“Yes, but is this the right medium for that story?”
That’s the first thing they told me to ask myself in film school. It’s something not enough filmmakers ask themselves throughout their career. This is exponentially true for game designers, as evidenced by Half-Life 2 mod-turned-retail interactive-narrative Dear Esther.
As I kept my middle-finger glued down to the “W” key for the game’s duration (~70 mins), I kept asking myself if this story would have been better told through another medium. While I didn’t come to the conclusion easily, the answer is: yes, it would have.
Over the past couple years, the vernacular of our medium has been expanding and morphing to include new types of experiences. Some bold, some alienating, and almost all ill-fit for the medium they chose to cram their ideas into. I’m speaking of games and modifications such as The Path, Radiator, and past titles by Dear Esther developer thechineseroom (Conscientious Objector, Korsakovia). These developers take the experimental approach of European developers (Ice-Pick Lodge, Tale of Tales) to their logical extreme by stripping out most interaction, combat, and immediate threat. They are linear stories where you primarily progress through movement alone and the goal is to see the end.
What made the original mod iteration of Dear Esther stand out in 2008 was its confident voice and style. The player starts off on a dimly lit shore, surrounded by billowing clouds of fog and mountains ascending in the distance. There is a flashing, red beacon far away. Videogame logic tells us this will be the end point of our journey, but don’t rely on that mental muscle too much. This isn’t a game in the traditional sense.
After taking a couple steps toward a sad looking cabin on the shore, our narrator starts an internal monologue complimented by powerful string music. You better get used to it, because Dear Esther only has three things going for it: its writing, music, and visuals. If you aren’t a fan of one of these things, you most likely will regret your time with the title. Luckily, two of these three are stellar and the writing is magnificent when it’s not bloated by artistic pretensions.
This isn’t Max Payne speaking. The voice of our protagonist is a much more literately informed, esoteric one. The vague, inconclusive narrative of the game is told through our narrator’s misplaced letters to Esther, a woman we know little about even by the end. At times, the narrator sums things up beautifully (“Infection is not simply of the flesh.")
Other times, he barfs up lines that sound like bad Mars Volta lyrics (“Did this island rise from my stomach forcing the gulls to take flight?”) Even more difficult is the non-linear storytelling that jumps from biblical parables (ham-fisted late into the production) to feverish ramblings that are both fun and frustrating to decipher, especially when you are trying to read something written on a wall. Even when the words fall flat, voice actor Nigel Carrington makes them come alive with a rare spirit. He adds a weight to the syllables that make them sink into your gut.
The impact of Jessica Curry’s score on this project can’t be praised enough. Her music, from sweeping string movements in the pastoral scenes to her gloomy piano pieces in the caves, help paint the landscape with character. You feel like you are in a wonderful H.P. Lovecraft short story as you slowly traverse a hillside or dive deeper into a cave. It's too bad then that for long sections the game is played in silence, tainting the illusion.
This 2012 commercial release, made possible through extra funds and the help of former DICE employee Robert Briscoe, is the same game as before just with better production values. Judging by the comparison image below, you can see how much of an effect this made. While the audio brought the story to life in the mod, the rebuffed imagery complete the vision in this retail remake. The beginning landscapes are expansive at the cost of appearing a bit too ordinary, but the artistry put into the cave section in the narrative’s 2nd act is astounding. Dear Esther is one of the most beautiful games I’ve ever played at points, overcoming any sense of dullness the rest of the experience put me through.
So, yes, this game is dull. And, yes, it is a game. There are rules and keys and narrative triggers and all those things we come to expect of a $9.99 purchase on Steam. The problem with Dear Esther is that it never uses its resources as interactive-fiction to good effect.
Let’s break this down to its basics: What does the story gain from being interactive?
For one, you can explore this world with your own eyes. You can also explore parts that aren’t worth exploring: Pathways that lead nowhere, caves with the same assets copy-and-pasted, and dead-ends that will make you curse the game’s painfully snail-paced walking speed.
Another possible benefit is that you are in control of the action, yet Dear Esther doesn’t seem to respect the player very much in this regard. All you do in this game is walk. You literally hold down the “W”-key for 70 minutes -- even ducking, the only other action, is automatic. At one point, my finger became so tired that I mapped the “Forward”-command to my right-mouse button. A “move forward forever”-button, as found in many MMORPGS, would be appreciated. If the developer sarcastically respond, "While we're at it, we'll just make it a Machinima!" I'd say, "Good!"
