-
http://www.kongregate.com/games/AlexanderOcias/loved
This is stuff Professor Paul would post.
Experience it yourself.
-
For anyone else having trouble connecting to Kongregate at the moment, here's a link to the game from the developer's site. (http://www.alexanderocias.com/loved.php)
Personally, broken Aesop much? I can understand the idea of children having to follow orders to go from child to woman, but for your 'mother' to basically declare you ugly or disgusting for every mistake and then claim she loved you regardless?
-
I thought it was more like "How the game is playing with you rather than doing it the other way". I haven't even thought of the mother-child-relationship.
-
If you follow the rules and do what you're told, and make people happy, the world becomes more clearly defined.
It lacks color, however.
Intentionally break the rules, and it becomes more colorful and exciting... but easier to mess up and get lost.
-
Some consideration as to the endings.
Love ending: The entire game has simply been a tutorial. The pickup you find in the ending is a sign that now you're about to play the real game. Following orders has given you meaning.
Hate ending: You have no guiding morals because you refuse to follow orders, so you're doomed to wander aimlessly.
-
Are there only two endings? I've only played it twice, once
doing everything I'm told
and once disregarding every command
.
-
Mother! :*
-
It's about how you want to live: wether you're going to adopt someone else's ideas or forge your own. Obviously the second option is deeply discouraged, it's far easier to do as you're told and live a pre-confectioned life.
-
Are there only two endings? I've only played it twice, once doing everything I'm told
and once disregarding every command
.
Pretty sure it just depends on what you did most often, but there are only two endings from what I can see. I tried going down the middle and got nothing that new.
-
Pretty sure it just depends on what you did most often, but there are only two endings from what I can see. I tried going down the middle and got nothing that new.
Tried alternating between obeying and disobeying, got hate end. Maybe it has priority?
-
Oh jesus, Loved. I played it once for the badge then ditched it.
It's... I realize, I really realize people like to make games like this for DEEP MEANINGS, but it's boring.
You know what, want to make a meaning game like this? Put some actual effort into it. This game would've been wonderful if it was longer, had more to do, and overall was more like an actual -game-.
If someone posted it without all the meaning crap, I can assure you, it would NOT be where it is right now, and it kind of pisses me off seeing as games that can hold interest get shoved out of place for these games.
Loved embodies the worst part of this trend, when people get lazy and assume that deep meaning and gameplay are two exclusive concepts. It has plenty interesting parallels you can make (I'd be unsurprised if the author didn't make them himself), but it's as a game, bland and unmentionable.
-
I'm terrible at traditional platformers ;___;
-
*sigh*
Remember, kids, stalking is not love.
The only message the game gets across to me is not to ignore a good idea just because someone else said it first and rebelling out of spite. Even then, it completely undermines itself by ordering you to go kill yourself, which is why, ultimately, the ending of the game is a bullshit oversimplification that attempts to portray choice as a binary thing. It ain't.
-
B...but, Mother! :fail:
I do get what you guys are saying about the game's design. Although, it gave me reaffirmation that everything I wanted in life was right and just, it really started to crack around the edges when I tried playing it differently. The way the questions are all independent of each other, have no contextual meaning within the game, the fact that there are only two endings, and they don't even give you seperate achievements for getting different endings.
The end result is much like that of a painting. If you stare head on, you can see the imagery within and all of it's beauty, but if you look from the side all you see is a thin layer of paint.
-
It is rather interesting and I like how it plays with the idea of whether or not the player wants to follow instructions. I think it's a rather refreshing change of pace.
Not sure if I would be willing to post about it though.
I do see where Chaore is coming from however. If you really wanted to judge the game by some measure of quality then it is rather superficial.
On the other hand, if people think such a game shouldn't exist especially considering that it costs you nothing to try it, then that sort of attitude is part of what makes me fear for the future of computer games.
If someone is interested in such a game and someone is willing and able to make it then that by itself is good enough to justify the game's existence. It's when someone wants a game but for some reason the game doesn't or can't exist that I think there would be a problem. Whether such a problem could be solved would depend on a lot of things outside of one's control of course.
