So the creator of The Stanley Parable has a new game out

[namman siggins]

Called The Beginner's Guide

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=86&v=RBK5Jheu0To

 

First of all I didn't even know Wreden was working on a new game.

 

Second, this looks bloody fabulous 

 

http://store.steampowered.com/app/303210/

[juv3nal]

won't be able to play it until after work, but instabuy

[namman siggins]

Just finished and fuck me.

 

That game got mean and dark towards the end. 

 

It's a short game, took me two hours I think.

[graddy]

I'm so glad this is short. It claims 1.5 hours in the Steam description. One commenter on the Giant bomb review said that that much money for that amount of time wasn't worth it to him. Barring that she just doesn't like narrative games, ~5 bucks per hour isn't worth it to you?

 

With every AAA and frankly some indie games being longer than they deserve to be, I'm excited more and more these days for short memorable experiences. I hope this will be one of them.

 

Gonna play soon, maybe after supper!

[Problem Machine]

Just played. Wow. Intense.

And a bit uncomfortable how closely I identified with the narrator... I wonder how autobiographical it is, if at all.

edit: It also just occurred to me that the game is a bit strange to recommend. It kind of implicates anyone whose response to a work of art is to then try to sell their friends on it. POOR MARKETING STRATEGY DAVEY WREDEN.

second edit: A common thematic thread running through both this and Stanley Parable seems to be that always expecting things to have a deeper meaning, to be explicable, is ultimately self-defeating -- that sometimes you just have to let art be what it is without demanding it be more.

[Atlantic]

I played it last night.

 

I think I identified with Coda more than the narrator. I've been making music for years, and usually when a switch in my brain flips that reads "complete," I stop doing what I had been doing. I then go on and begin again with a different idea. I've had people with elements of the Davey character, but never a full Davey.

 

I think I disagree that art does not have a deeper meaning. Searching for a deeper meaning in a piece of art can be incredibly rewarding, but (let's put on our Roland Barthes hats) pestering the author is rarely the best way to go about it. The Stanley Parable and The Beginner's Guide can both have deeper meanings than what the narrators or real life Davey Wreden can tell us they have, and that's good. The film Room 237 about wild, tinfoil hat interpretations of Stanley Kubrick's The Shining is a good example of this, in that there are a lot of possible ways to read the film that have nothing to do with the "story." The truth is that it is about all of these things, and none of them. There can be deeper meanings to all art, but I never assume the author has all of the answers.

 

This is only kind of the stance of Coda. He asks Davey not to read into anything he has made. However, Coda also asks Davey to stop adding lampposts to his levels. If there is no deeper meaning, does adding or removing elements change anything? Or is it an emotional response from Coda, in that he wants Davey to leave him alone? I'm inclined towards the latter, but I'm not completely sure.

[Problem Machine]

Yeah that particular phrasing was a bit glib

More specifically what I think I meant was that interpretations of a work of art are a property of the reader far more than they are of the artist or the work -- that is, trying to figure out what the real meaning of a work is is contrary to the spirit of art itself. Art is vague by nature, and many interesting things can be gleaned from any given work... and sometimes that's a problem, actually, as with some of the specific reactions to pieces like The Catcher in the Rye and Helter Skelter, but again that responsibility lies with the person making that reading. Taking any given reading of a work and trying to impose it upon the work as some kind of truth is doing it and the artist a disservice, no matter how lovingly and enthusiastically done.

So basically fuck junior high English classes.

[Atlantic]

Oh! I didn't mean your phrasing. I think those points are made in the Stanley Parable and remade and countered in the new game, and I was just expounding on what is implied-but-unsaid in the Beginner's Guide.

[Problem Machine]

Ah. Nevertheless, grateful for the opportunity to clarify

[dium]

I'm so glad this is short. It claims 1.5 hours in the Steam description. One commenter on the Giant bomb review said that that much money for that amount of time wasn't worth it to him. Barring that she just doesn't like narrative games, ~5 bucks per hour isn't worth it to you?

