@@shrekislove3997 Real line from the game; "Presidente, dont research that. Dont you know that if you do, you will then research Socialism. Which everyone knows is bad. We should stick to our current model of Capitalist Cronyism. I, my friends and all my relatives think its the best form for Government." What a genre the poli sim truly is FeelsStrongMan
A bit of context for the tarot stories: The Tower is a bit obtuse out of context, but the story it's referring to is mostly alluding to elements of lore from Daniel Mullins' previous game, The Hex. That game exists in the same universe and also features GameFuna, focusing on them much more by virtue of featuring multiple characters and multiple stories across multiple games they were involved with. The "triangle of isosceles proportions" is the Gameworks, a game development tool used by GameFuna devs to make their games, which seems to somehow be responsible for granting the NPCs sentience. The Empress's story also mentions it, and how Kaycee used it to work on Inscryption. The "blue man" is Irving, a recurring NPC antagonist who does GameFuna's dirty work in the digital world. Also, The Hex strongly implies that the CEO of GameFuna is literally Satan (his listed name is Lou Natas). Not sure how that ties into the reading of the card's meaning, but it seemed worth mentioning.
Good to have that side of it. I knew the games were more connected to the broader work body of Mullins' games, but I wanted to try and grasp what INSCRYPTION alone gives, so I didn't play Pony Island or The Hex "for" INSCRYPTION. That said, I'd say given what you've explained, the Tower still is more a vehicle for "deep lore" and tie-in than associated symbolism.
@@Rosencreutzzz Yeah, I'd say the most accurate description would be that The Tower is symbolically relevant for The Hex in a way that doesn't carry over as directly. Its meaning is a very good and concise summary of that game's arc, but appropriately for the topic of this video, I won't be spoiling why in any detail.
I think there's an interesting difference between "story spoilers" and "mechanical spoilers" in games. By "mechanical spoilers" I mean information about how to play well, more so than information on new mechanics that occur later in a game. Though we often focus more on avoiding information about a game's story, in many cases being "spoiled" with gameplay advice can be much more damaging to the intended experience of a game. A lot of people have noted that being spoiled on the story of a game or other piece of media generally doesn't lessen the story, even if you miss the first-time experience of plot twists. If you go in knowing those things ahead of time, either due to spoilers or on a second time through, those twists can still be compelling as a sort of dramatic irony. However, in many games, you really do lose something significant if you go in already knowing how to play the game. In Inscryption, I think you could watch a dozen video essays on the story and themes of the game, know everything that was going to happen in the plot, and still have a great time playing through and experiencing the game for yourself. But what if you instead watched a bunch of strategy guides and went in knowing how all the mechanics worked, and what all the best builds were? The exploration phase of the game, where you're feeling your way through unfamiliar mechanics and developing skill, is genuinely lost. You effectively just skip the first several runs. And in a lot of games, this "exploration phase" is a sizeable chunk of the gameplay experience. I think this is true for a lot of different games across many different genres. Outer Wilds is famous for how protective its fans are of spoilers, but I think you could go in spoiled on 80% of the game ahead of time and still have an almost equally good experience, so long as you managed to miss the plot elements that double as puzzle solutions. But the moment you learn those puzzle solutions, it short-circuits your experience; people describe it as a game you can "only play once". I can't think of any books you can "only read once" or movies you can "only watch once". I think it's something unique to interactive media. If you watch someone else play the game later, it can be enjoyable again to see the story: it's like you've removed the interactivity and turned it into a movie, where the spoilers don't harm your enjoyment. I've even seen people seriously discuss spoilers for Factorio, which more or less lacks a story entirely. You spend so many hours in that game figuring out design principles and the best ways to build things, and for many people that's a huge part of the gameplay appeal. Enough that being "spoiled" on standard or optimal ways to build feels like they've had a big chunk of the experience stolen from them. It's definitely hard to ignore that information; it makes you feel like you're playing badly on purpose. Information is weird.
You got through the entire video without using the word 'ludonarrative' even once, despite dedicating a lion's share of the video to analysing Inscryption's weaving of narrative and gameplay and the complexities it necessarily burdens on to the audience. Nevermind, you started talking about english poetry and the difficulties of authorship, I can no longer take anything away from this video. Jokes aside, definitely worth the wait. Please keep doing these for forever, please.
Semi-regular Rosencreutz watcher here; this topic is a treat for me. Inscryption is one of my favorite games of all time. I'm so glad I didn't spoil it for myself.
1:02:00 I feel this now, as I’m going through an audiobook series for Terry Pratchett’s Discworld, an aspect of “I’m recommending this to you for me through you, not for you.” Aspect of thought you mention, I can’t reread the Discworld without the same wonder, I can’t get to the humanist thesis statement in each of his books with the righteous anger he wrote them the same way the first time. It becomes a different book, much like how Inscryption becomes a different game. the “Inscryption is alive as long as its name is remembered” line you briefly mentioned is how I got to this connection by the way. He mentions in the book Going Postal about semaphore operators repeating the names of their dead colleagues in “the overhead” through the codes in order to keep them alive, as long as their name is repeated, they can’t be forgotten. Sorry for rambling
Ever since discovering no-clip glitches in games growing up, I've come to dearly appreciate games that offer the experience of breaking out, toying with their boundaries, and self-reference, whether born from conceit or happy accident. Finding out the world is so much bigger, and with perceptible imperfections in spite of the veneer of ideal controlled space provides a rich and formative experience. Inscryption was another one of those moments for me. I appreciate the language you used in this essay to draw out the concepts: Parallaxing depth. Diegetic conceit. Planes of immersion. Invoking symbolism not as substantive literary device, but to motivate investigation/instill wonder. Genre and subversion. Hopefully few people who've never played will watch this, but many who have will become a tactful evangelizer themselves. Thank you
I'm one of those "weirdos" that like spoilers. I spoiled myself for inscription way back when the game came out, so yes, I watched this video just because I like your content. Your intro however inspired me to respond to it, even if it may not be completely relevant to the main argument or video. The reason why i like spoilers; If a story is well written, any scene that is meant to rely on impact will still be enjoyable, regardless of if that impact is missing. The point of it is the journey, not the destination. I enjoy well written stories, and I think that is true of most people. This ties into a common issue I see regarding media quality, and how to quantify it. If you cannot see the way two scenes or the connective tissue of the story making sense beyond the point of the point of impact or retroactively when analyzing it, it means the story is not good. Plain and simple, the whole entire thing of authors rewriting their stories to avoid fan speculation from hitting marks is a point in favor of this argument. A lot of people love impact, and love being taken in by the moment, but this ultimately makes them believe that because they *feel* a scene is good, it means it is, *objectively.* And these are not always true. Think of these examples. The series Demon slayer and JJK are beloved by many, but when you actually sit down to analyze their respective plots and characters, you will start seeing cracks. To avoid spoilers I wont go into specifics (but may do so in the comments if this gets any engagement), but I'm not surprised that well after the series has ended and seeing plenty of videos talking about how good demon slayer was, suddenly you get videos like "Demon Slayer is Extraordinarily Incompetent" by Captain Mack and other critiques about specific characters and how their roles in the plot either became completely irrelevant or didn't make sense to the story that the series was trying to tell. Demon slayer is a *bad* story. What's even more interesting is how people respond to said critiques; usually with defensiveness or derision. There is a similar situation happening in the Marvel Cinematic Universe as a whole, and the discourse surrounding it and the quality of its films, to name another example. I think this is why people normally hate spoilers---because then they have to experience the story without the impact that blinds them to the actual quality of the story that is being told. They don't get the free dopamine points that the "big twist" gives them, or that the solution they found for themselves gives them. Its purely a psychological reaction. The problem is the subjectivity of it all. If a bad media makes you feel complex or intense emotion, essentially doing what it aimed to do through its intended experience, and you enjoyed it; does that make it bad? It may be poorly written, its animation might suck, the gameplay might be boring, the game may be a buggy mess, what have you---If you still liked it, does that make it bad? Does getting spoiled on a media that requires those points of impact to *be* good make it bad? I think yes, *BUT* people are still allowed to to still enjoy bad media and not need to feel as if doing so makes their taste in media bad as a whole. I think the game Pathologic is a great, if not the best, example of this. I can play inscription, knowing what happens, and still have fun *playing* the game. anyways, I'm going to watch the rest of your video.
