I went through all the endings in under two hours and spent the rest of the afternoon in intense terror about the idea of eternal life and the possibility of eternal suffering..
Probably not what the author intended, but I'm not playing it again.
I played this game and I don't understand it, what is the point ? honestly the performance of the narrator was amazing and was my favourite part of the game but otherwise I don't understand what the "message" is.
spoiler
and like, who is stanley ? who is the narrator ? how come stanley can hear narrator's voice ? if stanley is in a game and we are playing that game, then narrator should be in the game too, somehow he is in the game and not in the game at the same time ??
Idk it was mostly just funny because of the narrator imo. You do have a bunch of valid questions, but I guess this is more of a piece of art that leaves this up to interpretation. I remember the avhievement you get for not playing the game for 5 years, so I feel like the game was maybe trying to say something about our increasingly digital life and how that narrates our reality or something. There are mamy different endings though, so I'm sure there are plenty of interpretations
Also I think the game was an exercise in what you can do when you choose a video game as the medium for your art. Its the first time where it was possible to let the main character defy the narrator. That would't really work in a book.
If you're asking all these questions, you're trying too hard to "get" the game.
It's kind of a humor game, kind of a satirical take on how games in general just kind of expect you to follow along but in SP you can do all kind of "not what we're here for" shit like sitting in a closet for twenty minutes. Is it riveting gameplay? Not usually, but it was worth the $5 I paid for it. I certainly have gotten more than $5 of entertainment out of it.
Totally understand if that kind of game isn't everyone's cup of tea. I certainly wouldn't have played it in highschool. Or at least I'd be bored with it very quickly.
And with all the different paths in the game, replay is okay because you probably don't remember all of them.
oh I didn't mean that I didn't enjoy it, I enjoyed it quite a lot it was a fun game and definitely worth playing. it's just that I felt like the game was trying to tell me something but I couldn't understand what. but I guess you're right
If there's some deeper hidden meaning, I haven't found one. I never really felt like it was trying to tell me anything except maybe "don't take games too seriously"
It's a fourth-wall breaking game, a game whose characters are aware that they're in a game. Their personalities, knowledge, and awareness change throughout the game and the consistency is limited to "pathes" that you take. The devs are playing with and making fun of the rules.
The game explores the idea of choice and structure in modern video game narratives.
It's presented to you in such a way that you feel like you can't break away from the established narrative, everything you do has actually been planned and accounted for, and even intended by the developer.
I am sorry, but could someone please explain this to me?
Looks like an old office with old monitors, but is the joke more than just "times have changed"?
