Control was my first jump into nex gen. Or is it current gen now? I don't know.

I played in Graphics mode. The one with Ray tracing. That was cool. The non organic objects looked great. Light filled rooms and bounced around, gave body to objects. It's great when things start exploding or when you levitate objects to block and direct light. But the humans look even worse than last gen. The hair has no consistency, vanishing and reappearing. The faces are wooden, emotionless. Mouths move wrong and creep you out. This is the uncanny valley. But only in motion. It looks great in stills. I'm sure entering photo mode turns everything up to max.

A handful of games have ruined all others. Last of Us 2, FF7 Remake, Death Stranding, and believe it or not Life is Strange True Colors. The people in these games look like people. I emotionally attach to them as people. The people don't look like people in Control. Dead eyes, stiff faces, and janky motion capture with boring autocutscenes. Whenever someone speaks the illusion breaks down. Maybe this is why nobody talks in the cutscenes.

Emotionless people for an emotionless story. Is some weirdness all it takes to impress these days? Everything has to be explained rather than experienced. The emotional stakes are absent. I know nothing of Jessie's relationship with her brother. I know nothing beyond the fact she was the chosen one blah blah it's all bullshit. You won't be invested in a second of it.

I'm assuming lack of character detail is a tradeoff. Because not much is fixed down. You can blow almost anything up. Hurl almost any object. And they will all react, break, shatter, and bounce around. There's a sense of kinetics and realism. It feels good. Playing the Yuffie DLC for FF7 Remake afterwards left an impression. It was the opposite. Everything was locked down.

There is lore… tons of it I'm sure. But in the most boring format. Collectables. Audio logs. I just can't. Who wants to chase down this shit when you could tell the story with sound and picture?

The aesthetic of the Oldest House would be cool to fight in no? Twisting, moving panels of wall that would have to be navigated through and utilized to fight. But no. It's all just for show. You end up fighting in familiar office settings. The ashtray maze everyone raves about, probably because it at least attempts to fulfill that promise, is itself not even a maze. It unfolds in front of you as you step through, unfurling just for you, leading the way, rather than being an adversary.

The gunplay is mediocre, and unneeded. Launch is simply too powerful. Your best option is always just to hurl shit. Enemies are all defeated the same way, minus one of the DLC bosses. I take that back, the ones with shields you have to time exactly when you hurl shit. Worse, you don't even need to manage things to throw. You can just look at a wall, and rip out some concrete. There's always something to levitate. I beat the game easily without even getting shield or seize.

Random "kill X number of Y in Z location" missions appear fullscreen during a tense battle. Really?

The upgrades are uninspired. Boring. Just altering numbers. More damage. More health. Etc. They don't change the way you play.

Levitation is at least satisfying. The thrust upward accompanied by the animation of Jessie throwing he head and hands back. It became a lone source of joy.

The absurdity and artificiality of the environment is laid bare. You're the director of the Bureau, and yet you are denied entry and need keycards. Even though you can backtrack, you don't have to - the story moves you forward from new place to new place. The welcome choice of not having waypoints is offset by the fact it's still telling you were to go. It doesn't feel like I need to explore. This is no metroidvania. The things I found might be interesting… if I cared about the story.

I see and appreciate the artistry that's there,. but so much of the experience in playing control was standard and familiar. And yet so highly praised. Am I out of touch? Or are the kids wrong?

You make me sad I spent money on it, but glad I didn't play it (yet).

I think I bought into the hype, which I also did for quantum break, which disappointed me in some of the same ways you described for this game.

I guess I'm too optimistic about gaming, the way I subsidize the industry by buying games I don't play. I've gotten better, though. I'm not ordering or preordering the Horizon game until I finally finish the first one (dammit!).

- No text -

Why does it need to be a new invention? Can't it just be something well done, executed with and often far-too-fleeting "folks being good at their job"? Do not besmirch the flowers, and their scent, simply because you've smelled it before.

Just for note; Believable Humans are hard. We instinctively know what they are supposed to look like, move like, so on. Pulling this off is, even in movies, one of the hardest things to do in all of digital art. Just putting that out there, as, every time I see it mentioned it feels like low hanging fruit. Unless shit looks like Reboot, it's just whatever.

As for the Story, Cody. You're Cody Millering it again. It is not a shame that they didn't hand over a story in a silver platter. Video games are... get this, INTERACTIVE! That means you need to INTERACT with the game world, which, by the way, is its own story and its own character. Yes, that means there is reading (but some videos as well). Movies? Whole different deal. I'll even agree. In a purely visual medium, show don't tell.

But you're in the WORLD Cody, and it seems like you didn't even play in it. I read your take as if... you only play with Legos per instructions, which HEY! Fine! But... so much potential joy is lost. Just... play man. But then again, maybe it's for the best. Clearly you didn't find anything about the world interesting. Mundane objects with fantastic and strange capabilities. Visions and whispers, all asking questions by giving what it calls an answer. What is this place? Why is a free floating fiberglass carousel ride seat, AKA the marry-go-round horse, capable of moving short distances at great speeds? I mean shit... look at that question! I did not think I was going to write that down as a question today!

And you think it's boring?! I'm calling on "It's you man", as Publisher-bull aside, it is a cool game. The game shouldn't need to force you to have fun. To change things up. To which there are plenty of instances of through out the Old House, though clearly not to your rigorously unmoveing and lofty standards.

Anyway, here is what the rest of us said in 2019.

Plus... no love for live action? Here I thought you were an true connoisseur!

For what it’s worth, I don’t agree with just about any single thought in that post. Control was incredible from start to finish. If you’re expecting anything besides a Naughty Dog game to be The Last of Us, you’ve already fucked up.

But you're in the WORLD Cody, and it seems like you didn't even play in it.

