And so we may project and personify, but I wounder to what extend can the boy know thyself[?] (Also thinking about Westworld, PBSIC-vid)
Wait, they made all the sound INSIDE a skull? Now that's using your noggin!
Not all of it, but some of the drone sounds we're re-recorded with the acoustics of the skull.
Using someone else's noggin.
It's mine now >:)
And if someone inserted their privates into the eye sockets (which they definitely did), it'd be really using your knobbin.
Any comments on the part around 60-70% through when the boy is effectively drowned? I've seen some say that he's 'saved' by the underwater creature but to me I saw it as, no, he dies. I think this because a) in every other scenario in the game being caught by one of those things equals death so why would this one save him, and b) *how* exactly are we meant to believe he was saved? Some new magic gills implanted in him by a monster?
No, in my reading, for the rest of the game it's a worm (or w/e) inside* the boy doing the 'thinking' (for want of a better word) and inhabiting the boy's body. This is why you no longer need to worry about oxygen, as he's literally no longer breathing. Of course the player control remains unchanged.
*geddit?
You actually missed a few things. It could be argued that the blob doesn't actually escape the facility and simply believes it has escaped. This can be shown if you look at 12:43 in your video, the "outside" is perfectly modelled, with the god-beam coming down on where you land and everything. Which sort of make sense, because, why would the scientists and everyone be trying so hard to help you escape? They give you the means of escape multiple times.
Also, you say that the blob survives it's escape, I would say otherwise, as it simply sits there, essentially motionless after escaping. The way I interpreted it was sort of the same as the fan theory for the Matrix, that the "Real world" that Neo escapes to is not actually the real world but instead another Matrix for those who became dissatisfied with the first one.
then again, they did put you in some kind of silo at the end of their little "show"...
Think of it in the sense of a mental imprint saftey protocol. If we implant a specific location as a sense of hope or beacon of freedom and safety then it will try to 'escape' there and stay. Where it then can be collected again and returned to the facility. Basically the diorama is a trophy display case to that idea. 'look what the engineers in team B did? Oooooweeee'
Maybe that lamp thing that gave the boy to breathe majorly affected the blob in a more focused light stream at the end because the mermaid would freeze in light so if the boy could breathe he had a fragment I guess.
Also, if you map out the boy's path he takes throughout the game, there is literally no way he's outside.
This game is fucked up, but totally worth playing
I'm glad you mentioned the trial and error elements of Limbo and Inside. I played Limbo, and watched a Let's Play for Inside, and decided I kind of hate these games because they basically seem constructed to kill you for not knowing what to do at any given moment -- but the only way *to* know is to die and retry. That frustration overrides anything else enjoyable (or otherwise) about this game for me.
You don't really address the fact that it all seems to quite clearly be a test. We have the diorama that looks exactly like the ending shot and the (presumed) scientists are literally pointing you in the right direction at times. The fact that people are basically running to get a good spot for the show because they know what's coming (even if you don't) would also seem to support the "you are being controlled" theme to me. Even when the boy is inside the facility, you have people either ignoring him or running past him to get a good view of the blob. Earlier we see people running into the facility itself, clearly in a hurry.
Also while I agree about the puzzle design, the narrative conceit makes sense of them all. Yes it's quite convenient that you have exactly the things you need to solve this puzzle - because this is a test that's been deliberately set out for you.
I don't know if they could get away with this style of game a 3rd time, but I think Inside is a pretty tight package - the narrative retroactively justifies the gameplay, and you see it all with a different eye on a second playthrough. I was pretty impressed.
This is an old comment, but I couldn't help but wonder why you thought this was "clearly" a test? The ending sequences have you literally run over other humans in your path as they're running away from you in panic. If they saw all saw the signs of the blob coming to life and knew what it meant, they would've evacuated the facility earlier to prevent any casualties. If anything, this was a very badly thought-out test. It makes more sense in my opinion to see those final sequences as "just" a contingency plan going into motion when they realise the blob is actually free.