-
On the other hand, if people think such a game shouldn't exist especially considering that it costs you nothing to try it, then that sort of attitude is part of what makes me fear for the future of computer games.
If someone is interested in such a game and someone is willing and able to make it then that by itself is good enough to justify the game's existence.
That is a good point. My own complaints came at least partially from self-aggrandizement, as a bid to say "look how clever I am," I can certainly recognize that. If the guy wants to make games like this, then let him go ahead! With experience, I'm certain he could get something great out there.
-
Did that bastard just call me a girl
-
Some consideration as to the endings.
Love ending: The entire game has simply been a tutorial. The pickup you find in the ending is a sign that now you're about to play the real game. Following orders has given you meaning.
Hate ending: You have no guiding morals because you refuse to follow orders, so you're doomed to wander aimlessly.
My interpretation:
Love Ending: You did everything you were told unquestioningly. If you simply do as commanded, everything is clear because there quite simply is no question. You have a set destination, everything has a set meaning. However, everything is bland, monotonous, colorless. Just as you are. And then at the end, you receive a reward, having done everything you were told. And yet it's just like everything else. Colorless. And the same mother who commanded you to kill yourself, from the beginning treated you as worthless, now claims to love you. Because you're her tool, she can use you.
Hate Ending: You chose your path, ignoring your senseless orders. Your path is unclear, as you find your own way through life. And yet, it has meaning, color, no matter just how difficult it may be. You're your own person, but the "mother" wishes to control you, make you bend to her wishes. Even in the end, she tries to convince you to stay so that she can perhaps change you. Claims to love you, despite everything she has said, everything she tried to do to you. But you won't be controlled. You leave, and now, you're free. There is no reward to take, but from here, you find your own path.
-
Ending discussion:
I don't really associate the Color with the idea of "A life worth living" or "Meaning in life." When I first heard read that the hated ending gives the world color, I though it meant that instead of becoming detailed it would become more vivid. Becoming a more vividly colored area would make it feel like it had more meaning, but instead the colors were random. It served to obfuscate the playing field. To me this indicates that the player, by disobeying, is choosing to throw away all conceptions of the world they have.
The whole thing, to me, is a watered down take on the Law vs. Chaos that every SMT game likes to play with. By following the Controlling Mother's orders you become smarter, wiser, you can understand more about the world around you and it's beauties. But at the same time you are giving control of yourself to another, higher authority. Doing things you would normally refuse to do to serve a purpose you don't know or understand. And all you can see is black and white. Once you fully develop this path, the coin at the end signals that you are focused enough to begin searching for your true goal.
On the other hand, by ignoring the Mother's orders, or outright rejecting them, you will start to see the colors in between Black and white. You can see the double edge of everything, and you can see how everything around you has it's own personal story, it's own color. The downside to this is that you slowly lose the big picture of what's happening around you, and it becomes harder and harder to do anything except wander around aimlessly on your path as you watch the world around you change colors independent of your own volition and ability. On top of that, because you rejected the mother, you have no one you can rely on to carry on with you, so you are left with only the ability to run forward as you try to survive.
In the end, neither path is more beautiful than the other.
-
oh man do I ever love dichotomous moralities
But still, silly teenage hipster moral choices aside, it was an interesting diversion from the usual "go here, do this" games. Although this sentiment may be derived from the fact that I was playing MMOs before this.
maybe we should start an indie game megathread for us to post these sorts
-
MotK is too deep for this game.
-
Of course, there's always the statement that if the game has sparked such discussion, then it has already succeeded, but I find that meaningless and unsatisfying.
Oh wait. That's exactly what I feel about the game. Why don't game writers have the balls to actually write an ending?. No, they have to try to be all artsy-fartsy and be all coy about their endings and never actually have a satisfying conclusion. Like that other one that pretends to be a take on the Orpheus myth.
Now, Eversion, that has a narrative without having to throw abuse at the player, as well as an ending.
