New Dear Esther released

Technology and Gaming
#61

Anyone who thinks this game is terrible has no heart. It takes a bit of an idealistic and inquisitive nature to appreciate a work like this one. “I did not get to mash buttons this game is shit hrpth pth pthpfpfpfpfpf” is not going to fly with me, no matter how much you try to justify it.

That said, while the new Dear Esther was absolutely a technological triumph (hot damn it’s lovely), I find that I actually prefer story delivery of the original mod version.

Okay, and I will nitpick at just a couple things: Did anyone else think the caves were way, way too bright? What were those, fucking atomic candles? Give me something dark and mysterious to explore! Also, the new lines that they recorded for the new release were painfully distinguishable from the old lines from the original mod.

#62

The caves were quite bright yes. I was playing with all the lights off, no problems, but once I got into the caves I actually started squinting occasionally.

#63

I wasn’t really a fan of it, but that’s just me.

#64

So i ask, what is the benefit to buying this over playing the original mod aside from the graphics?

#65

I pirated it and cicled thru the maps with noclip, i almost had ejaculation when i ve seen the maping and the effects, i almost belived that i am in a cave, its beautyfull

its sad that they tried to compensate the short gameplay with that extrame slow movement

in portal 2 ive seen Super 8 , that was like a movie too but its more interactive

#66

the super 8 level had no interaction at all

#67

Some pathetic posts in here…

This game is a truly great achievment for the very little manpower behind it, but meh, people saying its a bad game are probably playing COD or some shit like that

#68

Oh yes, CoD, the greatest scapegoat the gaming community has ever had.

#69

Die in a fire.

#70

I think it was breathtaking at moments. The visuals are simply amazing, and certain voiceover parts sent chills down my spine. Plus it’s a very immersive environment.

I’m inclined to say ‘yes’, because I was actually thinking the same thing while playing. On the other hand, the lighting did create a good atmosphere… if it was very dark it would’ve been more scary, which wouldn’t have been right either I think. I’m a bit undecided on this, still I agree the lighting could’ve been toned down a bit in certain parts.

I actually thought there were two voice overs; that certain parts were voiced by someone else. Are those the old lines from the original mod you’re talking about? If so, that’s a shame because the “real” voiceover (the one in the trailer), sounds way, way better.

#71

So now we’ve all safely agreed it’s a game, what about the story? I’d never played the mod version, so it’s all new to me, but I think I was too distracted by the visuals and the mystery of it all to pay much attention to who was speaking.

But am I right in thinking that the narrator is reading from two different accounts - letters to/about Esther, and an explorer guy? Because there are two, possibly three different themes going on. There’s the mystery behind Esther, but then there’s also the guy who fell down the caves whilst exploring, broke his leg and was high on painkillers, unless they’re the same guy…?

#72

Spoilers*[COLOR=‘Black’]There is Paul Jacobson ( lonely sheep herder on the island who died after crawling through the caves). Then there is Esther Donnaly who may died in a car accident in which you and Paul were included. That’s how much I got from the first run but it may be different on other runs. I don’t know. The english is quite hard sometimes.

#73

my kinda take on the story.

[COLOR=‘Black’]Esther is your deceased wife. Paul is the drunk driver who was in the other car in the accident. Although we only ever see one car, maybe a friend in the same car? Regardless, the various inhabitants of the island have their stories recited, donnely who visited too, because they are parallel to what [the narrator] thinks he is experiencing.

But that’s the thing that hangs in the balance for me. Isthe island is real, or simply a figment of [the narrators] imagination, delirious on painkillers from a operation on his kidney stones. Did he really fall and injure himself? The island he has most probably read about after borrowing donnely’s diary from the library, could so easily be conjured up, and mixed with his memorys post-car accident. Hence the interweaving of the nervous and chemical symbols. Imperfect I know, I’d be interested in hearing someone disprove this, as it’s sketchy to me too.