I'm actually curious because I haven't really seen anyone else bring up that specific theory.
I feel that on some level I should hate the cheap deaths in this game (and Limbo), but I don't. I agree with your well made point about the tension in the chase sequence, but as a whole i guess I just looked at the sequences as puzzles, not action set pieces. Which may be a cop out but hey ho. I began to equate dying with the noise from The Witness when you answer a puzzle incorrectly. I would just shrug it off and say "ah well that wasn't the answer, let's try again". This mind-set seems to be helped by the super short load times and lack of meaningful penalty when you die.
each death animation is also extremely rich and emotionally powerful and alarming -- they highlighted the brutality of the environment, the vulnerability of the boy, and the stakes of his mission
I disagree with the notion that Inside (and Limbo)'s trial-and-error approach to puzzle solving is disruptive. For me these are very deliberate design choices that hark back to 1980s platformers -- the notion that some puzzles have to be brute-forced and that your character will die a dozen deaths in order to learn information about how to overcome those puzzles. I couldn't help but think of Rick Dangerous (a game that very obviously inspired Spelunky too) while playing Limbo and Inside. For every success state that's attached to a puzzle in Inside, there's two or three equally interesting fail states -- so much so that it can be just as rewarding to discover as many of those as possible and gain an insight into how they inform the narrative and world building. If I found myself breezing through a (potentially lethal) puzzle on my first attempt, I'd invariably feel that I'd missed some of the game's content and thus restore a checkpoint to see how things could have played out if I'd failed. That the fail states often outnumber the success states -- and that so much time and effort went into conceptualizing, storyboarding, and animating them -- is endlessly fascinating to me and suggests Playdead are perhaps a bit more willing than other developers to play around in that space where mechanics and narrative collide. Whether or not they fully succeed is open to debate, but the glorious fail states in both Limbo and Inside were what made them such fascinating experiences for me.
I *totally* agree with you here Mark. I've seen argued elsewhere that INSIDE's failstate production quality is cultivated to the point of fetishizing child-death. I found that somewhat extreme, but I think it resonated with the idea that death, or fail-states, should be part of the experience. that even intelligent critics feel their ego being threatened by such an uncompetitive experience as a cinematic platformer is hilarious to me -- death is a way of life, especially when the story so strongly implies you are not the only red-shirted little boy in the world -- you're one of many, and most of them die along the way, chaff to this sprawling industrial machine. that held serious narrative impact for me.
I wasn't intending to comment on anything on this video, but this is a tremendous and insightful response to another tremendous and insightful comment. That is a *really* interesting approach to certain characteristics of the game that were overlooked, simply because it was presented as an "intellectually-stimulating and provocative indie platformer"! Your comment shook me up hahaha.
I feel like this notion comes down to preference. There will be people who find it annoying that they have to die every time to bruteforce the solution, and would rather be telegraphed in the slightest manner to feel the satisfaction of being smart enough to figure it out on the first go. IMO, this was way more prevelant in Limbo than in Inside.
And then there's the people, like yourself, who enjoy seeing all that a game has to give.
I think both sides are equally worthy of pursuing when it comes to games like these, where dying is usually quite a common thing.
Nice insights though.
I agree, Mark. I'd liken it to the "king's quest" era of adventure games maybe. The character's death is part of the experience. Especially with Limbo. I'd say Limbo was a series of traps as opposed to a series of puzzles.
yes, failure can be used in an interesting way in games.
however, not everyone gets it right, and depending on laser specific circumstances, can instead of feeling like a growth scenario, instead feel like the game is laughing at you or just causing you to fail deliberately for the sake of it.
it can be a tricky line to balance.
I'm not sure how much it was intended, but the trial and error style of limbo's puzzles played into, I thought, the general themes and ideas of the game. Causing you to die over and over provided a quick and easy window into how terrifying of a situation the kid was in. It doesn't play well, but it does get that across.