You keep trying to convince me to finish up my backlog, because i do really want to see your vids but there are a few games that I want to go in completely blind like inscryption
i haven't bought a new game in about two years, my backlog still has 635 games left, but i have gone thru about 150 already and it has been so fun and satisfying. mindlessly buying games you will never play actually slowly makes you depressed. Dont keep making yourself a unclimbable mountain, make it a little hill that is fun to walk over
Spoilers do not inherently ruin an experience, but parody can. I've seen so many parodies of movies like The Thing or the Godfather that I'm just not interested in seeing those movies. Watch Blazing Saddles, then try not to feel a little bit gross when you go and watch spaghetti westerns from the 50's and 60's, I can't do it. Not all parody kills the media it parodies, Futurama's first 5 seasons are basically nothing but Star Trek parodies, but unlike parodies of The Thing or the Godfather that you see in The Simpsons or Family Guy, they don't look straight in the camera and say "we're doing a movie/tv show this episode". I didn't even realize Futurama was largely a Star Trek parody until I actually watched Star Trek, but watching Star Trek opened up a new way of watching an old favorite for me. I would say even Outer Wilds isn't ruined by the vast majority of its story spoilers, but it could be ruined with puzzle solution spoilers. While part of the experience is piecing together all the clues to the mystery surrounding the game, most spoilers lack the context to function as more than an extra clue. Other games actually **rely** on players spoiling each other to solve its puzzles, such as Voices of the Void. VotV in particular has an easter egg that is so well hidden you will at some point, regardless of how far you can get in it on your own, need to go online, and ask someone else what to do. Personally? I was never going to play Inscryption because I got bored of deck builders at age 11 when I opened a disappointing Yu Gi Oh booster pack. There is nothing you could say about the game that could make me play it because I see a deck of cards and fall asleep. No layers of hidden depth or metatextual trickery will change the fact that it's a card game, and I'm completely unengaged by card games. Why am I here then? The same reason you include anecdotes about your time working in an escape room. This is more about the theory of game design, using Inscryption as a jumping off point and a guiding hand for the discussion.
It ain't rocket science, completely neuters the exploration experience by turning every trip into a straight line and gluing the player's eyes (and mental map) to the top of the screen instead of the environment
Essentially what the other reply said: It's not deep enough to fully explore... I think. It boils down to three things: 1) you get hud brainpoison, and are constantly looking at the compass to tell you something is *nearby* which means you don't stumble upon things nearly as much in an actual surprise way. This is good for keeping the gameplay constantly "up" but it means you rarely round a corner to a surprise unless it's like a genuine spectacle of a site-- like some dwarven ruins being massive outside compared to others that are a small exterior. 2) this turns gameplay into aggressive location hopping and changes the relation you have to the world, rest, adventure, all of it. You're just going from cave to cave until you're overburdened, or at least are pulled to do that. 3)it means NPCs and quests literally never give actual instructions. They say "Go find Bingledur in Riften" and your compass knows his exact location at all times. That's the most anti-exploration element and I think ends up contributing the most to the reason people try and cut across the in-lore nation's highest mountain range by billy goating instead of... taking the actual roads. I guess this could be worked into the larger Elder Scrolls Worldbuilding video I have in mind, but it would also be a tangent there, lol.
@@Rosencreutzzz i really liked how AC Nexus did objective traveling. the game has minimal UI, and the only map in the game just makes you massive, allowing you to overlook the enviornment youre in, with the objective marker only appearing once you press a button, or you go into eagle mode, then you can make a route for yourself like i did, looking over everything with eagle vision, and plotting a route to get there, and it was so fun. the whole game is pretty fun to me (no im not a ubisoft dicksucker, i just want rayman back fully)
@@Rosencreutzzz Honestly I appreciated the compass, but for exactly the wrong reasons: the NPCs don't give you ANY FREAKING LANDMARKS TO WORK FROM. I played Skyrim on PS3 and then persisted to Dragonborn (the only area that wasn't hopelessly broken and jumpscaring me with bugged wolves thanks to Dawnguard doing SOMETHING to wolf howls). Dragonborn may not have struck me in the nostalgia but it hooked me in a way none of the main game did. NPCs gave directions, landmarks, and guided me on the quests. Solstheim pushed me toward Morrowind, and Morrowind showed me exactly what went wrong with Oblivion and Skyrim: They replaced in-world directions and creating distinct landmarks with a HUD waypoint, and the most frustrating thing is that Skyrim had a spell for an "I'm stuck, help!" with Clairvoyance. I've USED Clairvoyance before to track down where TF something was because it wasn't obvious where the objective had gone or where I was supposed to go to to access it. I NEVER had that issue in Morrowind, of not knowing where to go or where something was. Someone SOMEWHERE had the information I needed on where I should go (or who I should seen out), I just had to ask if they didn't volunteer directions immediately.
@@neoqwerty Yeahhhh. That's the thing, if you delete Skyrim's compass the game breaks, because there's no "infrastructure" of NPCs actually saying any single thing about where to collect an item or how. To be fair, radiant quests would be... well, they'd lose all the ease of function they have on the dev side if they then all required handwritten instructions to find the caves etc, BUT it's deranged to me that there are quests that are handwritten and say "Go see Flongar over in [entirely different city]" and that's your whole instruction, and then the quest log says "find Flongar"
Isn't it great when a RUclipsr posts something new just as you're watching one of their older videos? I was just rewatching your John Glubb video, and now I have another hour of content to enjoy! Can't wait to dive in.
I really don't understand the whole fear people have of "spoilers" or the fetishization of "going in blind." I haven't played Inscryption because I don't really know anything about it, and therefore had no reason to be interested. So, "going in blind" means "not going in." There are several games I've only played *because* I watched a video that "spoiled" it for me, and told me it had themes I'd actually be interested in, and I went in and still enjoyed them just fine, thank you. I read/watch reviews of games/movies/etc. all the time before playing/reading/watching, that's what reviews are *for* after all. (And for that matter, I've read of studies that show people actually enjoy films that are spoiled *more* because they can look for the thematic elements and how it plays together rather than worrying about trying to predict what's coming next.)
I think the reason is because this games are hinges on discovery. If you spoiled Inscyption, it's just a kinda good card game and not "the experience".
This was very therepeutic having worked at escape rooms for a couple of years, watching people play games all day disenchants and i enjoyed the little bit of magic you put into the video.
I liked that the video feels like a long string of thought, and exploration of your experience with a game, and of your experiences even more than it is about Inscription in a way. It did make me like the game more, I hated robotopia a little bit, and yeah it was intended, but also slow. Also is that Miles Edgeworth?
Personally my take on intended experiences is that they are the most human approach to making media and that having an objectively correct meaning and the inability to interpret does not disqualify something from being art. A thing is created with intent, an artist makes specific choices for a specific reason this means that when crafting a narrative the author chose specific elements instead of other elements and for one specific reason out of many potential reasons. A work having an objective intended meaning makes as much sense to me as my sentences being written with an objective intended meaning by me. Where this breaks down is when the vague nature of the medium of communication creates ambiguity that must be filled somehow and imo this happens through projection. The work you end up understanding is a combination of the intended elements you gathered and the bits of yourself you pushed into the gaps. This can ofcs be useful cause you can use this new chimera to understand the parts of yourself you infused in a different context but that does not mean it's not still a form of miscommunication. I would even go as far to say that intended ambiguity that we see through symbols is purposeful miscommunication the same way a riddle playing on words does. Another way is the socratic method where you pick an obtuse way of communication where you don't just say what you mean to say but instead create barriers being questions that are to be interpreted. You still intend to communicate "you are wrong" but you are doing so by forcing the other person to project themselves. You are forcing engagement and self movement on the part of the other person to engage in the process of changing their own mind rather than just commanding the wisdom down on them.