I played. I found many things. More than most people apparently. But when the characters don't seem to care, why would I? There are no emotional stakes. Every game creates a world, just like every film or book. What's the difference between Fantastic Beasts and Harry potter? Same world right? So why was one of them so insufferably dull?

A world is not enough. It needs emotional richness. And Control was emotionally impoverished.

Why does it need to be a new invention? Can't it just be something well done, executed with and often far-too-fleeting "folks being good at their job"? Do not besmirch the flowers, and their scent, simply because you've smelled it before.

By this logic, I should be fine playing 2D platformers until the end of time. They are better than they ever have been objectively. If you believed that you'd be playing the same games over and over. But you, and others don't. We as humans crave new experiences, new novelties, and new challenges.

Human experience is relative. While 2D platformers are at their best absolutely, does a new one today FEEL like it did to play Mario 3? No. Because the improvements are incremental, and your knowledge largely carries over. Halo wasn't Halo because it only felt a little better than Goldeneye.

If Lindsay Ellis didn't take down her twitter, I'd embed her "No meaning, only lore" tweet.

For what it’s worth, I don’t agree with just about any single thought in that post. Control was incredible from start to finish. If you’re expecting anything besides a Naughty Dog game to be The Last of Us, you’ve already fucked up.

You can tell me how wrong I am while we play It Takes Two or A Way out :-p

So what the hell happened to her? She hasn’t put up a new video in ages. I don’t have or use twitter, so I wasn’t aware she got rid of it.

So... this post WAS longer. Naturally, just as I was finished and about to click "send" my computer decided it would be a good time to just... seize up. Lost the whole thing, and boy-oh-boy am I not happy about that. So, now this is going to be an abridged version, based on what I can recall I put down. Shit this sucks. This hurts.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

But you're in the WORLD Cody, and it seems like you didn't even play in it.

I played. I found many things. More than most people apparently. But when the characters don't seem to care, why would I? There are no emotional stakes. Every game creates a world, just like every film or book. What's the difference between Fantastic Beasts and Harry potter? Same world right? So why was one of them so insufferably dull?

A world is not enough. It needs emotional richness. And Control was emotionally impoverished.

It's a game of Bureaucrats. It's not supposed to be Shakespeare. In fact, they're a little too emotional. As for Jesse, let's just say she has always found life a little strange. (It's part of the story.)

Why does it need to be a new invention? Can't it just be something well done, executed with and often far-too-fleeting "folks being good at their job"? Do not besmirch the flowers, and their scent, simply because you've smelled it before.

By this logic, I should be fine playing 2D platformers until the end of time. They are better than they ever have been objectively. If you believed that you'd be playing the same games over and over. But you, and others don't. We as humans crave new experiences, new novelties, and new challenges.

Human experience is relative. While 2D platformers are at their best absolutely, does a new one today FEEL like it did to play Mario 3? No. Because the improvements are incremental, and your knowledge largely carries over. Halo wasn't Halo because it only felt a little better than Goldeneye.

I had a huge response to this one. This hurts the most... something about, you care more about tech or something? Oh... it was a solid observation and I can't think for what it was now. I'm so angry. Rrrrrr.

Cody, you're on a Destiny forum. We do the same thing, have done the same thing, for days, weeks, months... YEARS now. And then after that is was basically "everything is a remix", and some observations on that front, but I'm just so out now... I'm just posting this now out of spite of my computer.

Eh.

Well... at least the meme I made survived.

Cody, you're on a Destiny forum. We do the same thing, have done the same thing, for days, weeks, months... YEARS now. And then after that is was basically "everything is a remix", and some observations on that front, but I'm just so out now... I'm just posting this now out of spite of my computer.

Everything is a remix… to an extent. But the video game has the advantage here I think. With new tech comes new modes of interaction. I don't think it's fair to say that the experience of playing Halo for the first time was a remix. There really are unique leaps from time to time. Heck, describe Katamari Damacy to someone in 1985, the dual sticks and the 3D rendering of the bazillion objects, and they'd think it was magic.

Watch her "mask off" video on youtube. That explains it pretty well.

- No text -

For what it’s worth, I don’t agree with just about any single thought in that post. Control was incredible from start to finish. If you’re expecting anything besides a Naughty Dog game to be The Last of Us, you’ve already fucked up.

Good to know. Cody's criticisms resonated because I felt similarly about Quantum Break, but I still want to play Control sometime. I'm always hopeful for the next Last of Us--in particular, a game that nails story and characters that well. It's not an expectation, though--just a hope.

A friend of mine remarked to me how he always wanted a "Quantum Break" but done right, and felt this served that purpose well. I'd generally agree. Some of Cody's remarks have merit. For example, upgrades are meh and the powers certainly aren't all equally useful. There's more promise in the premise than has yet to be fulfilled but doing so all in one game would probably require too much work to be realistically viable. (the good news is that there's more to come from this "universe")

That said I loved the game, and I didn't play it with any expectations. I'd normally hate the number of readable and listenable collectibles that this game has but I couldn't get enough of them. It's going to be very much down to taste.

I think everyone has different degrees of what aspects of games matter to them. Just because you believe games should be a certain way doesn't mean they need to be in order to be enjoyable. You may not enjoy them if they don't meet those standards, but plenty of us don't need them to meet those standards to love the game.

Sure, call it flawed. It does have flaws. For some of us, those flaws did not detract enough from the game to outweigh what did engage us. You were not engaged by those things either and so the game fell flat for you.

Both Jesse and I shared the same fascination in this strange world and wanted to understand it more. That's all it took for me to connect.

It makes sense to have high standards for what you want games to accomplish but it's unfortunate that your standards may make games that don't reach that bar far less enjoyable for you.