Agreed. Justification for Limbo's cruel and unfair challenge design is in the game's very title. I didn't like Limbo much but if there's ever been a game that is allowed to be abstract, vague and unfair it's Limbo.
I can't say dying in chasing sequences ever broke the pacing for me, and that's again largely thanks to the sound and music design, but also the way they animate every fail, so you see something new, albeit disturbing, even if you've made a mistake, and finally it just fades in and out of black instead of having a loading screen or a retry prompt.
Actually when the drones became disfigured I felt even more empathy for them, just seemed so sad.
1:33 But later in the game you use what you learned from your past failure to trick and kill two guys chasing you. I think the game is trying to say "you learn from your failure" and "knowledge can be used as a weapon". Which plays into the theme of the game.
I did most puzzles in the first section of the game my first try. There's really no other way to do it, they can't distill them even more without outright removing those events or trivializing player input. 3:30
What about the diorama?! The dioramaaa!
**DIORAMAAAA Intensifies**
I agree that if a game tries to build a sense of flow, then it's obstacles should not also halt that flow. A game like Amnesia (Dark Descent) managed this balance very well: every obstacle you encounter when you're chased in a scripted event is something that you've seen before and should be familiar with enough to react quickly and avoid death.
Loved your optimism and nonchalance concerning cerain themes in the game. It really made my day.
6:39 Very well said. I'm hoping that in the future developers will actually learn to do the reverse - figure out what kind of effect given set of mechanics brings and then derive the tone and meaning from it (or at least ask themselves if it fits). Most of the time they seem to not have enough time to do that.
Isn't it like this that if you figure out this stuff properly then it creates experiences that we can call profound? It works for books and paintings. It should for games too.
To me this game is vague 'fill in the blanks yourself' horror video game.
Theodore Caesar Moseby Yeah, I think the story mistook being deep with being vague. It was kinda pretentious.
I still enjoyed the hell out of it, though. It was great just for the visuals and atmosphere alone.
theparkourhobo True.
I don't think that's fair. It could just as well be argued that a great deal of thought went into conveying a range of fundamental conflicts in human society -- and then were stripped of all linguistic reference. Just because these notions are obscured, I think it's unfair to call them vague. You will find a deeper interpretation if you search for it.
buildings and food No, that's stupid. All there was is a notion of deep themes and an interesting context with no reasoning at to why they exist. There are faceless men attacking a certain boy, why? There's a facility attempting to create slaves of drones. For what exactly, world control? What are the outside forces which they would want to conquer, or defend against? Why does the blob exist? Why is there a diorama of an exact replica at the end for? A powerful weapon? Which killed seemingly the facilities' own employees? Why is a bunch of computers wired to a mind control helmet? What's their purpose for? Why does the boy seemingly act like a drone when he pulls out the cable? Is he a drone himself? Then why did the faceless guys earlier try to kill him? Why did he crawl down that mountain in the first place right at the start? Did the boy know about the facility and try to stop it? Or was he sent there in false implications?
All of these questions are never addressed.
I guess that's Math for ya.
I think there's more of a thematic element to the "the blob was controlling the boy all along" theory, personally. If you accept the player character as an avatar of the self, it means that the blob was controlling YOU all along. And it was controlling you in a way that you likely didn't think about. Did you ever think to wonder "why am I moving right?" Maybe you did, but I'll guess a lot of people didn't. You don't ask why you move right when you play sidescrolling platformers; the instinct is so ingrained into the general game-playing public that we don't even really think about it most of the time. The blob made you move right so you could be absorbed. The message here, to me, is clear: acting without thinking, acting out of habit and nothing else, will let you be taken advantage of and the entity that does so will subsume you.
Oh shit, finally someone who agrees with my unpopular LIMBO opinion. People always argue that it's acceptable because you don't lose much progress, but that doesn't make it feel less cheap.