2024 is a very interesting year to me. I'm jobless and clueless about the future, lonely, sick, and desperately looking for fulfilment. But so many people speaking my artistic language have been expressing similar interests, hopes, dreams, worries, that I've never felt this heard in my life, and this inspired to join the conversation. I doubt I can really express why this video speaks to me with words, so I'll keep working. Maybe some day, that idea of mine will be a game. Or an experience. Or art.
I love inscryption a lot and I don't think I would have loved it as much if I didn't go in completely blind. I still would have enjoyed it but I truly didn't anticipate any of the twists (not sure if that's the best term tbh) and the urge to find out what else this game had in store for me, and the satisfaction of finding new things, really enhanced the experience for me. I really think that this is one of those games where being spoiled takes away from the experience
I've been thinking about this vid a lot and while I think being spoiled can take away from the experience for some things, sometimes knowing what you're in for can give you a whole new experience. I'm rereading dracula now. Everyone knows dracula is a vampire, it's impossible to read the book in the way that was intended by the author. But with that knowledge the book becomes a different kind of horror, and it's still a good read that can make you think about horror books and their tropes, especially in a historical context. I wonder if something similar could ever happen to games like inscryption, and if looking back on this game from a long way in the future would change my perspective on how being spoiled influences the experience and what the twists tell us about the themes of art and authorship in current times
If you need to be unspoiled to appreciate fully a work, doesn't that means it's not that great outside of shock value? I'm being very harsh here. But it's a legitimate question to ask. You're asking a lot of trust from someone by telling them to go blind, after all. I was spoiled EEAAO before seeing it, and it still ended up one of my favorite. Patricia Taxxon's last video on "Bean and Nothingness" convinced me more with the spoilers parts than without them, too. At this point of my life, I think less and less of spoilers as an imperative for a "pure" experience. If I'm really interested in a game, I need to know about all the mechanics in detail. If I like a work, I'll send a lot of times thinking about the themes, the story, hoping to get more out of it. If there's a risk that a work becomes less interesting the more I look into it, what even is the point? What if it's only an empty shell?
@shytendeakatamanoir9740 You are equating 'spoilers change the experience' with 'relies on shock value'. I don't think those two are the same at all. For example a great detective story can only be experienced without knowing the true culprit once. After that it could still be a great work worth re-experiencing but you'll never get that first experience again. However if the killer turns out to be someone Totally Shocking but makes no sense in the story (what??? It was you evil twin who we have never mentioned before and are now introducing in the last chapter of the book??? That sucks!) that shock twist makes the story worse, and you'll probably feel cheated if you invested time into that piece of art. Also how much you value the mystery solving part of the work depends on your personal taste. I like being surprised by the art I experience, but that sometimes comes with disappointment. Sometimes something wasn't worth the effort I put into it to me. this doesn't mean its objectively bad, I didn't really enjoy the outer wilds but that game is super beloved by a lot of people, but if I'd known beforehand what it was all about I wouldn't have played it. But sometimes I get a wonderful surprise like playing inscryption that I still think about years later. I think the surprising parts of inscryption made an already fun game way more impactful, and I simply don't think it could have done what it did without hiding some of its aspects at the start. Personally I think inscryption has a lot to offer even if you know what's going to happen, but the surprise of the sudden completely change of style and gameplay definitely hits harder when you don't know its coming. And obviously, trying to piece together information to find out what's going on is only possible when you dont know what's going on. But besides that I like the gameplay, love the atmosphere, and I've played quite a bit of kaycees mod even though it holds no more surprises to me. But I also understand wanting to know what you're getting into. I'm and adult with a job and investing hours into something that might turn out not to be your thing is disappointing. Even if I'm promised a great ending I'm very unlikely to finish something I'm not enjoying in the first 10 minutes Sorry for the wall of text I have a lot of thoughts
@@shytendeakatamanoir9740What's the point of complaining that something is "just" shock value, though? There is merit in shock value. A good twist can elicit feelings and reactions from the audience that are hard to get otherwise. On the same vein, there is craft to shock value. A well executed twist can be mindblowing while a poorly made one will just wiggle limply in the general direction of eliciting a reaction. There is also merit in not needing shock value at all, which is something very few pieces of media actually achieve, but i dont think theres anything wrong with a work that knows most of the punch its packing is from shock value and is proficient at it
Never played this game. Never watched this game. Hell, I never even heard of this game. But of course I will watch this entire video with utmost curiosity and concentration!
This is my interpretation that nobody asked for: Some of us desire an answer, regardless of the results. Thus we turn to the interface which limits possibilities while giving the illusion of totality. The provided answer is a vague reflection of personal externalities. There is an implicit contract between ourselves and the facilitator. We recognize their authority as representative of the absolute, although they really build up rather than down. Some are functionaries, while others find purpose in providing purpose. The interface is a ritual that lends meaning through symbolism given weight by age.
I was taught that the Tower isn’t just destruction, it’s necessary destruction of rotten foundations, like, the end of something that cannot or should not continue, whether comfortable or not, so I’d read that as saying GameFuna is similarly bad? Not that that informs us on much more than we already know
I can see that as a read, but it still feels a bit disjointed, to me. Perhaps that's partly down to how the Tower in the in-game card is pristine and monolithic and...towering, as opposed to being struck down. The Tower tarot card always read to me as present-tense, in the sense that the destruction on the card *is* happening, that the moment of note is the fall, not the anticipation of it. On the other hand, Judgment is sort of a "cleansing fire" kind of destruction too, which fits your "rotten foundation" perspective. I can't shake how the card feels too literal in its application here.
Your speaking style is very reminiscent of The Magnus Archives. Or SCP readings, buh far more the former and to compare you to SCP seems disingenious. The audio is also really well done in pausing, lagging, and changing to impact what you wanna say. I was quite surprised to be hooked right after the intro, prolly around the first bus roll. Intertwining stories is always super fun. I also love the attempts at structure, to set yourself rules to talk about topics and then intentionally or unintentionally turning into a scripted rant. - Sacrifice, Cyclicality, Authorship & Intent are laid out as the next topics. They're all talked about but loosely, blended together as you mix other stories into it. - You start with the loading from the first save, and skip the 3 saves in the middle. Only to choose the last one at the end. - The layers of the game were described again and again, reminding the viewer and describing it in a different way. Each comparison leading into a different story, asking the viewer to look at the layers of the video.
Hmm. I played inscryption only after watching a youtube series by youtuber "Aliensrock" which fully spoiled acts 1 and 2, and my favorite segment was definitely the last one. I thought it was the most mechanically interesting part of the game, and I thought PO3 was kinda cute! Like, he hates you so much, he calls you an idiot gamer, I love him :3. I very strongly believe he was robbed of a proper final boss. Also, I thought the idea was that what PO3 uploaded is the game you're playing? And you, in the lore, are not the guy in the cabin or the lucky carder, but yourself at your desk, playing the mangled version he uploaded. Maybe I just wasn't paying too much attention, and all this was a while ago. That thing you mentioned about people assuming more complexity reminded me of something. I played this game "Buckshot Roulette" which seems very inspired by Inscryption. You play against the dealer and try to shoot the dealer before they shoot you, by choosing to either fire towards your own self or the dealer, and the dealer has the same choice. I thought there would be some complex system there, and I was wondering about it. Therefore, I asked him! And he told me it was just a coinflip until he reached the last shell! X3 I think he's added a smarter AI by this point, but it's a good example of speculating more detail than there really was I think.
It might be silly but I can’t get over how fun it was to hear P03’s name pronounced how I read it when everyone else seems to read it like a serial number
I think he forgot that death is literally canonically the creator of the old data, while his reading does add to the game. This game takes place in the same world as pony island.