 

I don't think this is a spoiler to say this: the game itself kinda preemptively addresses this kind of thinking about short games (and therefore itself).

 

I played it last night and my specific opinions are still coalescing, but The Beginners Guide is definitely an appropriate and successful followup to the Stanley Parable. If you liked that game (unless you liked it purely for the humor, I suppose) you owe it to yourself to play the Beginners Guide too. Just be prepared for a completely different tone.

[dium]

Good writeup by Cameron Kunzelman on Paste: http://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2015/10/the-beginners-guide-review-good-evening.html
 
(No story spoilers in that article, but I'd personally avoid too much media about this game before playing it)
 

My somewhat more considered thoughts:

Kunzelman finds the epilogue to be weak, and I have to agree. The narration is fine, but feels unnecessary. The ending to 'game 1' when you float above the level is a legitimately powerful moment; its bookend moment at the very end just feels convenient, and not much else (especially after being telegraphed so much). It's a shame, since it's not a terrible ending (especially in the context of video games, which often don't know how to end nearly this well). It's just noticeably weaker than the rest of the work – Kunzelman's word 'kitchy' feels perfectly apt – and since it's at the end, of course, that's the flavor you leave with.
 
The ending being a bit weak is only relevant because of how strong I found the rest of the game. It's just as 'meta' as The Stanley Parable, but I think it's a braver story because it adopts a sincere tone and attempts to plot a more specific and human emotional arc. So if it's sometimes less successful, it's because it's attempting something more difficult.
 
This is a game that's aggressively 'about' a lot of things. Art criticism, authorial intent/inspiration/motivation, introversion, etc. My favorite theme right now is talking-to-yourself as a metaphor for creation. It can be delivered a bit heavy-handedly (like when the narrator points out to you that you're talking to yourself when you're in the phone booth talking to yourself about talking to yourself) but the metaphor is interesting and I don't so much mind being spoon-fed it.

[Problem Machine]

I super disagree!

I think the first question to ask about the epilogue is: Where did it come from? All the other 'games' in The Beginner's Guide were made by Coda, but this last one is almost certainly made by Davey himself. Davey, the character (as distinct from Davey the creator) is someone who has no confidence in his own creations, and has taken then to living his creative life through Coda -- but over the course of the narrative has come to realize that this is increasingly toxic, both for Coda and for him. Thus, this last scene of the game, where he tries to shut up, where he tries to let the work speak for itself, is him trying to be more like Coda.

 

The beam of light raising the player up, to Coda that was probably just a glitch. But to Davey, who craves an unquantifiable freedom, it's everything. He took the thing that drew him to Coda's games and built a game out of it. And it's very different from one of Coda's games, all open spaces and transitions, exploring outwards rather than folding in on itself.

 

The epilogue marks Davey's transition from audience to creator, trying to capture something elusive that was only triggered by Coda's games. The title 'The Beginner's Guide' suggests this journey.

[dium]

I'm guessing that from here on out, this thread will be in Spoiler tags entirely.

 

I caught that the epilogue was certainly a Davey creation rather than a Coda creation. And I like your reading, for the most part. But for whatever reason (and now I'm gonna have to argue and articulate WHY, which is gonna be tough) the end didn't feel satisfying or compelling to me. If this was Davey trying to be quiet and let art speak without explanation, I would've hoped he actually wouldn't talk over any of it.

 

It feels very explainey, to me, and it's WEIRD that it feels so explainey when the rest of the game has been explaining itself much more literally up until that point.

[Problem Machine]

Maybe it feels that way because there's no longer the additional layer of narrative of Coda's games, and it's now the creator speaking directly to you? I can see the issue: It might have worked better without any voice at all during the epilogue. I wonder if he tried it that way at any point.

[dium]

That might be it. After thinking about it some more, I really do like thinking about the epilogue as this separate trying-to-learn moment from the Davey character, and I like it more in retrospect. But again: in the moment it felt much less powerful.