An interesting note as to the plot (although I recommend you watch Night Mind's video on the game to see it explained in more detail):
Based on all available evidence, we can surmise that the laboratory/facility is developing the Blob as a control-node to make the use of drones easier. They have tried this before, but suffered catastrophic failure.
See:
- Drones can control drones (which as this notes is used in several puzzles and further alluded to in the "secret ending"), hence the blob (composed of many individuals merged into a single whole) could presumably control many drones (as suggested by the multiple control helmets attached to it) but _be_ controlled by a single individual in turn. *_The blob is intended as a force-multiplier._*
- The entire flooded/underwater segment takes place in what is, upon closer examination, a heavily damaged replica/precursor of the area around the blob's silo/viewing chamber. You even swim past a number of smaller observation rooms identical to the ones scattered around the blob chamber. Furthermore, the part of the game taking place in the operational laboratory is full of signs designating it "Sector 4", whereas the flooded area contains signs designating it "Sector 3".
Thanks for taking your time and putting out quality videos.
Another recurring theme in the game I saw pointed out by the fabulous Night Mind was _sacrifice_: nearly every encounter in which control is a topic involves someone dying to fulfill the goal. Of all the chicks thrown at that crate, _one_ of them is always motionless afterwards. Several times, there is _one_ dead drone. And in the end, it is _you_ who are sacrificed to the benefit of the whole, absorbed into the blob.
I think you hit the nail on the head with how INSIDE's tone is what makes it worthwhile. I personally thought the ending was too vague to really derive much meaning from it, but due to the tone of the game the ending sequence still managed to provoke an effective reaction.
Weirdly enough, I actually haven't died during any of the pursuit sections, so I didn't even realise they could work so poorly in some cases.
No comment on the water girl or the model the blop falls on that looks like the ending?
One of the few reviews I've seen that in my opinion actually captures the meaning of the 'twist' ending, thanks!
My first play through of the first segment looked a lot like your last. I jumped over the obstacles instinctively and stopped running when I got behind the car because I thought that maybe I had managed to get away, only to keep running when I saw that I was wrong.
It seems this game is getting a lot of praise, but I haven't seen anyone who claims to have experienced it as fully as I almost did. In my first run, my first death was me checking to see if I was just paranoid and these people weren't actually a danger to me. Such was the illusion of freedom the game managed to create for me.
i always thought the artifice was acknowledged, though. Limbo was a nightmarish trip through either his subconscious or purgatory himself, it's so spiritual it would be easy to attribute it all to an author or designer putting these obstacles in your way with a way to progress through them. with the fake escape towards the end of Inside, too, it's easy to imagine that it was all pre-planned, considering how the scientists grant you an audience, help you, and how the blob was obviously expecting/controlling your arrival.
Another note for the potentially bleak ending: it could also be extrapolated that in order to escape a system controlling and oppressing you, you need to control and oppress others, because if the blob did control the boy in order to escape, it had to feed into the very system controlling it in order to do so
Hi.
Here's my thought on the puzzle to the 2nd ending.
I think Limbo could get you really stuck on some levels and maybe, wanting to make Inside more fluid pushed them to make the puzzles easier, which they are.
So, to balance with that, they created a enigma of sorts. I didn't think of it at the time so I asked the internet but truth is, there are clues all around and and it makes for a sort of scavenger hunt.
The yellow wires help, sure, but more importantly, the achievements are clues themselves. There is no wire in the field but the achievement's name is "Field Research". And if you find the last one, There's a map of them. A vague one, sure but still. With the big letter E lying around which you can find next to one of the secrets with the "key" sound you need to open the final door.
If you look for the secrets like you would in any other game by exploring everything mindlessly, it can feel like a grind but if you use the clues and take it as a scavenger hunt, it makes it much more satisfying.
Also, I think the whole game feels like we're a disease going through the body. Starting at the bottom, through pig mud and up to the brain, passing through drowned lungs and a beating heart (beating really hard in our face) etc...