The bigger problem with Dear Esther is that it revolves entirely around moving forward without providing any momentum, incentive, or even a clear path (at times). The most thrilling moments are when you take a plunge into an abyss, trusting the narrator for his word. Yet, games like Uncharted 3, Gravity Bone, and The Stanley Parable offer so much more variety in action and movement in their non-combat-based narrative moments. Dear Esther could have been thrilling, but instead it feels lazy. When you spend 10 minutes walking, hit a dead-end, and walk 10 minutes back … well, that’s just amateur hour.
Arguments will be (and have been) made that the reality of getting lost is one shared by the player and narrator. That’s all fine and good but there is nothing that is interesting about that for me as a player. The frustration of being lost and the pain of holding down the “W”-key don’t make me sympathize with my avatar, they just make me more aware that I am playing a game in the real world and am feeling increasingly unhappy about this decision. The biggest insult of all is that the game ends with a scene that takes all player-control away for the sake of what?
Dear Esther is such a purely audio/visual experience that I have to conclude it would be better as a short film. It’d be a challenge to make, but it’s nothing that Chris Marker and Gus Van Sant haven’t successfully attempted. Regardless, I recommend playing Dear Esther in order to figure out where you stand on interactive experiences such as this. Dear Esther is such a bold, specific creation that it will help develop your taste and understanding of interaction-fiction. As a bonus, you’ll be treated to some occasional ear-and-eye candy.
Dear Esther is an experiment but it is a flawed one. I have to wonder, even if it were a short film, if its vague plot and predictable conclusion would be effective. The ironic thing is that the most pedestrian of stories can be convincing when coupled with intelligently applied interaction -- something Dear Esther stubbornly stands against. It’s as if it wants to be a part of this wonderful medium of ours without asking itself why, which is exactly why you should seek it out and learn from its failures as a game enthusiast, critic, or developer.
So, that's Allistair's Interactive-Fiction 101. Now, which one of you students do I get to take home tonight?
Final Verdict: 4.5
Subpar: 4.5s have some high points, but they soon give way to glaring faults. Not the worst games, but are difficult to recommend to everyone who isn't already a huge fan of this genre or brand.
I was excited for this game, so I did skip to the finial verdict, not wanting to "spoil" anything for myself. That is a bit disappointing, though I'm still a bit intrigued by the art and music.
After-all, I paid more then $10 to see that pile of crap Cop Out, (which, in my defense I knew literately nothing about before seeing) so in that example, even if this game completely destroys my computer, it is worth it.
Would you have liked this more if it was free like the HL 2 modification version? I enjoyed the mod when I played it, but even with those graphics, I'd never want to pay money for it.
Except this isn't a game, and to review it like one just because it's in a video game engine is stupid. This is almost trolling as hard as a Sterling article.
He stated a few times that he was reviewing it as an interactive story, not a game. Which is what it is. An interactive story. I detected no trolling in this article.
Skipping on this one. Ya know what story-driven game was actually really good though? To the Moon. Every nook and cranny was worth exploring, and the writing was always intriguing and never pretentious to me.
Well, half the internet is giving it almost stellar reviews, but i expected opposite opinios too. Plus 10$ price tag still seems to me as a very bad decision, but i guess Dan and Rob know for the best.
I'm still excited about it as i was excited about the mod.
P.S. Also, it's absolutely not like the Path, if someone thinks it is. The Path actually shoves in some videogame mechanics - 1, is very frustraiting and not really interesting to explore - 2. DE is just on an empty beautiful island, music and voice. Not a lot of people will be able and want to to push themselves though a sad story of loss. And that's understandable, especially given it's price.
I still want to check this game out...eventually. Even before this review I told myself I would wait till I get a window to both buy and play it, and after the review I feel justified in that decision. I think games like this call into question of how we merge telling a story with interactive elements. I think interactive stories are still in their infancy, but they have the potential to deliver greatness.
Well, even an interactive story better have some events, or protagonists in it.
Some guy reading a book while I'm walking around doesn't turn this into an interactive story.