-
Goddammit pixels everywhere I can't see a thing how the hell do I make this jum[ahsdasidhaisdasd
I should have listened to mommy ;_;
-
Mom's a bitch. :(
-
She just wants to teach you about how the world works.
She could have been kinder, yes, but you know she just loves you.
-
Now, Eversion, that has a narrative without having to throw abuse at the player, as well as an ending.
It creeped me out like hell, though.
-
Eversion? Now what could possibly be creepy about these guys? (http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g229/Krimsun_Munkey/Untitled-85.png) In fact, I think I'm going to play this game, because I'm in such a happy mood that I feel like prancing around in sunshine and happiness.
On the actual topic: I find no problem with the existence of these artsy games. If a particular artist chooses to express himself through a somewhat interactive game, so be it, that's his artistic choice. It may not necessarily make for a fun game, but it still has a right to exist as a piece of art.
-
The thing is, my beef is the clear fact that these kinds of game are being held to a standard they do not belong in. Sure, it has a right to exist. But it has -no- right to be where it is in rankings. It is there only for the potential 'meaning'. This pisses me off.
Games can be art, sure, it can be 'deep' like this, sure. But it has to have -effort- and way more than controls and a 'meaning'. Eversion is an excellent example. It's not only 'art', but wonderfully designed and fun to play. It is done right. It is what loved and other 'art' games should try to be like.
The fact Loved not only barely trys, but is gratified for it, irritates me. People need to learn you can't make shit like loved and get far.
For a good game on the same 'scale' as loved, see Don't look back. Though it's more solidly a game, it has 'meaning'. Especially the end.
P.S. Great misrep paul.
P.P.S. fuck on screen keyboard, hard.
-
The person (which many people seem to refer to as Mother) is... really sadistic. Asking you whether they own your mind or your body (resulting in them saying either "Beg for me" or "Dance for me"), and the second time, if you say you're frightened to meet them, they go "Oh, that makes it so much more enjoyable". And disobeying results in comments like "You will fail" and "Ugly creature.", ultimately resulting in you having a tiny and cramped path leading to absolutely nowhere in the end. That's not even mentioning how they pretty much just toy with you, even going as far as having you outright kill yourself.
It's a disturbing game no matter which path you take. The person/voice/circlething kind of reminds me of Glados from Portal. You're just a pawn to some sadistic being who claims to love you so that you'll do whatever heartless things they command you to; and even if you refuse, it still ends terribly.
-
Tis a bit off topic but I definitely endorse the idea of making an indie game megathread.
Now a bit on topic for Loved I thought it was an alright game. The background imagery and music was soothing but still had this curious yet mystical feel to it.
The controls for the game were pretty awful as I had many problems with just performing what should have been really simple jumps. But I can get over control issues if the game is an overall enjoyable experience. The game definitely has some creative ideas going for it making you wonder who the voice in the background is yet never gives you a clue who it actually is.
But the ending is what I like the most about this game. It leaves me in a state of confusion and curiosity but of the good sort. Does grabbing that medallion at the end mean the end of your character's life or just the beginning. Is it a sort of contract that shows that your character is now a slave to the voice in the sky? Or in the bad ending does running through that empty hallway lead you to freedom or just a endless hallway as punishment for your resistance against the voice. I'm curious if the game has a bit of a religious message to it.. Since the checkpoints definitely look like angels and the game makes you take big leaps of faith (If you take the good ending that is). Does the characters running down the hallway (In the bad end) represent his freedom from the voice?
It's a very interesting game but it's really only going to be enjoyable if you want to over think or analysis it. Otherwise, I can see people brushing it off for a boring/poorly made/artsy fartsy sort of game.
-
I'm pretty sure it's about abusive relationships or something.
Like how that one VN, I think it was called "air pressure", was about drug addiction, but everyone thinks it's about cutting yourself
-
On the actual topic: I find no problem with the existence of these artsy games. If a particular artist chooses to express himself through a somewhat interactive game, so be it, that's his artistic choice. It may not necessarily make for a fun game, but it still has a right to exist as a piece of art.