;p

But I did laugh

I think everyone has different degrees of what aspects of games matter to them. Just because you believe games should be a certain way doesn't mean they need to be in order to be enjoyable. You may not enjoy them if they don't meet those standards, but plenty of us don't need them to meet those standards to love the game.

Nah man of course. Tons of people loved the game, clearly. But you know what? Sometimes I really like reading from folks who don't like a game I love, or from people who love a game I dislike. Often, it's really valuable to see how they see things differently, and sometimes their insight can better inform you or open you up going forward.

If you loved Control, I'm not, nor would I ever, take that away from you.

I think everyone has different degrees of what aspects of games matter to them. Just because you believe games should be a certain way doesn't mean they need to be in order to be enjoyable. You may not enjoy them if they don't meet those standards, but plenty of us don't need them to meet those standards to love the game.

Nah man of course. Tons of people loved the game, clearly. But you know what? Sometimes I really like reading from folks who don't like a game I love, or from people who love a game I dislike. Often, it's really valuable to see how they see things differently, and sometimes their insight can better inform you or open you up going forward.

If you loved Control, I'm not, nor would I ever, take that away from you.

Oh for sure, I agree with you on that, it's just your closing statement presents a bit of a false dichotomy. lol

I see and appreciate the artistry that's there,. but so much of the experience in playing control was standard and familiar. And yet so highly praised. Am I out of touch? Or are the kids wrong?

For the record, I get the reference, it's just very irrelevant in this scenario.

There was enough that was non-standard, in such extremely non-standard ways, that appealed to me as an individual, that the areas it did not excel were, at minimum, tolerable. You're not out of touch, the kids aren't wrong, it's just that what the title focused on was extremely appealing to others and not so much to you.

To me, it was developed without worrying that it'd end up a niche title (that's Remedy for you, I guess XD) that managed to break out of the bounds of that niche more than one might expect. I think with more design iteration it could break out beyond that niche even more.

As for the Story, Cody. You're Cody Millering it again. It is not a shame that they didn't hand over a story in a silver platter. Video games are... get this, INTERACTIVE! That means you need to INTERACT with the game world, which, by the way, is its own story and its own character. Yes, that means there is reading (but some videos as well). Movies? Whole different deal. I'll even agree. In a purely visual medium, show don't tell.

It should not just be a movie (Looking at you, Modern Warfare…) but lore text attached to collectibles is not ok because it is interactive. The story should be experiential. That is the promise of video games.

As for the Story, Cody. You're Cody Millering it again. It is not a shame that they didn't hand over a story in a silver platter. Video games are... get this, INTERACTIVE! That means you need to INTERACT with the game world, which, by the way, is its own story and its own character. Yes, that means there is reading (but some videos as well). Movies? Whole different deal. I'll even agree. In a purely visual medium, show don't tell.

It should not just be a movie (Looking at you, Modern Warfare…) but lore text attached to collectibles is not ok because it is interactive. The story should be experiential. That is the promise of video games.

If the game world is experiential, indeed a frame for the story to live in, then why not should parts of that world (which can be collected) be part of its story? Be it main, secondary, or tertiary.

As for the Story, Cody. You're Cody Millering it again. It is not a shame that they didn't hand over a story in a silver platter. Video games are... get this, INTERACTIVE! That means you need to INTERACT with the game world, which, by the way, is its own story and its own character. Yes, that means there is reading (but some videos as well). Movies? Whole different deal. I'll even agree. In a purely visual medium, show don't tell.

It should not just be a movie (Looking at you, Modern Warfare…) but lore text attached to collectibles is not ok because it is interactive. The story should be experiential. That is the promise of video games.

If the game world is experiential, indeed a frame for the story to live in, then why not should parts of that world (which can be collected) be part of its story? Be it main, secondary, or tertiary.

If there is information in a document you can pick up in the world, the character is also receiving that information via reading that document. Same with audio logs.

Some details can't be experienced first-hand, like an audio log recorded thousands of years ago (Halo) or like a report on a paranormal event that has occurred and since passed (Control). It adds flavor to the world, and it gives you a better sense of what the greater world is capable of.

Control does have paranormal events that are displayed and interacted with and there are others that you learn about that add context. The number of details you learn through Control's collectibles would be impossible to showcase in a single game, but the context they provide enriches what the game does allow me to experience. Some of them also provide additional context for things you will experience directly in ways they couldn't convey experientially.

I can understand the distaste. When you come to a game to experience the game, breaking away from the interactive elements can be off-putting. In the specific case of Control, however, the character's impetus from the start of the game is seeking to understand all this weirdness, and reading documents found throughout the world is totally in keeping with that impetus. I never felt like I was breaking from the character's (and my own) motivation by stopping to read because that's part of what we're there for. If your interests don't align with the character, you won't necessarily find it appealing, and that makes sense.

I think too many games rely on audio logs and diaries and shit for lore dumps. I don’t have a problem with the concept, but the execution almost always leaves me a bit baffled. Why would anyone have written or recorded this? Control didn’t have that problem—they were either memos or files that were necessary for the operations of that agency, or recordings of scientific expeditions or something. It all made sense within the world. Unlike something like Bioshock where they were all just ramblings that make no sense why the person would have recorded.

Because it's rarely Gone Home, or Edith Finch. It's usually not integrated into the playing, but a fully separate "bonus DVD content" vibe on a screen that's far too low resolution to be the preferred place for me to read.

(note that I have not played Control and I'm speaking generally here)

Because it's rarely Gone Home, or Edith Finch. It's usually not integrated into the playing, but a fully separate "bonus DVD content" vibe on a screen that's far too low resolution to be the preferred place for me to read.

(note that I have not played Control and I'm speaking generally here)

I think this is a good way to put it. In fact, this is the key issue.