I'll still be getting this, but mostly because of the level design rather than because of the gameplay factor. I'm thinking of my purchase more as a "donation" to the level designer (this is a mostly one-man project after all).
I kind of expected that from a gameplay perspective, and a "fufilling lengthful" perspective that this was going to be a bust, but that's not what really interested me in it. It's just mind blowing to me how all of this was achieved in Source Engine, the same engine that powered Portal 2. But yeah, it is a shame he is charging $10 for this, because to 98% of the population its only worth about $3-$5, but ah well.
Allistair Pinsof is the fellow who discribed the pc as a "basically a glorified Xbox360". Your opinion on anything pc related is pretty much moot. You shouldn't be having anything to do with the platform let alone doing reviews giving that ignorant statment.
Dood, you dont like gti it. Theres like, so much deep feel in the gaem. Its like an experience... without the divsty of experiecne. That's y its so sw33t.
I don't really feel like it makes sense to review Dear Esther at all. I mean, 4.5/10 as what? An adventure game? An indie arthouse game? It isn't really either of those things. Not that I fault Destructoid or Allistair for doing so - being released like a regular game makes it a fair target like any other.
I just don't think thechineseroom intended it to be anything more than a hike across a mysterious island (with a story told via voiceover of course). I suspect an awful lot of people are going to buy it under the false impression that because it's being released on Steam that it's a 'game' in the traditional sense. The devs at thechineseroom have always been very interested in storytelling using game technology as the vehicle - in the case of Dear Esther, I think this is especially true.
A pen and paper RPG might take the form of a book, but that doesn't make it a novel. Dear Esther takes the form of a video game, but in most areas, that isn't what it is.
Dear Esther a game by definition. There is no escaping this.
It's reviewed because Dtoid likes reviewing things, as do I. The rating and words above convey my experience with the game, which is all a review comes down to: How did it make the writer feel?
@Allistair
Like I said, I've no issue with you reviewing DE - it's good publicity if nothing else, and I enjoyed reading it :)
With regards to your first point, is anything you build in a video game engine automatically a game? I mean, obviously we'll call it that, because pretty much every alternative sounds like a massive wank ('interactive experience' anyone?) but is it true? Is an empty room a game? How about an empty field? An empty field with a narrator? Already we're close to DE without being close to any regular concept of a 'game'.
Anyway, I wasn't trying to devalue your opinion. I personally wouldn't give DE a numerical score because I don't feel that it has any factors with which to quantify a score. It's an experiment in interactive storytelling, and I can't think of a fair way to rate something like that until it has contemporaries with which to compare it.
...Wow. I'm sort of surprised about the anti-reviewer words here.
I 'played' the old mod of it, and loved it. Not as a 'game', or as an 'experience', simply as a thing. It was an interesting island to walk around while an amazing voice told you words which didn't really make sense. That was it. I'd recommend the mod to others, but mainly because it was interesting, and also ~free~.
I've not played this version, and don't really intend to, but if its simply the mod with higher production qualities and more lines, then I can 100% agree with any 'mileage may vary' comments. It's a 'thing' that shouldn't really be reviewed in any standard way, because people will always react differently to it.
So, what I'm trying to say is, fuck people who attack the reviewer for not reacting in the same way you do. Especially the people calling it 'trolling' and calling platform-preferences into question.
This review is absolute garbage. This isn't a game, it's a friggin experience and you treat it as though it's a traditional game... If you are so inclined to actually behold of this experience, then this review should've gotten a higher score. IGN actually played this game as an experience but I guess you didn't get the idea. I've played this game and beat it. It's a masterpiece in its own right and people like you need to understand that. Sure you just "walk" but the atmosphere and visual aspect give it a ton of meat. For people who are concerned on whether to buy this game, do yourselves a favour and don't pay any attention to this review. This is a terrific game. (not to mention it's only 10$ on steam which I don't think this guy mentioned as a plus).
This review is absolute garbage. This isn't a game, it's a friggin experience and you treat it as though it's a traditional game... If you are so inclined to actually behold of this experience, then this review should've gotten a higher score. IGN actually played this game as an experience but I guess you didn't get the idea. I've played this game and beat it. It's a masterpiece in its own right and people like you need to understand that. Sure you just "walk" but the atmosphere and visual aspect give it a ton of meat. For people who are concerned on whether to buy this game, do yourselves a favour and don't pay any attention to this review. This is a terrific game. (not to mention it's only 10$ on steam which I don't think this guy mentioned as a plus).