Wow Chris, this is one of the best episodes you've done so far. A perfect balance between analysis and opinion, considering very accurately both positive and negative aspects of the game and a perfect duration.
I really enjoyed it, thanks!
I believe that the boy begins as one of the last not controlled humans (maybe even chasing after his family being taken in the truck in the beginning), but drowns in the middle and becomes a drone being controlled by The Blob. Notice that something is being injected into him and from that point onward he doesn't need to breathe.
I haven't seen the secret ending before and it does throw a wrench in this theory, but I'm willing to believe, that the facility, clearly trying to create a biocomputer, is started by a man controlling others. Maybe it's actually him who wants the boy to kill the electricity?
The game is ripe with possible intepretations, though I must say that I love how the 2D perspective meshes with themes of control. All those "crafted" puzzles are exactly that, they are crafted by the entity controlling the boy, as it is actually the most efficient way to merge with the blob.
the music system was supposed to make every death feel continuous with the restarts, and imo that worked well in a sort-of meditative sense.
Never actually comment (although I'm a HUGE fan). I just have to say that actually the setting of the game does make sense to me way more than Limbo's wishy washy afterlife since for me it felt as the whole process was designed as a 'trial' for the blob and its extension (the boy). This I believe is made clear when you end up in this space that resembles a stage and you, the blob, are being watched by a lot of people. You were being expected to arrive at some point. And all the trials to reach that point were designed to test the capability of the blob (must admit mermaid boy does not fit into this).
And even the scientist are kind of guiding/aiding you out of the station in a non-agressive way. I'm really not a fan of going into details and fan-fic things but even dying and repeating feels as a part of the story and not just a mechanic. Maybe you are kid #908 who finally managed to reach the blob and merge with it. Or maybe others have reached already and you are just the drop that spilled the cup. In that context it also makes sense for you as an extension of the blob to have the choice to opt out and finally break the cycle of control once you are aware of the final result through several attemps. Collectively the blob has completed several cycles and managed disconnected the network all around it so that it needs one more step to fully be free/die.
I guess I'll only address the intro for this video. I really hope you touch on similarities between Dishonored 2 and Thief 2. Like how Delilah and the witches are Victoria and the pagans, or how Jindosh and his robots with his voice are the builder and his robots with his voice. And how they cast Stephen Russel. With maybe a call back to the recent Thief and how not to revive a franchise.
Is it just me or does this particular video have a more Laid back, conversational tone to it? I like it.
2:58 "He's gone down the slop...damn it we've lost him" lol
I too hate the trial and error system of the puzzles, but over all for some reason this game really hit a nerve with me. It was definitely one of my top experiences via game in 2016
the end of INSIDE as a ray of hope? you are so sweet Chris :') I see it as the absolute most depressing note of the sordid tale. there is no escape from the systems of social control.
you didn't mention that fact you passby a room that looks super close to the place the blob stops at, implying even when he 'escaped' he didn't really and it's believed throughout the entire thing you were always 'inside'
I know that for some people this is blasphemy, but I have the same feeling with the puzzles on ico. maybe is because I finally played it on this weekend.
I think we all fell on the optimism trick at the end. You even made this video about it. And for this fact, that Playdead even manipulated through the game narrative to make us think we were free (when we were not), I just stand up and clap. This game goes far beyond any game I´ve played.
i feel like the game was designed to give us the experience of power dehumanizing others and even ourselves. so we can experience this change and reflect on how even we are guilty of it and what that means for society. its not making a specific claim about this power or that power but about the nature of power in general, so i feel that the vagueness was definitely warranted.
That tangled script from the beginning of the episode sounds pretty impressive. Considering that you finished "Everything" before finishing that script, I'd say it has a lot of potential.