A lot of these things are games wanting the benefits of making an RPG, but without actually making one. Look at Deus Ex. It's an RPG, so all of these modes of interaction and play make sense and are actually a part of the game. Control is an action game, where none of this stuff is actually integrated into the way you play. The language of the game is about moving and killing. But the language of Deus Ex is far greater. Which is why speaking to people or hacking a computer and reading emails feels okay.

I don't think the folks making games have really appreciated or even really seem to understand, that to tell the stories they want to tell with games the way they are, you have to make an RPG instead. Then lean into elements of whatever other genre you want, and boom.

Put it in the movie, not on the DVD extras, as you say.

I Don't think it needs to be an RPG, at least not the way I think of how that term is defined. I think it can fit in very well in a walking simulator (previously mentioned Gone Home), A puzzle game (Papers, please), an adventure game (Life is strange, Myst) or in ARGs (I Love Bees). The primary motivation of the characters needs to be aligned to world exploration and inductive analysis and the pacing of the game needs to be slower than most action games can allow for.

ODST is an interesting example to consider because it separated out the game into two separate modes and put the audio logs into the slower exploration parts. But, then with ILB being so enormously personally important to me I know I can't be objective about them so maybe I'm just making excuses?

I Don't think it needs to be an RPG, at least not the way I think of how that term is defined.

I mean RPG in the truest sense. A "Role Playing Game". Not something like Final Fantasy or Skyrim.

I Don't think it needs to be an RPG, at least not the way I think of how that term is defined.

I mean RPG in the truest sense. A "Role Playing Game". Not something like Final Fantasy or Skyrim.

Except Control was an RPG for me in this sense. I synced with the role of Jesse Faden. Despite aspects of her time in The Oldest House being action oriented due to the present threat, she didn't come here intending to deal with any threat of this kind, she came for answers. The gameplay is actually an obstacle in the way of her purpose.

The gameplay is experiencing the weirdness, but the weirdness doesn't explain itself. If you want to understand the weirdness, you need to learn more about past events of these sort, you need to learn more about the place you're in, how it came to be, what it's used for. Some of that comes across in dialogue with characters (and for some of it you have to voluntarily talk to those NPCs outside of mandatory cutscenes).

You will get exactly as much information as you seek. The gameplay does not require you to understand but understanding essentially requires "research." It sounds boring, and it might be to some, but I was ravenous for that info.

In contrast, as much as I enjoyed Mass Effect, I never read that Codex. It makes sense that such a database of information would be easily on hand in that universe, but I didn't find reading an encyclopedia all that compelling, especially when the extraneous details didn't necessarily add much to the experience. The intricacies of the civilizations in Mass Effect revealed themselves through the experience because it involved social interaction. Control is about the weird. What you see has no obvious explanation and the weird does not tell you much, if anything, about itself. If you want to understand, you must seek it, and it feels natural to do so given the context.

Except for the Mass Effect part. I devoured that damn thing.

But it is an entirely different experience to Control. In Mass Effect, the absolute vast majority of entries make absolutely no difference in anything you are experiencing. In Control, at least half of it does.

Vortech: Because it's rarely Gone Home, or Edith Finch. It's usually not integrated into the playing, but a fully separate "bonus DVD content" vibe on a screen that's far too low resolution to be the preferred place for me to read.

(note that I have not played Control and I'm speaking generally here)

Cody Miller: I think this is a good way to put it. In fact, this is the key issue.

A lot of these things are games wanting the benefits of making an RPG, but without actually making one. Look at Deus Ex. It's an RPG, so all of these modes of interaction and play make sense and are actually a part of the game. Control is an action game, where none of this stuff is actually integrated into the way you play. The language of the game is about moving and killing. But the language of Deus Ex is far greater. Which is why speaking to people or hacking a computer and reading emails feels okay.

I don't think the folks making games have really appreciated or even really seem to understand, that to tell the stories they want to tell with games the way they are, you have to make an RPG instead. Then lean into elements of whatever other genre you want, and boom.

Put it in the movie, not on the DVD extras, as you say.

Vortech: I Don't think it needs to be an RPG, at least not the way I think of how that term is defined. I think it can fit in very well in a walking simulator (previously mentioned Gone Home), A puzzle game (Papers, please), an adventure game (Life is strange, Myst) or in ARGs (I Love Bees). The primary motivation of the characters needs to be aligned to world exploration and inductive analysis and the pacing of the game needs to be slower than most action games can allow for.

ODST is an interesting example to consider because it separated out the game into two separate modes and put the audio logs into the slower exploration parts. But, then with ILB being so enormously personally important to me I know I can't be objective about them so maybe I'm just making excuses?

Why have neither of you recognized EffortlessFury or cheapLEY? mmm? I think they've answered these points quite well. Ah well, lets risk some more redundancy.

For my first observation folks, you suggest genre! So I suppose Pokémon really was ahead of its time! Take in-part one of the given examples, Gone Home. Technically, yes it does have story collectables, but that's because the game IS the collectables. There is little other gameplay otherwise. It's not fair to use it as an example to grade all other usage. To do so is honestly reductive (hey this must be a Cody thread), and even silly. Gone Home is great and all but I don't think Control should be Gone Home. Or Bioshock. Or Destiny #.

But this is also about an exact demand in method, a game language as Cody put it. I've already essentially implied (though it had been more (ಥ﹏ಥ)) that in a government building, endless stacks of papers (and videos and audio, both in outdated formats) that end up helping tell you what happens before you got there makes perfect sense. In other words, thank you for your Dues Ex example (which I underlined for you above) Cody. I'm glad we all agree.

...