I don't have a problem with artsy games. I dislike this particular game, though, because its "artsy" elements are shallow and devoid of meaning. As has already been pointed out by several people, the whole obedience/disobedience dynamic is pretty flat and inconsequential, and it's all the game has.
Not trying to seem harsh. I just feel like the guy who made this was just trying to seem artsy rather than actually say something.
-
Now, Eversion, that has a narrative without having to throw abuse at the player
Define abuse, because that game is evil :V
-
Define abuse, because that game is evil :V
Evil? I don't know what you're talking about! It's all happy sunshine and rainbows! A fun world of jumping-puzzle adventure! Of course, best played alone in a dark room, for optimal enjoyment.
-
Evil? I don't know what you're talking about! It's all happy sunshine and rainbows!
AND HANDS
THE HANDS MAN
-
AND HANDS
THE HANDS MAN
(http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:O6oG60j5Uj8mhM:http://www.deviantart.com/download/84701783/Spongebob__Imagination_by_kssael.png)
*ahem, we now return to our regularly scheduled discussion.
I dislike this particular game, though, because its "artsy" elements are shallow and devoid of meaning.
Not trying to seem harsh. I just feel like the guy who made this was just trying to seem artsy rather than actually say something.
And therein lies the problem with art. It's all open to interpretation, and whether you choose to read into a bunch of symbolism or just see it as a pointless arrangement of pixels on your screen, no side is necessarily correct. That said, I think it's better to assume that he was indeed trying to say something, even if his execution in conveying his message is imperfect. There's nothing wrong with not finding meaning in someone's work, but it's awfully dismissive to accuse someone of "trying to seem artsy" when there's possibly something much deeper at the root of it all.
-
but it's awfully dismissive to accuse someone of "trying to seem artsy" when there's possibly something much deeper at the root of it all.
I would like to think that the people here are capable of making a sound judgement on a piece of work. Now, professional art critics we ain't (unless someone knows something I don't know), but I'm certain we come close, hence the accusation of "trying to seem artsy," I feel, is valid.
-
The distinction I'm trying to make is the difference between judging the art and judging the artist. The art is something we can observe and make a judgement on. We can pick at concrete words and images and analyze them for meaning (or the lack of such). The artist's mind, and the original ideas contained within it, however, are more abstract, and are things we lack the ability to perceive with our own senses. They can't necessarily be perfectly grasped, and we can't judge something that lacks a more definite form.
-
The distinction I'm trying to make is the difference between judging the art and judging the artist. The art is something we can observe and make a judgement on. We can pick at concrete words and images and analyze them for meaning (or the lack of such). The artist's mind, and the original ideas contained within it, however, are more abstract, and are things we lack the ability to perceive with our own senses. They can't necessarily be perfectly grasped, and we can't judge something that lacks a more definite form.
Perhaps, but we can certainly judge the artist's ability to get across whatever he is trying to say. In this case I feel it can then be said that either the artist's presentation of the idea was clumsy, or that he had a poor grasp on it in the first place. Now we have arrived at the distinction we cannot really make without further evidence, but neither of the two options is positive. Still, it's possible to optimistically lean to the former conclusion.
-
I'm pretty sure it's about abusive relationships or something.
Like how that one VN, I think it was called "air pressure", was about drug addiction, but everyone thinks it's about cutting yourself
Air Pressure was cool though because it was totally unexpected, yet it still made sense (mostly :V)
-
The end result is much like that of a painting. If you stare head on, you can see the imagery within and all of it's beauty, but if you look from the side all you see is a thin layer of paint.
I understand if the message or imagery you got from the game gives you a bad feeling since I'm certain it's suppose to give you a bad feeling, But to then complain about the game engine and how you wouldn't play more than twice... Makes it seem like you're intentionally missing the point. When using games as your canvas, the gameplay is basically the equivalent of the picture frame in the case I made above in quotes. It's just a nice placeholder to compliment the picture, and prevent people from staring at the angle where it's just "A thin layer of paint."