There's still a positive read on the ending even after you see the diorama that implies the ending is faked by the higher powers. While the ending does show that you haven't escaped their control, the scenery and lighting and color still imply happiness. so I'd argue the ending could represent the idea that if you can accept where you are in life and make peace with the powers that control you, you still have a shot at happiness
Many theories say that the puzzles were made to test the boy, and are contrived. That's what I liked so much about the ending
This was great, but I really can't wait for that other thing you mentioned you were working on at the beginning there, that's so my jam :D
theres a piece to the story that completely goes against your take away - the grass and the beach are shown as a model inside the lab, as if the blob was only ever manipulated to crave that specific ending. so even though you escape, you were never pursing your own dream so much as your programming. even in your escape you are still a slave.
Wow, cannot wait for that Thief 2 v Dishonored 2 and stealth games retrospective!
What happened in 2017 that was terrifying and sad? I can't even remember any more. It has always been the Backstreet Boys Reunion Tour and it will always be the Backstreet Boys Reunion Tour.
This game did a better job at exploring choice and control than most video games featuring "big choices."
Man, I can't wait for your take on immersive sims... ya tease. :)
13:52 That's not a universal sentiment, you know. Some people seem pretty happy. Also, the tone and story of the game seem to relate to much larger events than just the past year's politics. 1984 comes to mind.
3:50 that's just not a problem I had. I died once and then I did the whole sequence. That way it flows pretty well.
The Puzzles I found annoying were the ones that require you to perform the same action two or three times. After I've proven that I understand the puzzle I shouldn't have to demonstrate it over and over. That's just inconveniencing the player.
I also seem to have a completely different read of the ending from
everyone else I've seen? Sort of a tragic ''almost made it''. It's only a
few meters to the water and you can see the sun but the blob can't move
anymore.
I agree that the trial by error game mechanic in Limbo was cheap, brute forced and dishonest. That was the whole fun of it though! You couldn't trust your expectations of the level design, which only added to the over all atmosphere of the game. When it was cheap, it was cheap at your expense, yes, but in a way that let you know the designers were being cheeky, not mean spirited. For the vast majority of puzzles I found my self laughing at the deadly surprises. That platform/piston puzzle you mentioned had me cracking up big time when I first fell for the trap. I felt like it was a morbid sense of humour that drove many of the puzzle designs, which to me at least - was refreshing and fun!
my take on the story is the will to control inadvertadly creates systems in which escaping from is monsturous
If you want to play this game and UNDERSTAND THE STORY: The boy is a metaphore for the video-game itself. The bad corporation people are big publishing studios.
Figure out the rest for yourself! Much more fun if you know what's goin on
Great analysis, as always. Keep it up. I absolutely loved Limbo and have high hopes for this studio in the future.
This is the so manieth review about this game where nothing is mentioned about the ending possibly not being what it appears to be. During the first moments of being the Blob, you smash through the glass of a model of the exact place that you break out of (or rather, into) in the very end.
Seeing I adore your videos because of the extreme insight you give to the games you review and/or talk about, I'm sad that this wasn't noticed, or perhaps talked about. I would still love your thoughts on this.
currently in love with "biotool"
This game kills on atmosphere and damn near feels like with a few tweaks it'd a be a great way to do a game version of Stranger Things. As it is, you go though a lot just to have your time wasted on some esoteric meta statement. Deadlight may have had a pat twist, but the story and gameplay were coherent and felt rewarding enough to play more than once, rather than disincentivized.
My interpretation of the finale hinted at a much bleaker and depressing end for the boy/hive mind. As stated by others here the diorama you fall on while trying to escape the facility is an exact replica of the environment the game's final moments take place in. Even the small beam of sunlight that gives solace to the hive mind is artificial or a simulacra. Thematically I feel that interpretation of the ending fits appropriately given that Inside's tone and imagery invoke larger questions on individuality vs the collective, fate vs free will, societal/government oppression, conformity, and multiple layers of control. I kinda of got a 'Myth of Sisyphus' and 'Plato's Allegory of the Cave' mixed with '1984' vibe which is awesome coming from a game with no dialogue or text.