EffortlessFury: I can understand the distaste. When you come to a game to experience the game, breaking away from the interactive elements can be off-putting. In the specific case of Control, however, the character's impetus from the start of the game is seeking to understand all this weirdness, and reading documents found throughout the world is totally in keeping with that impetus.

...

BUT CONTROL IS AN ACTION GAME! Ok... well what do you want the message to be made out of? Morse code in explosions? This is the major problem in the proposal, as there is so much just saying what it should be that in posting there was no time made to figure out what it is you are actually proposing. It's a problem looking for its proof that it was ever there. I ask you; Should the language in Controls game play override its environment and it's theme? Would you rather have the Old House not have ANY documents at all? No reading, no audio, no video. Geeze, is it just me or does the just hurt to read?

Goodness, in this simulation, all there is to tell story as outlined, as described, are the objects of power and nothing else. The same thing, changed a little, for the entire game. No break up, no little story snacks as you move point to point, just go here then go there, boom boom boom. Ugh... well ya did it, you made the game to where even the psychic blowing shit up actually feels pointlessly droll now. What the fuck ya thinking? All you've done is create fatigue on a fanatic premise. Even action MOVIES need to stop now and again.

...I'mma stop there, this hurts, ugh...

Man.

And on the flip side you have the game FORCING these things. Which I suppose the game surely could I do but... help me out here EffortlessFury...

EffortlessFury: Some details can't be experienced first-hand, like an audio log recorded thousands of years ago (Halo) or like a report on a paranormal event that has occurred and since passed (Control). It adds flavor to the world, and it gives you a better sense of what the greater world is capable of.

---

In the movies, the only collectables are its props deemed necessary by the story as writ or sometimes as improvised by its actors... so, the brilliance in-part of Gone Home. Everything is a remix. But the most important thing (for the sake of what we speak of), AS ANY GOOD EDITOR KNOWS, is the rhythm of its edits. Pacing. How and much a story is delivered. You need to make sure the consumer of the content does not grow fatigued.

In video games, we're all its actors. We're all improvising. This when and where and pattern of the beats is always a major problem in every videogame with a true story to tell. SO HOW DO YOU EDIT THAT?... in a shooter or an action game, and without making everything like Gone Home? Prevent fatigue, but create an entertaining pace? Well, fortunately, since it's a given that humans are playing video games (and maybe the occasional cat), there exists an option that all(?) folks whom can play such game have.

Curiosity and wonder. So while you are playing a videogame, such aspects becomes aimed upon the gameworld as you move from play-space to play-space. Destiny #, Bioshock, Control... each are their own worlds, with their own game and styles of play. Each with collectables that act in different ways as mortar to the larger story beats, be it history of a before-you-entered, or a pending warning of what is yet to come. Curiosity should be rewarded, should it not?

The edit in the down time,where the player is free in a space, must come from somewhere other than explosions. You can't risk that fatigue. So in the game, on that down time, you have curiosity and wonder to work with. That's why it's SO IMPORTANT to have story collectables in these games where story are often intrinsically part of the game. Control does it well. You learn of the world without becoming fatigued of it, which in turn help increases the enjoyment of it, and so you get this loop. A cycle. Seconds of fun, if you will. Fun from X then fun from Y. And one becomes more involved in the story beats. YOU ARE IN THE WORLD, and it all just works.

Ans so Cody, in short, again...

..it's you Cody. You asked.

Caveat;

cheapLEY: I think too many games rely on audio logs and diaries and shit for lore dumps. I don’t have a problem with the concept, but the execution almost always leaves me a bit baffled. Why would anyone have written or recorded this? Control didn’t have that problem—they were either memos or files that were necessary for the operations of that agency, or recordings of scientific expeditions or something. It all made sense within the world.

It would be false to conclude that we don't see the truth embedded in the spark of this myopically made white lie. Sometimes it can feel like a slog. I myself never did collect all the Riddler question marks in the Batman: Arkham Asylum series, even though it involves game play that is part of the game that I enjoyed. Sometimes you just lose interest. It happens.

But to go and say...

Cody Miller: There is lore… tons of it I'm sure. But in the most boring format. Collectables. Audio logs. I just can't. Who wants to chase down this shit when you could tell the story with sound and picture?

It's insulting to the craft that can be inferred you love so much, Cody. It's just a plan stupid statement all around. It is possible to not like something, yet not be an ass about it. Oh and while I'm here, you troll for perspectives Cody, but, instead could you not? How 'bout not be an ass and just... ask. You might even enjoy it? Actually... na. You probably won't, as the discussion would have to happen in a certain way or else it would be "wrong". ;P

Why have neither of you recognized EffortlessFury or cheapLEY? mmm? I think they've answered these points quite well. Ah well, lets risk some more redundancy.

Don't worry, it's unusual for me to get replied to/acknowledged here. XD I'm used to it. (it's actually something I've always been curious about the statistics of because I acknowledge that it's entirely possible my perception is skewed)

- No text -

- No text -

- No text -

Cody Miller: There is lore… tons of it I'm sure. But in the most boring format. Collectables. Audio logs. I just can't. Who wants to chase down this shit when you could tell the story with sound and picture?

To comment on this a bit, actually...all of these elements of presentation serve their own purposes with their own pros and cons. Video Games are unique in that they can leverage every aspect of every sub-medium in any way.

Dialogue and written word serve mostly the same purpose, except dialogue involves another person to have a conversation with. Documents found around The Oldest House have the potential to house (lol) more knowledge than the few NPCs that are around to speak to. They can also be more detailed than what a person might relay in casual conversation.

As for visuals, I'd argue they often pose more questions than answers. Often times, environmental storytelling merely implies answers to questions rather than answer them outright. So, too, do many of the documents in Control; they're not entirely forthright either. However, what questions and answers text/dialogue can pose are distinct from the ones that visuals can pose.