Very interesting and insightful video on an absolute masterpiece of a video game! Also, very happy to finally hear someone call the guy "Poe" and not "P O Three" :)
The initial premise of Inscryption, being trapped in a cabin with a madman who forces you to play a game with talking cards or else he’ll turn you into a picture, is so atmospheric and engaging. Honestly, it should have just been that, I just didn’t really care at all about the ARG stuff.
The designer, Daniel Mullins, seems unable to make a straightforward game. Every single thing he's produced has had a twist. I don't think he can help himself. Thankfully the game later added a mode that was just the cabin.
@@Veto2090 Inscryption very much seems to **suffer** from his need to jam an ARG into everything, because it's at it's core **actually a good game**. The ARG shit is a distraction from the game you are trying to play, and the game is a distraction from the ARG.
There's certainly something to be said about how a game that invites genre and tone shifts will inevitably lose impact for some people that it drew in. It's certainly not a false promise, but you can't help feeling like "no, wait go back to that other stuff" so I fully get it.
I didn't mention it in this one, but in the April teaser I did hint at the idea-- when subversion becomes a core staple of your work, the more...known you are as part of your work (that this is, for example a game by Daniel Mullins), the more that means something and can cause people to brace for it, to expect the subversion, and that's a very weird thing. Knowing his prior work, knowing the kinds of games Devolver takes on, you end up with expectations that go against the intent of being surprised.
i liked the ARG but i do wish the initial section of the game lasted longer; i only got to play like 5 runs before the next portion of the game started
Out of curiosity are you (or perhaps were you) a practicing R.C or was it just.a neat name you chose? Awesome video btw! Oh and no I am not “A∴A∴“ in the traditional sense anyway.... I just do my own thing but pull from OGRC, SRIA, GD and many others.. including Eris and Bob :) - FNORD Edit: alright after the tarot section I have my answer XD carry on! Great Work btw :D
I'd say, for this one, the inspirations most clearly calling out to me the whole time, the ones I couldn't shake, were (the semi-frequently referenced in my work) Campster/Errant Signal, and of all people, Dan Olson. Geller's work is interesting, but I don't think I watched much of it when I was forming an idea of what video essays are, so while I respect his work, and very much understand why it's so treasured, it isn't always "insta-watch" for me. Granted, sometimes that's because I find myself wanting to cover similar things, and I have a perennial fear of "accidental osmosis plagiarism" --of being unable to tell my own thoughts apart from those of an "influence" and thus tend to avoid works on topics I want to cover *until* I've gotten at least a full draft. It's a testament to his impact on the genre that as I'm writing this comment, his "Art for No One" video is looming in the "recommended" sidebar.
For the record, I've been a subscriber here for a year or so and I've watched most of your videos so far, and wrt this being different to what you'd usually make, I really enjoyed this video. Not better or worse than your usual work - it's hard to compare directly like that - but if you were later considering making something else that's experimental in future and wondering "did what I do with the Inscryption video even work?", then I would say it worked for me. At least, I *think* it did - because now I'm pondering my assumptions about your intentions for this video. Perhaps this is all just another layer. After all, if Daniel Mullins can create a fake RUclipsr, is it really so implausible for Daniel Mullins himself to be a narrative lie?
I've been drafting notes for a while for a potential essay on the use (and 'un-properly rooted' use, as you might say) of tarot in horror games. The section on s/Symbolism gave me such wonderful language for understanding my feelings on the subject, especially noting them as 'anti-blue-curtains'. I've been struggling to reckon with that question you posed, to what extent would properly rooting the tarot symbolism actually benefit the audience? How do I make my essay criticizing tarot in horror games contribute value to its audience?
You take requests? Can we have a video essay on the dirty f-word of medieval history (feudalism), it’s possible non existence, and maybe Kingdom Come Deliverance or Crusader Kings? Lol
I understand that your channel is predominantly a place where you use video games as a subject to spin around and catch multiple stray thoughts into a cohesive whole; but I think you have the approach that would really work for a video on Homestuck (particularly around the relationship an author has with their audience). It may be that you've never read/ held an interest in/ Have read and found it incredibly annoying/ decided (reasonably) that it was a piece of media to stick far away from you/ Have many thoughts about it but decided that it wasn't appropriate for the subject matter of your channel. But in the same way that you evangelize about inscription so that other people may experience and engage with this work in such a way that it won't disappear I feel the need to evangelize about homestuck in a similar way. I love the video and I'm working my way through your back catalog and so far I've enjoyed every single video and more importantly the thoughts I had afterwards. Your video on the way paradox uses base assumptions in map making really struck a chord with me in putting to words an idea that had been forming for awhile.
Usually I have it in the credits of every video, the full music list, but... well, yeah. It's Embassy Piano from Mission Impossible 64 (It might be Embassy Pianist)
Am i the only one that enjoyed Botopia more than pixel inscryption? I felt like the gameplay was too dependant on lucky draws and i found myself bruteforcing the same battle over and over again until i got said lucky draw, and it wasnt terribly enjoyable but also i felt like i didnt have many other avenues to progressing
So after the first few seconds of the video, I stopped it, bought the game, played through it all in a day, and came back. I think I'm glad I didn't watch the video before buying the game. I'm not 100% sure I'm happy I bought the game though.
@@THEEJONESY I like supporting smaller artists, I'm just not sure this feels like my money's worth for the 12 hours or so of play. It's realistically shorter than Dredge, and the number one complaint there is the length.
@@Rosencreutzzz you need to work on not taking negative comments personal man, any kind of positive attention you get, especially on the Internet is going to lead to negative attention. Your video was good until you got to the part at the end where you started whining. Pinning my comment kind of proves you take this shit personally, which you can't. Good luck dude
@@Rosencreutzzz Any kind of positive attention you get is going to lead to negative attention. Your video was really good until you got to the end and went on a rant addresing negative comments that you probably should have just ignored. Pinning my comment kind of proves my point You make good content, but you need to learn to tune out nay sayers. Good luck dude
![Chino Pacas - Modo Capone (with Drake & Fuerza Regida) [Video Oficial]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zjv8TQ0gBkg/mqdefault.jpg)
I don't care when this gets read, i just want to tell you - you really have a gift for this medium. Thank you for sharing your work with us.
And thats why I almost exclusively played builders and Simulation games as a child- You cant spoil the experience of early game Tropico 5 alright!🤧🤧
you gotta reach the next era >:P
@@shrekislove3997 Real line from the game; "Presidente, dont research that. Dont you know that if you do, you will then research Socialism. Which everyone knows is bad. We should stick to our current model of Capitalist Cronyism. I, my friends and all my relatives think its the best form for Government." What a genre the poli sim truly is FeelsStrongMan
A bit of context for the tarot stories: The Tower is a bit obtuse out of context, but the story it's referring to is mostly alluding to elements of lore from Daniel Mullins' previous game, The Hex. That game exists in the same universe and also features GameFuna, focusing on them much more by virtue of featuring multiple characters and multiple stories across multiple games they were involved with. The "triangle of isosceles proportions" is the Gameworks, a game development tool used by GameFuna devs to make their games, which seems to somehow be responsible for granting the NPCs sentience. The Empress's story also mentions it, and how Kaycee used it to work on Inscryption. The "blue man" is Irving, a recurring NPC antagonist who does GameFuna's dirty work in the digital world. Also, The Hex strongly implies that the CEO of GameFuna is literally Satan (his listed name is Lou Natas). Not sure how that ties into the reading of the card's meaning, but it seemed worth mentioning.
Good to have that side of it. I knew the games were more connected to the broader work body of Mullins' games, but I wanted to try and grasp what INSCRYPTION alone gives, so I didn't play Pony Island or The Hex "for" INSCRYPTION.
That said, I'd say given what you've explained, the Tower still is more a vehicle for "deep lore" and tie-in than associated symbolism.
@@Rosencreutzzz Yeah, I'd say the most accurate description would be that The Tower is symbolically relevant for The Hex in a way that doesn't carry over as directly. Its meaning is a very good and concise summary of that game's arc, but appropriately for the topic of this video, I won't be spoiling why in any detail.