Love your stuff man! Keep up the good work!
It seems like you'd get the exact same experience of this game just by watching another person play it, maybe even a better experience as you get to experience the atmosphere without having to deal with block puzzles.
Except that TH-cam video compression makes the game look like absolute ass....
Watching this video, you'd think Chris has never played a cinematic platformer (Another World, Flashback) before
one thing to consider: when you control the blob, you fall down this shaft and land in a minature of the ending screen, so most likely you're still doing what the government wants.
nervermind, dave the dwarf already said this
I love your videos dude! Keep it up!
I hope you'll do a followup of some sort with your thoughts on the diorama.
Games like Teslagrad, Out There Somewhere, Redder, Toki Tori 2+ simply bypass puzzle artificiality problems entirely by virtue of being metroidvanias, where you often will encounter puzzles that you can't even attempt to solve - yet, without either more tools or information.
Of course, this has added problem of making games about a place they're taking well, place, in - so it's hardly a universal solution.
I guess another approach would be to make puzzles "not puzzles" and more problems to solve, like in Zachtronics games like TIS-100 or SpaceChem - with puzzles not having necessarily a clear pre-designed 'solution' as such.
A refreshing take on two games that receive way too much praise for what they are.
My reading of the ending was a lot darker than yours. After the blob suffered a nearly slapstick degree of bouncing down the hill, when the game stopped taking player input I assumed it was indicating that the blob had died. I'm not sure if it's grimmer for the game to be saying "The only escape is death" or "Look at this guy who tried to escape, he's dead now", but either way, dark.
Very good video and in such a vital time too.
Watching this review on a mobile phone is like staring at a black screen.
It's 12 am.
But sleep isn't as good as this
Regarding Limbo, the mean trick that the designers play on you is somewhat alleviated by the fact that you get to play the exact same trick on a group of hostile kids immediately afterwards.
Fantastically well made and well written video.
But there is actually a clue as to why the boy just stumbles upon puzzles that can be solved immediately. As a blob you fall into a model of the shore that the blob ends up on in the end. It shows that ALL of it was planned. I think that's as valid as an explanation as the one from Portal, etc.
if the theme is that everyone is controlled, this requires some kind of godlike figure who rules over this, or it is just basically determinism. and the debate about determinism isnt really as... grim, as this shows it to be. im thinking about compatibalistic theories etc, that definitely works in this kind of context. in general, the idea of free will in it self turns out to not really mean anything.
I was interested by the point you made about the dying-and-trying-again mechanic taking the tension and fun out of the chase, and it seems like (from one perspective) that’s in service to the world-building in the same way that the frustratingly unfair puzzle you mention from Limbo was in service to the world-building of that game: I don’t end up with a sense of immediate crisis and tension, but an overall sense of melancholy.
(This is almost certainly reading too far into the game, but the puzzle construction that makes a world where everything is too conveniently placed [but placed just inconveniently enough that you die a few times before solving a puzzle] kind of jives with an explanation of these games taking place in a world designed by some omnipotent being that’s actively antagonistic to the player.)
You know, it's funny. The blob believes that it has escaped, but it's a ruse set up by the scientists. Likewise, Chris also believes that the blob has escaped, but he's fallen for the developers' trick. The blob and Chris, the scientists and the developers... that's some meta shit. It could almost be intentional.
Seems to me to be a modernist work of fiction. "What do YOU think it means?" I like how it looks and plays. I like the lack of conversation and visual story telling. I'm not altogether convinced this is some powerful, meaningful and philosophical ground breaker or game changer. Seems more cute and quirky than broad or grandiose. I'd say that if there are any questions of how an individual can escape a tyrannical system, its quite simple: skepticism.
I'm also interested on that (possible) video you were talking at the beginning ;0
I'm gonna watch this because it's interesting too, but i hope you haven't throwed that script, i'm really into inmersive sims.