They all serve their own purposes in the context of the game and story you are telling. It's about execution, and Control nails it when it comes to collectibles.

Curiosity and wonder. So while you are playing a videogame, such aspects becomes aimed upon the gameworld as you move from play-space to play-space. Destiny #, Bioshock, Control... each are their own worlds, with their own game and styles of play. Each with collectables that act in different ways as mortar to the larger story beats, be it history of a before-you-entered, or a pending warning of what is yet to come. Curiosity should be rewarded, should it not?

Yes and no.

I actually thought Cyberpunk did this really well with its side missions. Not the finding of them (that involved just being radioed or going to a marked waypoint), but the doing of them. They enhanced the world, story, and characters in a meaningful way. Not coincidentally, the things you do in the side missions you do in the rest of the game! It's just an extension of the actions the game has you do elsewhere. Walk, talk, sneak, shoot, quickhack, whatever. There's no alternate "mode" for sidequests.

But in Control? Hold square, and the game stops while you read some text. Where else in the game but the collectables are you reading such text? It's in effect a separate "mode".

Contrast this with one of my favorite moments from Last of Us, where on exploring I found a poster of the movie Joel's daughter liked. Ellie makes fun of it, but Joel explains what it is in pretty great detail. Ellie asks how a grown ass man knows so much about a stupid YA Werewolf movie, and Joel kind of shuts up. Because we know it reminds him of his daughter, and his attempt to connect with her by learning about the things she liked.

Notice though, how you never leave the game for this to happen. You never lose control, and in many other parts of the game Joel and Ellie talk to each other while you navigate the world.

See how that's different? See how that's much more effective than text with a lore dump? That's how I'd like my curiosity rewarded and my worlds expanded upon. You can't just add collectable text documents / audio logs and call it a day. The experience has to be designed to make those things seamless.

Except for the Mass Effect part. I devoured that damn thing.

But it is an entirely different experience to Control. In Mass Effect, the absolute vast majority of entries make absolutely no difference in anything you are experiencing. In Control, at least half of it does.

Oh, I don't mean to imply that it's useless, uninteresting, or unappealing to everyone. It just didn't appeal to me. There was so much meat in the game itself, where most of the pertinent details were conveyed through the vast amount of dialogue, that I didn't feel compelled to stop to read. The game was already long. XD

Curiosity and wonder. So while you are playing a videogame, such aspects becomes aimed upon the gameworld as you move from play-space to play-space. Destiny #, Bioshock, Control... each are their own worlds, with their own game and styles of play. Each with collectables that act in different ways as mortar to the larger story beats, be it history of a before-you-entered, or a pending warning of what is yet to come. Curiosity should be rewarded, should it not?

Yes and no.

I actually thought Cyberpunk did this really well with its side missions. Not the finding of them (that involved just being radioed or going to a marked waypoint), but the doing of them. They enhanced the world, story, and characters in a meaningful way. Not coincidentally, the things you do in the side missions you do in the rest of the game! It's just an extension of the actions the game has you do elsewhere. Walk, talk, sneak, shoot, quickhack, whatever. There's no alternate "mode" for sidequests.

But in Control? Hold square, and the game stops while you read some text. Where else in the game but the collectables are you reading such text? It's in effect a separate "mode".

Contrast this with one of my favorite moments from Last of Us, where on exploring I found a poster of the movie Joel's daughter liked. Ellie makes fun of it, but Joel explains what it is in pretty great detail. Ellie asks how a grown ass man knows so much about a stupid YA Werewolf movie, and Joel kind of shuts up. Because we know it reminds him of his daughter, and his attempt to connect with her by learning about the things she liked.

Notice though, how you never leave the game for this to happen. You never lose control, and in many other parts of the game Joel and Ellie talk to each other while you navigate the world.

See how that's different? See how that's much more effective than text with a lore dump? That's how I'd like my curiosity rewarded and my worlds expanded upon.

You're free to prefer that, but it doesn't work in the context of Control's narrative and shoehorning in people and events to make it work is a disservice to the narrative they want to tell.

Jesse is mostly isolated. Few people are around and they're not able to follow you into the rest of the House. There is no one to provide context and clarification. Hell, not everyone knows everything.

Your example from TLoU uses the environment to enrich the characters. That makes sense; have your characters talk about what is seen. It is a smoother presentation where new "verbs" are not introduced. However, there's nothing inherently wrong with introducing new "verbs" that are orthogonal to others within the same game. Jesse, as a character, in the context she is in, would stop to read that document. Therefore, it is a "verb" that is inherent to the context.

That's the power of Video Games. Not just in allowing for "verbs" of interactivity but in being able to utilize them as needed to craft a specific environment.

However, there's nothing inherently wrong with introducing new "verbs" that are orthogonal to others within the same game.

There is. If verbs exist here but not there, then the world does not feel whole.

It's why solving a puzzle in the original Portal made you feel like you made a solution, versus solving a puzzle in an adventure game where you felt like you found the solution. This principle is why old school point and click adventure games are dead by the way. Other genres simply got enough verbs.

Gone Home's a great example. The game is about picking up and examining objects. So, if you were to say, pick up a letter with text on it, and read the text, that's totally consistent with the game overall.

Control almost had this. When you interact with the puzzle locks, the camera moves in for you to manipulate the cube. That system could have had Jessie pick up a memo, and zoom in on it as you look at the actual text on the paper.

It's why solving a puzzle in the original Portal made you feel like you made a solution, versus solving a puzzle in an adventure game where you felt like you found the solution.

You lost me there. Maybe I'm too far gone in the "meta" of puzzle games, but there were definitely quite a few puzzles where I felt constrained by 'the one solution'.