The Artist get's his point across fine enough, considering all of the thoughtful posts made earlier in the topic, and it's obviously invoked a strong feeling in people (Which is the ultimate goal of any piece of media.) so you can't say that the artist failed to get their point across. All of the pieces needed to wrap the player into those feelings are there - The multiple choice questions, the written abuse, the sometimes absurd commands, and they all all used to give you a single, certain feeling that it nurtures all game.
Complaining that the gameplay is only added to the game to serve the above conventions, rather than to be exciting, fun, and to be able to stand out on it's own ... it's sounds like people are trying to imply the artist is a snooty know-nothing just because his picture frame isn't ornate enough.
-
This game did manage to get a message across, which boils down to: "would you kill yourself because you were ordered to or if you believed some good was to come out of it?". To me, this question is both about normal life and about religion. Indeed, the part of the game where you're ordered to suicide seemed a pretty good parallel for religion: following orders towards an unknown end, in hopes of a reward much, much later on. And the question is: would you do it?
-
To me, this question is both about normal life and about religion. Indeed, the part of the game where you're ordered to suicide seemed a pretty good parallel for religion: following orders towards an unknown end, in hopes of a reward much, much later on. And the question is: would you do it?
You... have a very interesting take on religion, there.
-
You... have a very interesting take on religion, there.
I know that my description of religion is simplistic and incomplete at best, but please do try to look at what I'm saying.
EDIT: I also had one religion in particular in mind, when looking at the suicide part.
-
As some other people have said, I see the game as portraying 2 different ways to go about life.
The first way is to go by society's mold. You follow what is generally acceptable. You follow the expectations that are put forth to you. You keep yourself safe by making yourself blend in. While your world and goals might be crystal clear and it will be very hard to stray, the path is dull and gray. It's monotonous. There's nothing but what you are told.
The second way is to go by your own beliefs and ideals. You don't accepts anybody's expectations, you form your own. You don't mold into society to blend in. Your world is colorful and exciting, but it's very hard to see where to go. The path is blurry and hard to see. You will probably stumble and stray off the path many times.
I think the idea that the author is trying to get across is this: Do you accept what you are told and obey to form a clear path and goal? Or do you stumble and fall as you clear your own path ahead?
-
The second way is to go by your own beliefs and ideals. You don't accepts anybody's expectations, you form your own. You don't mold into society to blend in. Your world is colorful and exciting, but it's very hard to see where to go. The path is blurry and hard to see. You will probably stumble and stray off the path many times.
The thing is, there is no other way to follow "one's own" path other than to capriciously and systematically do the exact opposite of what is being commanded. At some point it stops being one's own choice, instead becoming a simple tantrum of disobedience, one giant "you're not the boss of me" scenario. Even worse, in terms of commanding the player to do stuff, this other path is as equally manipulative as the obedient one - the player is still utterly controlled by the commands, he's merely doing exactly the opposite thing this time.
Ultimately, by presenting the player with choice, it completely strips it from him by making it utterly binary. People growing up in the Soviet Union tell stories such as this - during elections, there was only one person to vote for. You had a choice - you could vote for him, or you could not vote. I probably do not need to explain that this is not actually choice, and the same applies to this game: there's no way to go against the grain, as the grain is all there is, no matter how you might try to travel along it. Bioshock presents this beautifully and with a healthy dose of self-irony. Loved attempts to present the point straight, and, I feel, falls far short of being able to really pull it off.
-
Well to be quite honest, it would be rather hard to make the concept less binary in a small game like this. It's either obey or not. Obviously real life is a lot less black and white than this, and I think the author is trying to get this point across in what way he is able within the confines of creating a short, simple game.
-
Well to be quite honest, it would be rather hard to make the concept less binary in a small game like this. It's either obey or not. Obviously real life is a lot less black and white than this, and I think the author is trying to get this point across in what way he is able within the confines of creating a short, simple game.
Yeah, the expectations implied in my statement are exceedingly steep, you're right. Still, I don't think the author put quite as much thought as he should have into the subject matter.