A warning though, this article contains spoilers.
Now, this may seem a little strange from someone who reviewed the game and gave it a good score. And I’ll happily stand by that score for one reason. The gameplay is ingenious. During the PS2, Xbox and GameCube era, Max Payne, Prince of Persia and Viewtiful Joe were amongst the games that pioneered time control mechanics, which were quickly abused by a number of subsequent games and drove the mechanic out faster than a Denny special in Unreal Tournament.
The brainchild of indie developer Jonathan Blow, Braid married a variety of time control mechanics with a genre that was aptly suited to such additions, the puzzle-platformer. And as such, you had easily one of the most inventive brain probers arguably since Portal. Yeah, the platforming itself wasn’t the best, as it was prone to minor misjudgements though there aren't many platformers around these days, let alone good ones. However, there was something deeply satisfying about figuring out the mechanics of the level and some of the more difficult puzzles. On that note, it’s not a good game to play if you’re tired or lazy, as it really requires a fresh and inquisitive mind to be enjoyed. Once I got home late and very tired, tried to play the game and let’s just say that if it was a disc game, I might have snapped it...
Another very alluring aspect of the game is has some beautifully produced backgrounds and some stellar artistic direction. Some would probably play the game simply out of the beauty that it holds. However, I found the character and enemy designs to be as ugly as sin. The main character ‘Tim’ was a Mario rip-off but one of the worst and least characterised I’ve ever seen. The Goomba rip-offs were even worse, looking like something out of a children’s picture book from the 17th Century. It’s not enough to ruin the illusion, but damn they were ug-ly!
No, the real hate for Braid comes from the story that starts so damn well, but really went somewhere that it really didn’t need to. Heck, a lot of people who played Braid probably still don’t know where it went. When you finish the first level and the dinosaur-thingy says “Sorry, the Princess is in another castle”, you have this underlying feeling that you’re in for something a little more. And cleverly, there is a subtle hint hidden in the text introducing the mechanic for each level. As it turns out though, there is a whole lot more going on with the story than what needs to.
As gaming has become more popular, there has been a collective voice clamouring for games to come into line with other entertainment mediums, by giving audiences something more than ‘just’ gameplay. There has been a voice asking for games to address more mature themes and require us to consider what we’re doing on a deeper level, something that classic literature and film have been doing since we could put pen to paper and image to celluloid. And the story in Braid is an excellent poster-child for this. The problem that I have with this, is do games really need this?
In the words of Jonathan Blow himself, he believes that game developers need to make games using “innovative, ethical and personal art”. Further, he admits that even he can’t fully explain what the hell Braid is actually about… Sorry Jonnie boy, but that doesn’t give you license to screw with people. We love your game for its fantastic puzzles and parts of the visual design, but damn did you annoy some people with this pretentious dross.
So what is Braid about? Who is the Princess? Where is everything going? Why are there weird looking Goomba and bunny things? Why is the dinosaur talking? Who the hell knows? Still, here are just a few of the meanings construed from the story. One interpretation was that was a tale of faltering relationships. Another is that this game is taking the mickey out of gaming’s relentless pursuit of the ‘Princess’ or that our chosen hobby is a rather frivolous one. But the one that surprises me the most is that the game is depicting how the creators of the atomic bomb felt afterwards. Yeah OK, this one was easy to figure out, but why in the name of heck is this relevant in 2008? Why am I meant to care? How is this meant to be relevant for the modern gaming audience? Or any audience at all? Why is a game about time solving puzzles meant to make me reflect on the atomic bomb?
However, it’s not so much of a question of relevance as it is of whether a player ‘gets it’. The problem is that even with the superb puzzles, playing through Braid relies heavily on paying attention to the story. And even though I had a blast playing through it, the memory that resonates strongest with me is the resounding “Huh!?!?” that came upon completion. It wasn’t until I woke up in the middle of the night a few days later thinking “Oh, so that’s what might have been going on…”. And I can guarantee that I’m not the only one to have felt this way upon completing the game.
However, there probably are some of you out there who proclaim “Yeah, I got it, why didn’t you?” Well, you are either lying, or like the rest of the people that I’ve met who claimed to ‘get it’, otherwise unable to perform rudimentary tasks such as shave or hold a conversation. By Mr Blow’s own admission and implications, you’re not meant to get it. So next time you say that you ‘get it’, reconsider exactly what it is that you’re ‘getting’. At the end of the day, there’s nothing wrong with a developer, collective or indie, trying to express something deep and meaningful on a moral or ethical level, particularly as long as gameplay is not adversely affected. So long as the game doesn’t beat you over the head with it's message, or in the case of Braid, lead you to the end of the rainbow, only leaving you to find the leprechauns giving you a one finger and/or one-eyed salute.
Braid I suppose is somewhat fortunate to be saved by it’s excellent gameplay, but there is touch of the indie syndrome as well. While I’m willing to forgive the brain bender story on the basis of gameplay, I don’t believe any game is worth hiding behind the indie banner. While initially receiving very high praise, Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty was later lambasted (sometimes rightfully, sometimes harshly) for an overly complicated story. If Braid were released by, for example, EA or Ubisoft, you can guarantee your bottom dollar that you’d be getting a MGS2 reaction. Frankly, indie or not, if there is something about the game that isn’t right, it needs to be taken to school for it. Something I probably could have done a little better at the time I reviewed it.
The game itself isn’t the only controversial aspect involved here. Creator Jonathan Blow hasn’t been in everyone’s good books with some of the things he’s said. Given the game he’s created, it’s a little surprising that he didn’t end up with Miyamoto or Carmack status. Either of these two gaming masterminds can pretty much get away with whatever they want these days, but Blow seems to have jumped the gun. You have to make the stellar games, then say crazy things about game pricing and imposing your potentially pretentious development philosophies, not the other way around. Jonnie boy, we don’t begrudge you for wanting to eat a little more than canned beans, but you could have said what you wanted to a little more tactfully. Unlike me.
Phew, thinking about the ending has made my head spin again. To all developers out there, be they corporate or independent, please leave the head screwing to the puzzles in your game and not the story. After all, I want to love your potentially superlative designs, but hate is a strong force and it will devour the experience if you allow for pretentious propaganda get in the way.
Loading...