#74

Interesting… I was more thinking along the lines of…

[COLOR=‘black’]The island is life. The path over the island denotes part of the way life has taken for the narrator. From the letters it is clear that Esther is very dear to the narrator. Probably his wife, or girlfriend. I think the fall in the cave, where he hurts his leg, is a metaphor for the car accident where Esther died. He never quite recovered from that. I think in the ending ‘cutscene’, the narrator commits suicide so he can be with Esther again. The ‘flying away’ part seems like a metaphor for one’s spirit flying away after death… “When this paper plane leaves the cliff edge and carves clean vapor trails in the dark, we will come together”

Whatever the truth is - I think we can all safely agree that the story is very much left open for interpretation. I was thinking I’d play Dear Esther to have more answers to the questions I started with, but it only left me with more unanswered questions. I guess it’s not for everybody, but I love it.

#75

That seems to assume that any benefit, concerning taste, that can be had from playing a video game is objective. There’s no measurement for it, it’s entirely conceptual how people interact with it. Definitions are a way of categorizing and dealing with reality so that we can successfully interact with it, they’re not hard and fast realities.

There is no platonic form of video games that all games aspire to. It’s a concept that can’t be solidified. The axiom of what makes a good video game is completely unsubstantiated and so open to being deconstructed by pieces such as Dear Esther.

All in all I think you’re trying to abstract it into pieces when the whole point of the package is for the whole experience. The different visuals change the perception of the poem, music, interactivity etc. and vice versa. I can definitely tell that my experience of the story was different. It may not be easy to quantify that, but I definitely had a totally other experience than playing the original. And I value that beyond any integrity that I feel is owed to an arbitrary definition of “video game”.

So you don’t have to like it or appreciate it. It’s just that there’s no objective case against it.

#76

Flubly, prepare for a barrage of “your opinions are wrong”. It doesn’t matter that you succinctly demonstrated how the argument herein is entirely subjective and, therefore, how there are no objective criticisms which can be lobbied against it with any validity. That said, I don’t see why someone couldn’t try to substantiate what exactly makes a video game good in some sort of Socratic fashion. A couple of people did seem to try and do just that in a roundabout way. That doesn’t mean that they’ll ever get to a universal, objective definition, but one could probable get to one that is at least sensible.

#77

I understand that people want to come to some kind of definite opinion concerning subjective media, and that’s a good thing. It facilitates discussion and growth, I think.

The main thing I’m trying to point out, though, is that the whole “ideal game” comparison is kind of a waste of time. It’s just a matching game with no point. It’s better to work off of the experience of playing the game, the cause and effect relationship. Obviously this game brings up a lot of interesting questions concerning interactivity, social conceptualizations of gaming, as well as its own autonomous narrative. To me, looking at personal reactions to those aspects is more worth while than questioning whether it matches up to an imaginary standard.

That’s ultimately a relative belief too, but I think it’s one that has more tangible results. The perfect game is an isolated idea that doesn’t really effect anything outside of itself. It’s like gaming in a vacuum.

#78

So just the graphics then?

[COLOR=‘Black’]sheesh, it was just a question, don’t have to get all defensive about it

#79

I don’t really see how I came across as defensive. From your other posts it’s obvious that you would have a more categorical view of a game’s benefits than I think is relevant. The only way to communicate that is to explain it, there’s no succinct one sentence answer. That’s not a knock on your intelligence or taste, it’s just a highlight on how people perceive these things very differently.

Actually, I can see how the last sentence could seem defensive. I meant “you don’t have to like it” literally. It was just to emphasize the relativity, not to espouse the youtube attitude of, “if u dont lik it, dont watch it!!!”

#80

Actually, I’d never looked at it that way, and Hyperbytes explanation seems more well rounded than mine. interesting.

Founded in 2004, Leakfree.org became one of the first online communities dedicated to Valve’s Source engine development. It is more famously known for the formation of Black Mesa: Source under the 'Leakfree Modification Team' handle in September 2004.