I think there's an interesting difference between "story spoilers" and "mechanical spoilers" in games. By "mechanical spoilers" I mean information about how to play well, more so than information on new mechanics that occur later in a game. Though we often focus more on avoiding information about a game's story, in many cases being "spoiled" with gameplay advice can be much more damaging to the intended experience of a game. A lot of people have noted that being spoiled on the story of a game or other piece of media generally doesn't lessen the story, even if you miss the first-time experience of plot twists. If you go in knowing those things ahead of time, either due to spoilers or on a second time through, those twists can still be compelling as a sort of dramatic irony.
However, in many games, you really do lose something significant if you go in already knowing how to play the game. In Inscryption, I think you could watch a dozen video essays on the story and themes of the game, know everything that was going to happen in the plot, and still have a great time playing through and experiencing the game for yourself. But what if you instead watched a bunch of strategy guides and went in knowing how all the mechanics worked, and what all the best builds were? The exploration phase of the game, where you're feeling your way through unfamiliar mechanics and developing skill, is genuinely lost. You effectively just skip the first several runs. And in a lot of games, this "exploration phase" is a sizeable chunk of the gameplay experience.
I think this is true for a lot of different games across many different genres. Outer Wilds is famous for how protective its fans are of spoilers, but I think you could go in spoiled on 80% of the game ahead of time and still have an almost equally good experience, so long as you managed to miss the plot elements that double as puzzle solutions. But the moment you learn those puzzle solutions, it short-circuits your experience; people describe it as a game you can "only play once". I can't think of any books you can "only read once" or movies you can "only watch once". I think it's something unique to interactive media. If you watch someone else play the game later, it can be enjoyable again to see the story: it's like you've removed the interactivity and turned it into a movie, where the spoilers don't harm your enjoyment.
I've even seen people seriously discuss spoilers for Factorio, which more or less lacks a story entirely. You spend so many hours in that game figuring out design principles and the best ways to build things, and for many people that's a huge part of the gameplay appeal. Enough that being "spoiled" on standard or optimal ways to build feels like they've had a big chunk of the experience stolen from them. It's definitely hard to ignore that information; it makes you feel like you're playing badly on purpose. Information is weird.
You got through the entire video without using the word 'ludonarrative' even once, despite dedicating a lion's share of the video to analysing Inscryption's weaving of narrative and gameplay and the complexities it necessarily burdens on to the audience.
Nevermind, you started talking about english poetry and the difficulties of authorship, I can no longer take anything away from this video.
Jokes aside, definitely worth the wait. Please keep doing these for forever, please.
Semi-regular Rosencreutz watcher here; this topic is a treat for me. Inscryption is one of my favorite games of all time. I'm so glad I didn't spoil it for myself.
1:02:00
I feel this now, as I’m going through an audiobook series for Terry Pratchett’s Discworld, an aspect of “I’m recommending this to you for me through you, not for you.” Aspect of thought you mention, I can’t reread the Discworld without the same wonder, I can’t get to the humanist thesis statement in each of his books with the righteous anger he wrote them the same way the first time. It becomes a different book, much like how Inscryption becomes a different game.
the “Inscryption is alive as long as its name is remembered” line you briefly mentioned is how I got to this connection by the way. He mentions in the book Going Postal about semaphore operators repeating the names of their dead colleagues in “the overhead” through the codes in order to keep them alive, as long as their name is repeated, they can’t be forgotten.
Sorry for rambling
You are so damn good at this
58:10 interesting!! You might enjoy looking into pragmatist aesthetics, if you haven’t
If you're reading this and haven't played the game you should its really good
Ever since discovering no-clip glitches in games growing up, I've come to dearly appreciate games that offer the experience of breaking out, toying with their boundaries, and self-reference, whether born from conceit or happy accident. Finding out the world is so much bigger, and with perceptible imperfections in spite of the veneer of ideal controlled space provides a rich and formative experience.
Inscryption was another one of those moments for me. I appreciate the language you used in this essay to draw out the concepts: Parallaxing depth. Diegetic conceit. Planes of immersion. Invoking symbolism not as substantive literary device, but to motivate investigation/instill wonder. Genre and subversion.
Hopefully few people who've never played will watch this, but many who have will become a tactful evangelizer themselves. Thank you
Awh yeah new rosencreutz video
Runescape video essay when? I see those files
I really enjoyed that (both the video, and the game I got after your April Fool's video). The mix of formats (of the video) is really cool.
I'm one of those "weirdos" that like spoilers. I spoiled myself for inscription way back when the game came out, so yes, I watched this video just because I like your content. Your intro however inspired me to respond to it, even if it may not be completely relevant to the main argument or video.
The reason why i like spoilers; If a story is well written, any scene that is meant to rely on impact will still be enjoyable, regardless of if that impact is missing. The point of it is the journey, not the destination. I enjoy well written stories, and I think that is true of most people. This ties into a common issue I see regarding media quality, and how to quantify it.
If you cannot see the way two scenes or the connective tissue of the story making sense beyond the point of the point of impact or retroactively when analyzing it, it means the story is not good. Plain and simple, the whole entire thing of authors rewriting their stories to avoid fan speculation from hitting marks is a point in favor of this argument. A lot of people love impact, and love being taken in by the moment, but this ultimately makes them believe that because they *feel* a scene is good, it means it is, *objectively.* And these are not always true.
Think of these examples. The series Demon slayer and JJK are beloved by many, but when you actually sit down to analyze their respective plots and characters, you will start seeing cracks. To avoid spoilers I wont go into specifics (but may do so in the comments if this gets any engagement), but I'm not surprised that well after the series has ended and seeing plenty of videos talking about how good demon slayer was, suddenly you get videos like "Demon Slayer is Extraordinarily Incompetent" by Captain Mack and other critiques about specific characters and how their roles in the plot either became completely irrelevant or didn't make sense to the story that the series was trying to tell. Demon slayer is a *bad* story. What's even more interesting is how people respond to said critiques; usually with defensiveness or derision. There is a similar situation happening in the Marvel Cinematic Universe as a whole, and the discourse surrounding it and the quality of its films, to name another example. I think this is why people normally hate spoilers---because then they have to experience the story without the impact that blinds them to the actual quality of the story that is being told. They don't get the free dopamine points that the "big twist" gives them, or that the solution they found for themselves gives them. Its purely a psychological reaction.
The problem is the subjectivity of it all. If a bad media makes you feel complex or intense emotion, essentially doing what it aimed to do through its intended experience, and you enjoyed it; does that make it bad? It may be poorly written, its animation might suck, the gameplay might be boring, the game may be a buggy mess, what have you---If you still liked it, does that make it bad? Does getting spoiled on a media that requires those points of impact to *be* good make it bad? I think yes, *BUT* people are still allowed to to still enjoy bad media and not need to feel as if doing so makes their taste in media bad as a whole. I think the game Pathologic is a great, if not the best, example of this.
I can play inscription, knowing what happens, and still have fun *playing* the game.
anyways, I'm going to watch the rest of your video.
Dude I’d say this video did well. 12l views in a day at least in my small world is well. I hope it’s living up to your desire.
You keep trying to convince me to finish up my backlog, because i do really want to see your vids but there are a few games that I want to go in completely blind like inscryption
i haven't bought a new game in about two years, my backlog still has 635 games left, but i have gone thru about 150 already and it has been so fun and satisfying. mindlessly buying games you will never play actually slowly makes you depressed. Dont keep making yourself a unclimbable mountain, make it a little hill that is fun to walk over
Spoilers do not inherently ruin an experience, but parody can. I've seen so many parodies of movies like The Thing or the Godfather that I'm just not interested in seeing those movies. Watch Blazing Saddles, then try not to feel a little bit gross when you go and watch spaghetti westerns from the 50's and 60's, I can't do it. Not all parody kills the media it parodies, Futurama's first 5 seasons are basically nothing but Star Trek parodies, but unlike parodies of The Thing or the Godfather that you see in The Simpsons or Family Guy, they don't look straight in the camera and say "we're doing a movie/tv show this episode". I didn't even realize Futurama was largely a Star Trek parody until I actually watched Star Trek, but watching Star Trek opened up a new way of watching an old favorite for me.