Control almost had this. When you interact with the puzzle locks, the camera moves in for you to manipulate the cube. That system could have had Jessie pick up a memo, and zoom in on it as you look at the actual text on the paper.

I get it now. I agree with your point, but not your emotional conclusion. It feels inconsequential to me that we get an overlay as opposed to a zoom in and I'm sure it would take massive dev resources to get it just right, compared to the benefits, as I see it. I think I unconsciously abstract it away as the same thing.

Control almost had this. When you interact with the puzzle locks, the camera moves in for you to manipulate the cube. That system could have had Jessie pick up a memo, and zoom in on it as you look at the actual text on the paper.

I get it now. I agree with your point, but not your emotional conclusion. It feels inconsequential to me that we get an overlay as opposed to a zoom in and I'm sure it would take massive dev resources to get it just right, compared to the benefits, as I see it. I think I unconsciously abstract it away as the same thing.

Yeah, I can see your (I'm speaking to Cody throughout) point as to how that'd be better for "immersion," but it must also be noted that games are complex pieces of software on tight deadlines and budgets. Priorities mean concessions have to be made.

Hell, every game that has an inventory window has already failed your criteria. Here's a hyperbolic example to illustrate my point: is there any game out there that has you pull open your sack, riffle through it to find every item you want, pull it out, toss it, equip it, etc.? That'd be neat, but it'd also be tedious.

Elements of games are streamlined and abstracted not just for the developers' sake but for the player's sake. Most players do not care whatsoever that this information isn't presented in the physical play space. Implementing it would've been extra work for very little return. There are plenty of aspects of games that could theoretically be enhanced by implementing details like this, but they're not always practical to create or to even utilize.

The verb here is "the seeking and collection of information," not, "the real-time handling and observation of information." The latter is a layer of presentational polish on top of the former, a practical verb.

I feel like your observation here is the nitpick of nitpicks and, as justification for:

There is lore… tons of it I'm sure. But in the most boring format. Collectables. Audio logs. I just can't. Who wants to chase down this shit when you could tell the story with sound and picture?

I'm sorry, it feels a bit contrived.

Control also has fantastic in-world lore delivery in the form of the amazing Dr. Darling presentations projected on screens in-game, the wonderfully bizarre Threshold Kids show on televisions in-game, America Overnight playing from radios in-game, etc.

I love how the fixed documents you find in Control weave into the world so thoroughly. You find an old log of a strange mannequin found in 1967 berlin, and later run into it. You read about a spooky baby carriage, and later see it through safety glass and are relieved that it is on the other side of the glass. None of it is required to succeed, but it provides a beautiful flavor to everything you experience.

One of my very favorite documents is the very first one you find in the game (spoilers). Walking into an empty office building, and finding this note that is so deeply bureaucratic, but simultaneously so deeply weird, immediately making you wonder what you have gotten yourself into. I genuinely can't think of a way to deliver that feel in a better way. An audio announcement, or even a sign on the wall wouldn't have been as delightfully unsettling for me.

The lack of a camera pan to the documents didn't bother me any more than having a HUD did. You walk up to a letter, pick it up, and can tap a button to see the document. Overall, I loved this game, the universe it built, and the characters that inhabited it. I totally believe it isn't for everyone, but it is definitely one of my faves.

I couldn’t agree more.

That memo at the beginning sets the tone for the entire game, and does so more effectively than any cutscene or conversation I can imagine taking its place.

...
One of my very favorite documents is the very first one you find in the game (spoilers). Walking into an empty office building, and finding this note that is so deeply bureaucratic, but simultaneously so deeply weird, immediately making you wonder what you have gotten yourself into. I genuinely can't think of a way to deliver that feel in a better way. An audio announcement, or even a sign on the wall wouldn't have been as delightfully unsettling for me. ...

Image link isn't reliable without a slight edit (and only admin can edit), so for those of you on mobile...

Control almost had this. When you interact with the puzzle locks, the camera moves in for you to manipulate the cube. That system could have had Jessie pick up a memo, and zoom in on it as you look at the actual text on the paper.

It feels like this implementation detail bugged you, and you blew it up into a grand thesis about breaking immersion in games, and it's taken a dozen posts for you to pull it back down to what is ultimately a minor complaint.

I haven't played Control, but I loved this thread, and it's shifted my mindset about playing the game from one extreme to the other--I can't wait now. It seems like it has a lot of stuff I like--well-executed environmental storytelling, for one. Your example of the movie poster in TLoU is great, but so are the notes from Frank in Outskirts, or the notes from Ish in the Suburbs. And those were delivered in a manner that sounds very similar to how they're delivered in Control.

There certainly can be too much of this stuff, and it can be done badly. I think 343 completely botched terminals, for example. Found objects should be objects that would actually be found, not opportunities to deliver fan service movies automagiccally produced by an invisible director. I think that their decision was motivated by a mindset you articulate:

...Who wants to chase down this shit when you could tell the story with sound and picture?

Call it the Dan Ayoub fallacy (Sorry, Dan). I'm with Effortlessfury. Reading adds flavor to the game, because it tickles a different part of brain, for one thing. The main questions for me are: could this be found here, and does it add to my understanding and experience of the game world? If the answers are yes, my immersion is deepened, not broken.

I'll revisit your opinion after I've played it. There may be too much lore, and the story might not grab me, but from what I can tell, how the lore is delivered will not be a problem for me.

Kerm

It's why solving a puzzle in the original Portal made you feel like you made a solution, versus solving a puzzle in an adventure game where you felt like you found the solution.

This is entirely subjective as well. All of the test chambers nearly always feel like you found a solution by nature of being "designed" in the context of the narrative. When the game goes off the rails it has the opportunity to feel more "made" vs "found" but even that was rare; I have the knowledge that these games are designed with intent, so my brain is looking for the path that I know exists, and it is hard to separate myself from that in the context of a puzzle game. Puzzles are made to be solved, therefore solutions are already made to be found.