 

I almost feel like I have to play the game again to discuss this much further... I'm already finding that I've forgot most of the specifics of the epilogue other than the very begining of it (in the Grand Central-esque train station) and the very end.

 

Also, in case I seem down on The Beginners Tale: I was very into this game. Negatives are just easier to pick up and talk about; I can be bad about that.

[Problem Machine]

Yeah i already want to replay it too. Probably will tomorrow.

[namman siggins]

I would have enjoyed the ending if Davey learned nothing, gained nothing and continued as he was. But like one said, this is called The Beginner's Guide and it would go against the philosophy of the game. 

 

Overall, I loved this game. I was able to empathize and sympathize with both Coda and Davey. Having been in both their shoes, it was a hard game to play, emotionally. I tried to take the fly in the wall approach for most of the game to try to distance myself, but I couldn't.

[clyde]

I just made a large purchase so I don't want to spend 8 bucks right now. Am I going to sound oblivious when talking about hobbyist games for the next two months or so because the public consciousness will have this game in mind as a reference?

[darthbator]

So I played it last night and after waking up this morning I had this thought?

 

 

Am I the only one who interpreted the story as having elements of the "I have this friend" trope? I initially thought the game was going to tell a rather concrete story about the life of CODA through the games he'd made. However as the game closed up I started thinking that he was really talking about his own artistic journey... I have a completely ridiculous graveyard of unfinished video games that I'll never show anyone. That's a common developer experience. If one day I somehow got the courage to show that to people close to me and they really thought it had value I would probably completely lose my shit. Even if I did hide my authorship by saying my friend did this. I think the entire "engine" analogy in addition to the feeling that creative emanates somewhere outside of ones self, and it's possible to lose connection to this, is something that's felt by a lot of self motivated creative people.

 

Davey says at the start of the game that this is something that he's making to encourage this person to come out and create again. What if that's actually true but he's using this as an analogy for the creative individual he identifies within himself? Could we have just played through a game where it's creator is attempting to communicate to us his own personal journey to restart his own creative engine? I find it very convenient that CODA's games stop in the same year as the release of the original Stanley Parable mod.

[BaedWolf]

I got and finished this last night. It felt exactly the right size for what it was doing, and I didn't mind the cost (a trip to a "now in theaters" film can be twice as much around where I live).

 

I loved this experience for a variety of reasons.

First, I actually thought it WAS a documentary for a while, and found myself wishing more people would make narrated "semi-interactive" presentations like this -- for all sorts of topics. It was like having my own personal museum, complete with a guide.

Then, I deeply identified with the narrator's (mis)representation of Coda. I don't have the same creative expressions or talent -- but I definitely empathized with the sense of self-doubt and second guessing. (The "talk to the girl" game was particularly affecting.)

My enjoyment changed -- but wasn't lessened -- as the experience drew to a close and I saw what was "really" going on. I was able to appreciate the art of the story I'd been told, even if the writing was becoming cliched.

Besides other things, The Beginner's Guide is a fantastic illustration of an unreliable narrator. We discover that even his own idolization of Coda's symbolism has been skewed to fit the narrator's own desires -- there are elements we've seen that were never, in fact, part of Coda's designs (e.g. the lamp post).

 

I really hope this starts a (tasteful) trend of more things like this, in the future.

[juv3nal]

So I played it last night and after waking up this morning I had this thought?

Am I the only one who interpreted the story as having elements of the "I have this friend" trope? I initially thought the game was going to tell a rather concrete story about the life of CODA through the games he'd made. However as the game closed up I started thinking that he was really talking about his own artistic journey... I have a completely ridiculous graveyard of unfinished video games that I'll never show anyone. That's a common developer experience. If one day I somehow got the courage to show that to people close to me and they really thought it had value I would probably completely lose my shit. Even if I did hide my authorship by saying my friend did this. I think the entire "engine" analogy in addition to the feeling that creative emanates somewhere outside of ones self, and it's possible to lose connection to this, is something that's felt by a lot of self motivated creative people.