I would say even Outer Wilds isn't ruined by the vast majority of its story spoilers, but it could be ruined with puzzle solution spoilers. While part of the experience is piecing together all the clues to the mystery surrounding the game, most spoilers lack the context to function as more than an extra clue. Other games actually **rely** on players spoiling each other to solve its puzzles, such as Voices of the Void. VotV in particular has an easter egg that is so well hidden you will at some point, regardless of how far you can get in it on your own, need to go online, and ask someone else what to do.
Personally? I was never going to play Inscryption because I got bored of deck builders at age 11 when I opened a disappointing Yu Gi Oh booster pack. There is nothing you could say about the game that could make me play it because I see a deck of cards and fall asleep. No layers of hidden depth or metatextual trickery will change the fact that it's a card game, and I'm completely unengaged by card games. Why am I here then? The same reason you include anecdotes about your time working in an escape room. This is more about the theory of game design, using Inscryption as a jumping off point and a guiding hand for the discussion.
OVER AN HOUR??? i just sat down to eat, your timing couldn't be better 😌
Holy shit! I was wondering if this was ever going to come out. Super excited for this. Thanks for the videos, I love your work.
12:55 lmao the fredda blackmail
The squirrels & use of tarot suggests to me the immanentizing joke of the Happy Squirrel
It feels apt
Now I want a short video about the Skyrim Compass and how you think it's bad 😅
It ain't rocket science, completely neuters the exploration experience by turning every trip into a straight line and gluing the player's eyes (and mental map) to the top of the screen instead of the environment
Essentially what the other reply said: It's not deep enough to fully explore... I think. It boils down to three things: 1) you get hud brainpoison, and are constantly looking at the compass to tell you something is *nearby* which means you don't stumble upon things nearly as much in an actual surprise way. This is good for keeping the gameplay constantly "up" but it means you rarely round a corner to a surprise unless it's like a genuine spectacle of a site-- like some dwarven ruins being massive outside compared to others that are a small exterior.
2) this turns gameplay into aggressive location hopping and changes the relation you have to the world, rest, adventure, all of it. You're just going from cave to cave until you're overburdened, or at least are pulled to do that.
3)it means NPCs and quests literally never give actual instructions. They say "Go find Bingledur in Riften" and your compass knows his exact location at all times. That's the most anti-exploration element and I think ends up contributing the most to the reason people try and cut across the in-lore nation's highest mountain range by billy goating instead of... taking the actual roads.
I guess this could be worked into the larger Elder Scrolls Worldbuilding video I have in mind, but it would also be a tangent there, lol.
@@Rosencreutzzz i really liked how AC Nexus did objective traveling. the game has minimal UI, and the only map in the game just makes you massive, allowing you to overlook the enviornment youre in, with the objective marker only appearing once you press a button, or you go into eagle mode, then you can make a route for yourself like i did, looking over everything with eagle vision, and plotting a route to get there, and it was so fun. the whole game is pretty fun to me (no im not a ubisoft dicksucker, i just want rayman back fully)
@@Rosencreutzzz Honestly I appreciated the compass, but for exactly the wrong reasons: the NPCs don't give you ANY FREAKING LANDMARKS TO WORK FROM.
I played Skyrim on PS3 and then persisted to Dragonborn (the only area that wasn't hopelessly broken and jumpscaring me with bugged wolves thanks to Dawnguard doing SOMETHING to wolf howls). Dragonborn may not have struck me in the nostalgia but it hooked me in a way none of the main game did. NPCs gave directions, landmarks, and guided me on the quests. Solstheim pushed me toward Morrowind, and Morrowind showed me exactly what went wrong with Oblivion and Skyrim:
They replaced in-world directions and creating distinct landmarks with a HUD waypoint, and the most frustrating thing is that Skyrim had a spell for an "I'm stuck, help!" with Clairvoyance. I've USED Clairvoyance before to track down where TF something was because it wasn't obvious where the objective had gone or where I was supposed to go to to access it.
I NEVER had that issue in Morrowind, of not knowing where to go or where something was. Someone SOMEWHERE had the information I needed on where I should go (or who I should seen out), I just had to ask if they didn't volunteer directions immediately.
@@neoqwerty Yeahhhh. That's the thing, if you delete Skyrim's compass the game breaks, because there's no "infrastructure" of NPCs actually saying any single thing about where to collect an item or how. To be fair, radiant quests would be... well, they'd lose all the ease of function they have on the dev side if they then all required handwritten instructions to find the caves etc, BUT it's deranged to me that there are quests that are handwritten and say "Go see Flongar over in [entirely different city]" and that's your whole instruction, and then the quest log says "find Flongar"
Isn't it great when a RUclipsr posts something new just as you're watching one of their older videos? I was just rewatching your John Glubb video, and now I have another hour of content to enjoy! Can't wait to dive in.
I really don't understand the whole fear people have of "spoilers" or the fetishization of "going in blind." I haven't played Inscryption because I don't really know anything about it, and therefore had no reason to be interested. So, "going in blind" means "not going in." There are several games I've only played *because* I watched a video that "spoiled" it for me, and told me it had themes I'd actually be interested in, and I went in and still enjoyed them just fine, thank you. I read/watch reviews of games/movies/etc. all the time before playing/reading/watching, that's what reviews are *for* after all. (And for that matter, I've read of studies that show people actually enjoy films that are spoiled *more* because they can look for the thematic elements and how it plays together rather than worrying about trying to predict what's coming next.)
I think the reason is because this games are hinges on discovery. If you spoiled Inscyption, it's just a kinda good card game and not "the experience".
😢😢😢😢
This was very therepeutic having worked at escape rooms for a couple of years, watching people play games all day disenchants and i enjoyed the little bit of magic you put into the video.
I liked that the video feels like a long string of thought, and exploration of your experience with a game, and of your experiences even more than it is about Inscription in a way. It did make me like the game more, I hated robotopia a little bit, and yeah it was intended, but also slow. Also is that Miles Edgeworth?
Yeah I think so
Personally my take on intended experiences is that they are the most human approach to making media and that having an objectively correct meaning and the inability to interpret does not disqualify something from being art. A thing is created with intent, an artist makes specific choices for a specific reason this means that when crafting a narrative the author chose specific elements instead of other elements and for one specific reason out of many potential reasons. A work having an objective intended meaning makes as much sense to me as my sentences being written with an objective intended meaning by me. Where this breaks down is when the vague nature of the medium of communication creates ambiguity that must be filled somehow and imo this happens through projection. The work you end up understanding is a combination of the intended elements you gathered and the bits of yourself you pushed into the gaps. This can ofcs be useful cause you can use this new chimera to understand the parts of yourself you infused in a different context but that does not mean it's not still a form of miscommunication. I would even go as far to say that intended ambiguity that we see through symbols is purposeful miscommunication the same way a riddle playing on words does. Another way is the socratic method where you pick an obtuse way of communication where you don't just say what you mean to say but instead create barriers being questions that are to be interpreted. You still intend to communicate "you are wrong" but you are doing so by forcing the other person to project themselves. You are forcing engagement and self movement on the part of the other person to engage in the process of changing their own mind rather than just commanding the wisdom down on them.
HOLY SHIT ITS REAL NOT JUST AN APRIL FOOLS JOKE
Yeah c:
2024 is a very interesting year to me. I'm jobless and clueless about the future, lonely, sick, and desperately looking for fulfilment. But so many people speaking my artistic language have been expressing similar interests, hopes, dreams, worries, that I've never felt this heard in my life, and this inspired to join the conversation.
I doubt I can really express why this video speaks to me with words, so I'll keep working. Maybe some day, that idea of mine will be a game. Or an experience. Or art.