I would argue that the criticism that the game "doesn't say enough" is kind of inane. Video games are fantastic artistic tools for exploring ideas in a way that is totally different from books, movies, and music. Just because a game doesn't take a moral stance that you agree with on every idea it explores doesn't mean it didn't successfully explore the idea.
Awesome review. good job.
I'm disapointed, I really wanted this to be the video game version of inner space
Someone here pointed out that the model at 12:40 shows us the shoreline at the end of the game, implying that the people in the factory are expecting you to get there eventually. There is also the scene where the blob is trying to grab the box above it and there's pretty much an audience watching you do it like they had set the whole thing up for an animal in an exhibit. It's implied that the entire event is staged by the people in the factory.
As vague as the game is, I think it puts forward a very bleak thesis about control: machinations of control culminate with the manipulation of the desire for freedom i.e mechanisms that make the subject believe they are free when they are not while exploiting those very behaviors for further control. It's a pretty straightforward point but I think the game does a great job of making you experience it viscerally.
the game is full of references to the idea that You, the player-character, are nothing special, nothing new. The stages prior to the encounter with the Huddle are actually numbered in order -- they are just drowned, decomposing clones of the functioning lab you finally enter, as if tragedy has struck the same project several times before, and the whole society is merely going through the motions, rebuilding atop the rubble. you can even recognize the architecture.
Maybe the game only asks questions about control and leaves the answering to the players as opposed to mediums questioning and answering their own themes to the audience. I saw a gdc video about Warren Specter saying games being a more suitable medium for asking questions on themes and letting the players answer it through their own interpretation of interactions provided by the game even at the cost of developer intent. But that's his philosophy. I really have no idea what to make make of this game other than it being good and unique compared to the mainstream ones.
i really enjoy your content
Retrospective on Inside or Darkest Dungeon?
I think your read is generally good on the game, though my personal reading assumes that the group that made the blob and facility orchestrated your escape intentionally, and so includes more themes of manipulation and "followers" as part of the narrative theming around power. Of particular note, you only get more powerful, the more you take advantage of the tools given to you by the organization you're theoretically fighting to be free from.
I really liked Inside.
Interesting analysis.
One thing though: the world has ALWAYS been sad and terrifying. You've just discovered that the world is bigger than your immediate surrounding. :/
Sorry about that but it's the first step before changing the world, so...
Fucking finally, I hate this channel so much. You articulate exactly what I'm thinking which is simultaneously relieving and frustrating because it makes me feel dumb for not having expressed myself clearly earlier. But yeah, this is exactly what I was thinking, good work.
I haven t played this or Limbo, but watching this video I was constantly thinking "this looks very much like a modern take on Another World" ("Outside of this world" if you are in the US).
What about making a video on Another World and discuss its legacy?
"there is hope, these systems are not permanent or omnipotent and can be held at bay with empathy and unity..."
I disagree that art needs to have some kind of moral like this. I blame high school book reports for making us look for these obvious theses in everything.
It's great seeing a new episode. I also had troubles with the game, mechanically is boring and conterproductive (unless the deaths are a cheap mean to extend play time, but that's a bit cynic), the art direction has some ups and downs (while some vistas are nice/interesting/eerie, there is nothing that would make you stop moving foward), the story is a bit weird (it's an in medias res, but it never adresses why you are being chased and it keeps ambiguous to the very end) and the meaning of the game is a bit shallow (it borrows some tried and true symbolism like the conga line, the drones, the blob, etc. but I can't put my finger on what is trying to say... uncheked cience is bad? the nature of free will? death as freedom? mind controling? meta commentary about games?).
All in all is not something not worth experiencing, but many things are lost in it's horrible gameplay. They should have taken some advices from Jonathan Blow and trim down some parts of the game that don't help to the overall experience.
Great video, especially towards the second half and end.