I couldn’t agree more.

That memo at the beginning sets the tone for the entire game, and does so more effectively than any cutscene or conversation I can imagine taking its place.

A memo I missed because standing somewhere and holding square for a hundred different pieces of paper is lame. There's a bunch of better ways to do this not involving collectables.

It's not just a nitpick. It goes to the heart of immersion and storytelling in games. The intersection of story and game should not feel like a stupid chore.

A memo I missed because standing somewhere and holding square for a hundred different pieces of paper is lame. There's a bunch of better ways to do this not involving collectables.

Can you name a few that you think would work for Control?

It's not just a nitpick. It goes to the heart of immersion and storytelling in games. The intersection of story and game should not feel like a stupid chore.

Believe me, it doesn't when you're on board. You clearly weren't and that's totally fine, but a shame. Are you familiar with SCP Foundation? I believe anyone who enjoys some SCP will absolutely adore the memos in Control and how they intertwine with the game itself.

I couldn’t agree more.

That memo at the beginning sets the tone for the entire game, and does so more effectively than any cutscene or conversation I can imagine taking its place.

A memo I missed because standing somewhere and holding square for a hundred different pieces of paper is lame. There's a bunch of better ways to do this not involving collectables.

It's not just a nitpick. It goes to the heart of immersion and storytelling in games. The intersection of story and game should not feel like a stupid chore.

The concept of "immersion" in video games and what that even means is hotly debated. No game is fully immersive because that's rarely fun. Concessions will always be made to improve the experience and/or due to priorities in dev time and resources.

Perhaps it could've been done "better" in a way that would make everyone happier but it's not something that bothered anyone I've spoken to about this game other than you, so it's clearly not a universal sentiment.

Boy, you sure do hate the straw man game you created.

A memo I missed because standing somewhere and holding square for a hundred different pieces of paper is lame. There's a bunch of better ways to do this not involving collectables.

Can you name a few that you think would work for Control?

First thing:

Decouple them from collectibles. Do not track them. Do not tie them to achievements. Do not display an alert in the interface when you have unread ones.

You know how there are cool side missions sometimes? There’s a bunch of lame ones but cool ones too. If instead of having the reward be a lame mod or upgrade that’s worse than what you have, what if the memo was the reward? Just more story? Have every side mission be crafted to create a meaningful experience that expands the story and world, with the memo a part of that. Because right now finding them is really really boring.

A memo I missed because standing somewhere and holding square for a hundred different pieces of paper is lame. There's a bunch of better ways to do this not involving collectables.

Can you name a few that you think would work for Control?

First thing:

Decouple them from collectibles. Do not track them. Do not tie them to achievements. Do not display an alert in the interface when you have unread ones.

You know how there are cool side missions sometimes? There’s a bunch of lame ones but cool ones too. If instead of having the reward be a lame mod or upgrade that’s worse than what you have, what if the memo was the reward? Just more story? Have every side mission be crafted to create a meaningful experience that expands the story and world, with the memo a part of that. Because right now finding them is really really boring.

If the memo is the reward, and you can currently acquire and read the memo, then the memo bores you. Finding them isn't boring if you find the content of the memos appealing. This is a very bizarre problem you have.

- No text -

I ask you; Should the language in Controls game play override its environment and it's theme? Would you rather have the Old House not have ANY documents at all? No reading, no audio, no video. Geeze, is it just me or does the just hurt to read?

Goodness, in this simulation, all there is to tell story as outlined, as described, are the objects of power and nothing else. The same thing, changed a little, for the entire game. No break up, no little story snacks as you move point to point, just go here then go there, boom boom boom. Ugh... well ya did it, you made the game to where even the psychic blowing shit up actually feels pointlessly droll now. What the fuck ya thinking? All you've done is create fatigue on a fanatic premise. Even action MOVIES need to stop now and again.

...I'mma stop there, this hurts, ugh...

Man.

Oh hey, look you quoted me, as if I had forgotten. I didn't. Well, since we're having a quote party!

BUT CONTROL IS AN ACTION GAME! Ok... well what do you want the message to be made out of? Morse code in explosions? This is the major problem in the proposal, as there is so much just saying what it should be that in posting there was no time made to figure out what it is you are actually proposing. It's a problem looking for its proof that it was ever there. I ask you; Should the language in Controls game play override its environment and it's theme? Would you rather have the Old House not have ANY documents at all? No reading, no audio, no video. Geeze, is it just me or does the just hurt to read?

There is the entire context, THE WHOLE REASON, for my what if. What you called in fallacy, was simply example. Taking an observation to its extreme point, that is in no way a keystone.

Now... if you've got anything to ACTUALLY say, generalized as it may be, THEN SAY IT. But miss me with that non-constructive nonsense. I don't play that.

Oh hey, look you quoted me, as if I had forgotten. I didn't.

I did my best to interpret "?!?!... Put up or shut up. That ain't my game." If you wanted or continue to want something else from me I don't know what it is.

You lost me there. Maybe I'm too far gone in the "meta" of puzzle games, but there were definitely quite a few puzzles where I felt constrained by 'the one solution'.

In Portal 2, that was indeed much more of a problem.

But the original portal was far more flexible. You could essentially put a portal almost anywhere, and many of the chambers could be creatively solved if you were creative.

Oh hey, look you quoted me, as if I had forgotten. I didn't.

I did my best to interpret "?!?!... Put up or shut up. That ain't my game." If you wanted or continue to want something else from me I don't know what it is.

Man, you called me. This thread was done. Your feeling is mutual. Don't spit shit if you don't have anything to say.