I'm fairly sure I did pick this up on your recommendation. I have been waiting for a great video like this on Inscription!
damm what a good vide-IS THAT MILES EDGEWORTH
what do you mean?
Love to see more
I love inscryption a lot and I don't think I would have loved it as much if I didn't go in completely blind. I still would have enjoyed it but I truly didn't anticipate any of the twists (not sure if that's the best term tbh) and the urge to find out what else this game had in store for me, and the satisfaction of finding new things, really enhanced the experience for me. I really think that this is one of those games where being spoiled takes away from the experience
I've been thinking about this vid a lot and while I think being spoiled can take away from the experience for some things, sometimes knowing what you're in for can give you a whole new experience. I'm rereading dracula now. Everyone knows dracula is a vampire, it's impossible to read the book in the way that was intended by the author. But with that knowledge the book becomes a different kind of horror, and it's still a good read that can make you think about horror books and their tropes, especially in a historical context. I wonder if something similar could ever happen to games like inscryption, and if looking back on this game from a long way in the future would change my perspective on how being spoiled influences the experience and what the twists tell us about the themes of art and authorship in current times
If you need to be unspoiled to appreciate fully a work, doesn't that means it's not that great outside of shock value?
I'm being very harsh here. But it's a legitimate question to ask. You're asking a lot of trust from someone by telling them to go blind, after all.
I was spoiled EEAAO before seeing it, and it still ended up one of my favorite.
Patricia Taxxon's last video on "Bean and Nothingness" convinced me more with the spoilers parts than without them, too.
At this point of my life, I think less and less of spoilers as an imperative for a "pure" experience. If I'm really interested in a game, I need to know about all the mechanics in detail. If I like a work, I'll send a lot of times thinking about the themes, the story, hoping to get more out of it.
If there's a risk that a work becomes less interesting the more I look into it, what even is the point? What if it's only an empty shell?
@shytendeakatamanoir9740
You are equating 'spoilers change the experience' with 'relies on shock value'. I don't think those two are the same at all. For example a great detective story can only be experienced without knowing the true culprit once. After that it could still be a great work worth re-experiencing but you'll never get that first experience again. However if the killer turns out to be someone Totally Shocking but makes no sense in the story (what??? It was you evil twin who we have never mentioned before and are now introducing in the last chapter of the book??? That sucks!) that shock twist makes the story worse, and you'll probably feel cheated if you invested time into that piece of art. Also how much you value the mystery solving part of the work depends on your personal taste. I like being surprised by the art I experience, but that sometimes comes with disappointment. Sometimes something wasn't worth the effort I put into it to me. this doesn't mean its objectively bad, I didn't really enjoy the outer wilds but that game is super beloved by a lot of people, but if I'd known beforehand what it was all about I wouldn't have played it. But sometimes I get a wonderful surprise like playing inscryption that I still think about years later. I think the surprising parts of inscryption made an already fun game way more impactful, and I simply don't think it could have done what it did without hiding some of its aspects at the start.
Personally I think inscryption has a lot to offer even if you know what's going to happen, but the surprise of the sudden completely change of style and gameplay definitely hits harder when you don't know its coming. And obviously, trying to piece together information to find out what's going on is only possible when you dont know what's going on. But besides that I like the gameplay, love the atmosphere, and I've played quite a bit of kaycees mod even though it holds no more surprises to me.
But I also understand wanting to know what you're getting into. I'm and adult with a job and investing hours into something that might turn out not to be your thing is disappointing. Even if I'm promised a great ending I'm very unlikely to finish something I'm not enjoying in the first 10 minutes
Sorry for the wall of text I have a lot of thoughts
@@shytendeakatamanoir9740What's the point of complaining that something is "just" shock value, though?
There is merit in shock value. A good twist can elicit feelings and reactions from the audience that are hard to get otherwise. On the same vein, there is craft to shock value. A well executed twist can be mindblowing while a poorly made one will just wiggle limply in the general direction of eliciting a reaction.
There is also merit in not needing shock value at all, which is something very few pieces of media actually achieve, but i dont think theres anything wrong with a work that knows most of the punch its packing is from shock value and is proficient at it
Yes! I was thinking about this video literally yesterday and wondering when it was coming.
This was great! I know you said that this was an atypical video but honestly I'd love more of this kind of thing
Never played this game. Never watched this game. Hell, I never even heard of this game. But of course I will watch this entire video with utmost curiosity and concentration!
This is my interpretation that nobody asked for:
Some of us desire an answer, regardless of the results. Thus we turn to the interface which limits possibilities while giving the illusion of totality. The provided answer is a vague reflection of personal externalities.
There is an implicit contract between ourselves and the facilitator. We recognize their authority as representative of the absolute, although they really build up rather than down. Some are functionaries, while others find purpose in providing purpose.
The interface is a ritual that lends meaning through symbolism given weight by age.
I was taught that the Tower isn’t just destruction, it’s necessary destruction of rotten foundations, like, the end of something that cannot or should not continue, whether comfortable or not, so I’d read that as saying GameFuna is similarly bad? Not that that informs us on much more than we already know
I can see that as a read, but it still feels a bit disjointed, to me. Perhaps that's partly down to how the Tower in the in-game card is pristine and monolithic and...towering, as opposed to being struck down. The Tower tarot card always read to me as present-tense, in the sense that the destruction on the card *is* happening, that the moment of note is the fall, not the anticipation of it.
On the other hand, Judgment is sort of a "cleansing fire" kind of destruction too, which fits your "rotten foundation" perspective. I can't shake how the card feels too literal in its application here.
Your speaking style is very reminiscent of The Magnus Archives. Or SCP readings, buh far more the former and to compare you to SCP seems disingenious.
The audio is also really well done in pausing, lagging, and changing to impact what you wanna say.
I was quite surprised to be hooked right after the intro, prolly around the first bus roll. Intertwining stories is always super fun.
I also love the attempts at structure, to set yourself rules to talk about topics and then intentionally or unintentionally turning into a scripted rant.
- Sacrifice, Cyclicality, Authorship & Intent are laid out as the next topics. They're all talked about but loosely, blended together as you mix other stories into it.
- You start with the loading from the first save, and skip the 3 saves in the middle. Only to choose the last one at the end.
- The layers of the game were described again and again, reminding the viewer and describing it in a different way. Each comparison leading into a different story, asking the viewer to look at the layers of the video.
Hmm. I played inscryption only after watching a youtube series by youtuber "Aliensrock" which fully spoiled acts 1 and 2, and my favorite segment was definitely the last one. I thought it was the most mechanically interesting part of the game, and I thought PO3 was kinda cute! Like, he hates you so much, he calls you an idiot gamer, I love him :3. I very strongly believe he was robbed of a proper final boss.
Also, I thought the idea was that what PO3 uploaded is the game you're playing? And you, in the lore, are not the guy in the cabin or the lucky carder, but yourself at your desk, playing the mangled version he uploaded. Maybe I just wasn't paying too much attention, and all this was a while ago.
That thing you mentioned about people assuming more complexity reminded me of something. I played this game "Buckshot Roulette" which seems very inspired by Inscryption. You play against the dealer and try to shoot the dealer before they shoot you, by choosing to either fire towards your own self or the dealer, and the dealer has the same choice. I thought there would be some complex system there, and I was wondering about it. Therefore, I asked him! And he told me it was just a coinflip until he reached the last shell! X3
I think he's added a smarter AI by this point, but it's a good example of speculating more detail than there really was I think.
1:01:17 “perfection isn’t when there’s nothing left to add, but when there’s nothing left to take away”
-Idfk
The "I dont know Luke Carder" part was great! I was thinking, why does this feel so similar to Dan's video and then I saw the file name.
It might be silly but I can’t get over how fun it was to hear P03’s name pronounced how I read it when everyone else seems to read it like a serial number
It's 1) a lot more work in the brain to say p oh three, and 2) just kinda less... of a name? I like Poe for how to say it.