Davey says at the start of the game that this is something that he's making to encourage this person to come out and create again. What if that's actually true but he's using this as an analogy for the creative individual he identifies within himself? Could we have just played through a game where it's creator is attempting to communicate to us his own personal journey to restart his own creative engine? I find it very convenient that CODA's games stop in the same year as the release of the original Stanley Parable mod.

I think your read is half right. On the one hand it absolutely is suggesting that, but on the other: one of the overriding themes is the danger of inferring biography into a creative work...if we read into Wreden the developer's creative process like that we've fallen into the same trap that Wreden the narrator would (by the end anyways) admit he's fallen into. I think that's the cleverest bit of the game is that it at once sets up this interpretative space and simultaneously works to dissolve it.

[I_smell]

I have not played this, but after just watching the trailer, I'm stunned.

 

A little bit of success with The Stanley Parrable gave this author a megaphone, and I think his use of that reputation here is really admirable. He's just grabbing the creatives and the critics of the industry by the ears and very plainly making a statement, starting a worthwhile conversation.

 

Hats off, dude.

[jennegatron]

Taking any given reading of a work and trying to impose it upon the work as some kind of truth is doing it and the artist a disservice, no matter how lovingly and enthusiastically done.

 

An important distinction to be made here is that Coda doesn't take issue with Davey looking for meaning in his work, instead he takes issue with the meaning Davey finds and assigning it to the author, as well as altering his work to conform to the meaning that Davey wants to see. It's also incorrect to say that there is only one correct reading of a work, and foisting that opinion onto someone else, as fact as Davey does when he tells us what the door puzzle means is where meaning and symbolism and themes break down.

 

 

So I played it last night and after waking up this morning I had this thought?

 

 

Am I the only one who interpreted the story as having elements of the "I have this friend" trope? I initially thought the game was going to tell a rather concrete story about the life of CODA through the games he'd made. However as the game closed up I started thinking that he was really talking about his own artistic journey... I have a completely ridiculous graveyard of unfinished video games that I'll never show anyone. That's a common developer experience. If one day I somehow got the courage to show that to people close to me and they really thought it had value I would probably completely lose my shit. Even if I did hide my authorship by saying my friend did this. I think the entire "engine" analogy in addition to the feeling that creative emanates somewhere outside of ones self, and it's possible to lose connection to this, is something that's felt by a lot of self motivated creative people.

 

Davey says at the start of the game that this is something that he's making to encourage this person to come out and create again. What if that's actually true but he's using this as an analogy for the creative individual he identifies within himself? Could we have just played through a game where it's creator is attempting to communicate to us his own personal journey to restart his own creative engine? I find it very convenient that CODA's games stop in the same year as the release of the original Stanley Parable mod.

 

I have seen other people speculate the above interpretation and I find it both unconvincing and uninteresting. It's pretty explicit in the game that Davey, the narrator, showing these works is a breach of trust for his relationship with Coda.  Davey showing Coda's works to other people and then spreading rumors about how depressed Coda is is what, primarily, causes Coda to push Davey away. I think you're right in that this is not a story about Coda. It's about Davey's inability to respect other people's boundaries and to force his interpretation of work onto a game, but also the person who made the game. It's about Davey searching desperately for meaning. 

 

I think juv3nal's post on this page gets at a lot of what I found interesting about this game.

[Problem Machine]

On Why I'm Not Writing About The Beginner's Guide

[darthbator]

Was the general response to this one overwhelmingly positive here? It's certainly made me introspect into how I look at games, and for me that's a valuable thing. However I think that's more of a reaction to what the game is rather then the specific story content of the game itself. Does that make any sense? I certainly had expectations of what this game would be like based purely on things I inferred about the creative team from Stanley. That echoes powerfully with the core idea of the game itself. 

 

I played through this one with a good friend of mine who's a TV writer "riding shotgun". We play a lot of these kind of narrative games together. He started the run being super into the form it takes and ended up thinking it was really self indulgent.