@@Rosencreutzzz I also like to call them that because I think they’d hate it
Pronouncing P03 as Poe sounds so weird to me
I think he forgot that death is literally canonically the creator of the old data, while his reading does add to the game. This game takes place in the same world as pony island.
Very interesting and insightful video on an absolute masterpiece of a video game!
Also, very happy to finally hear someone call the guy "Poe" and not "P O Three" :)
The initial premise of Inscryption, being trapped in a cabin with a madman who forces you to play a game with talking cards or else he’ll turn you into a picture, is so atmospheric and engaging. Honestly, it should have just been that, I just didn’t really care at all about the ARG stuff.
The designer, Daniel Mullins, seems unable to make a straightforward game. Every single thing he's produced has had a twist. I don't think he can help himself.
Thankfully the game later added a mode that was just the cabin.
@@Veto2090 Inscryption very much seems to **suffer** from his need to jam an ARG into everything, because it's at it's core **actually a good game**. The ARG shit is a distraction from the game you are trying to play, and the game is a distraction from the ARG.
There's certainly something to be said about how a game that invites genre and tone shifts will inevitably lose impact for some people that it drew in. It's certainly not a false promise, but you can't help feeling like "no, wait go back to that other stuff" so I fully get it.
I didn't mention it in this one, but in the April teaser I did hint at the idea-- when subversion becomes a core staple of your work, the more...known you are as part of your work (that this is, for example a game by Daniel Mullins), the more that means something and can cause people to brace for it, to expect the subversion, and that's a very weird thing. Knowing his prior work, knowing the kinds of games Devolver takes on, you end up with expectations that go against the intent of being surprised.
i liked the ARG but i do wish the initial section of the game lasted longer; i only got to play like 5 runs before the next portion of the game started
"I don't know what that says about me" you're cool. Tarot is cool.
aw sick i love this guy (you)
Out of curiosity are you (or perhaps were you) a practicing R.C or was it just.a neat name you chose? Awesome video btw! Oh and no I am not “A∴A∴“ in the traditional sense anyway.... I just do my own thing but pull from OGRC, SRIA, GD and many others.. including Eris and Bob :)
- FNORD
Edit: alright after the tarot section I have my answer XD carry on! Great Work btw :D
Thumbs up for all your content
I don't know if I actually want to watch this one, considering the 'intended experience' last time.
funni brain man strikes again
Oh hey the links in your description are broken btw!
They work on my end which is... odder.
Guess I finally have to go play the game be back in a week
Well, someone's been watching Jacob Geller
Love your videos
also yippie Edgeworth
I really enjoyed this! Wasn't a fan of the glitchy audio transitions but otherwise top notch!
1:43 Or a secret third thing (the video essayist wears their Jacob Geller inspiration on their sleeve
I'd say, for this one, the inspirations most clearly calling out to me the whole time, the ones I couldn't shake, were (the semi-frequently referenced in my work) Campster/Errant Signal, and of all people, Dan Olson. Geller's work is interesting, but I don't think I watched much of it when I was forming an idea of what video essays are, so while I respect his work, and very much understand why it's so treasured, it isn't always "insta-watch" for me. Granted, sometimes that's because I find myself wanting to cover similar things, and I have a perennial fear of "accidental osmosis plagiarism" --of being unable to tell my own thoughts apart from those of an "influence" and thus tend to avoid works on topics I want to cover *until* I've gotten at least a full draft.
It's a testament to his impact on the genre that as I'm writing this comment, his "Art for No One" video is looming in the "recommended" sidebar.
@Rosencreutzzz thank you for the recommendations. Love the artists that inspire artists
@@RosencreutzzzDefinitely see the Dan Olson influence in the escape room portions
Yum yum video essay.
Omg Inscryption content!!!
Only 11k views on this is criminal
woo new vid
For the record, I've been a subscriber here for a year or so and I've watched most of your videos so far, and wrt this being different to what you'd usually make, I really enjoyed this video. Not better or worse than your usual work - it's hard to compare directly like that - but if you were later considering making something else that's experimental in future and wondering "did what I do with the Inscryption video even work?", then I would say it worked for me.
At least, I *think* it did - because now I'm pondering my assumptions about your intentions for this video. Perhaps this is all just another layer. After all, if Daniel Mullins can create a fake RUclipsr, is it really so implausible for Daniel Mullins himself to be a narrative lie?
I've been drafting notes for a while for a potential essay on the use (and 'un-properly rooted' use, as you might say) of tarot in horror games. The section on s/Symbolism gave me such wonderful language for understanding my feelings on the subject, especially noting them as 'anti-blue-curtains'. I've been struggling to reckon with that question you posed, to what extent would properly rooting the tarot symbolism actually benefit the audience? How do I make my essay criticizing tarot in horror games contribute value to its audience?
You take requests? Can we have a video essay on the dirty f-word of medieval history (feudalism), it’s possible non existence, and maybe Kingdom Come Deliverance or Crusader Kings? Lol
I understand that your channel is predominantly a place where you use video games as a subject to spin around and catch multiple stray thoughts into a cohesive whole; but I think you have the approach that would really work for a video on Homestuck (particularly around the relationship an author has with their audience).
It may be that you've never read/ held an interest in/ Have read and found it incredibly annoying/ decided (reasonably) that it was a piece of media to stick far away from you/ Have many thoughts about it but decided that it wasn't appropriate for the subject matter of your channel. But in the same way that you evangelize about inscription so that other people may experience and engage with this work in such a way that it won't disappear I feel the need to evangelize about homestuck in a similar way.
I love the video and I'm working my way through your back catalog and so far I've enjoyed every single video and more importantly the thoughts I had afterwards. Your video on the way paradox uses base assumptions in map making really struck a chord with me in putting to words an idea that had been forming for awhile.
if you are watching this and haven't beat inscryption yet, you got issues
Is the image divided left and right in the escape room stories related to the Knife power up?
Oh boy an hour long video of a game I like
I decided to watch it and not care about the soiilers but fuck that game looks cool,
Totally bormal conclusion:D
maryland mentioned lfgggg
What song do you use for the conclusion segment of your videos?
seconded
Usually I have it in the credits of every video, the full music list, but... well, yeah.
It's Embassy Piano from Mission Impossible 64
(It might be Embassy Pianist)
Am i the only one that enjoyed Botopia more than pixel inscryption?
I felt like the gameplay was too dependant on lucky draws and i found myself bruteforcing the same battle over and over again until i got said lucky draw, and it wasnt terribly enjoyable but also i felt like i didnt have many other avenues to progressing
comment for algorythm
1:07:15 does this count as ear blowing asmr? i am sorry in advance
So after the first few seconds of the video, I stopped it, bought the game, played through it all in a day, and came back. I think I'm glad I didn't watch the video before buying the game. I'm not 100% sure I'm happy I bought the game though.
to bad bucko, im glad you bought it because you supported a smaller artist
@@THEEJONESY I like supporting smaller artists, I'm just not sure this feels like my money's worth for the 12 hours or so of play. It's realistically shorter than Dredge, and the number one complaint there is the length.
@@nsimmonds casey's mod is literally an infinite survival mode with lots of challenges and different starting decks? have you beaten that too?
@@nsimmonds and no its not a downloadable mod it is included in the base game
@@nsimmonds also what happens to quality over quantity, and replay ability. I don't believe in needing every game to be a 100 hours worth of content
smilecat
OH??
32:17
It was real good until you started whining
Care to clarify where you mean?
@@Rosencreutzzz you need to work on not taking negative comments personal man, any kind of positive attention you get, especially on the Internet is going to lead to negative attention.
Your video was good until you got to the part at the end where you started whining. Pinning my comment kind of proves you take this shit personally, which you can't. Good luck dude
@@Rosencreutzzz Any kind of positive attention you get is going to lead to negative attention.
Your video was really good until you got to the end and went on a rant addresing negative comments that you probably should have just ignored. Pinning my comment kind of proves my point
You make good content, but you need to learn to tune out nay sayers. Good luck dude
what in the god damn...
Go touch grass
lol youre the second person ive heard call P03 Poe