Agree with ChampionH. Just finished it, and happy as I haven't been in a long time. You can't just prize visuals, texts and sound, and then just score it 45 out of 100 because of the absence of the gameplay, when none was ever promised. And I completely disagree about the wrong media pick, I hardly can imagine what other media could draw me inside this world as game did.
You've missed the point almost entirely with this review. For the price of a movie ticket you have a series of landscapes and caves painstakingly handmade by a well-talented artist, compelling writing, narrative, and a brilliantly composed soundtrack to match. Alongside this you have a story thats rotates in perspective with each playthrough. If the 2 hours playing through the story are thoroughly enjoyed (again, at the price of the movie ticket), then it will have succeeded most people's expectations.
This game was brilliantly refreshing, regardless of how it was paced; soaking in the ambiance and atmosphere is exactly how it's meant to be played. Marking it as a game when the game doesn't follow any traditional gameplay elements and then going on to compare to other AAA and Indie games alike which were promising gameplay over an audio/visual experience anyway is a very flawed perspective, especially coming from an accomplished reviewer such as yourself.
Reviews are generally responsible for critiquing elements of the game for what they promise to do, not what they 'should/could have been'. If they do it well, then it deserves a score that reflects that judgement.
You pay for what you get in this case, if you want a story driven experience with great visuals, emotional score, and top-notch writing, then I highly recommend you give Dear Esther your pocket change. Don't bother listening to this misconstrued review.
Allistair Pinsof, gaming websites are getting stupider and stupider each day, just to appeal teenage xbox players. Destructoid was somewhat above that stupidity line. However, after I read your review, Destructoid disappointed me.
Some people trying to defend "the reviewing sites that premierly target young xbox audience who thinks Modern Warfare series are the best games ever" by arguing we are "trolling reviewers with claiming they are trolling just because they don't share exactly our opinions".
Man... we don't want reviewers to have "EXACTLY SAME AS" our opinions, we just want "honest" reviewers.
For example in this Dear Esther situation. Yes, while it was still a mod, I played it and I can admit it was a bit boring. However, Dear Esther developer remaked the game with improving level design and graphics. After that, I got interested for the new product and started to wait.
It can be boring because it is not prepared for "fun", but describing this game as a "w-pressing application", is just pure trolling both us and the developer.
There are many visual novels (or visual novel games), mostly eroge games. you just mouse click all the way from the beginning to the end. you don't do anything just choose your path. however, that doesn't makes them mouse-clicking application.
We just want to have a honest review.
Surely there should be a professional level design, an atmosphering story telling or may ge a graphical art?
I am a newbie level designer, so it would be exciting for me (or for level designers, game developers or artists) to read the aspects of levels in this game and what is their pros and cons.
Instead of those, I see a wall of text complaining as "this is not a game, this is not fun and this is a w-pressing application".
if you don't like playing adventure games, visual novels and prefer to go and play some more Halo or Gears Of War,
then why you are reviewing this game but not some other reviewer who likes adventure games or visual novels?
Yeah, I'm with Yadda here. Played through it myself and if you don't fall into this trap of categorizing every shit there is and just see the product for what it is, you get a short movie experience.
You won't get some mindblowing story like Braid but it still manages to keep your interest.
What I really dislike is the way such games are handled. That shit wouldn't have happened if Burch was still around. Maybe the same score but at least a review that doesn't focus it's point that Dear Esther is not an actual game.
I mean, what the fuck is this line?
"There are rules and keys and narrative triggers and all those things we come to expect of a $9.99 purchase on Steam."
So because it has trigger points or in other words A mechanic you immediately categorize it into a standard game? With that kind of logic you could even say a movie is a game. Oo
In fact, putting in a DVD, pressing the play button, and reaching the end is a type of game. It's an observation that many fail to make.
A step beyond that is Interactive Fiction, which is how I label Dear Esther and the similar, more successful games I compared it to (Gravity Bone, The Stanley Parable; not Call of Duty).
Glad you guys got something out of it and enjoyed your time with the game. I think my issues with the design (including the level design) is pretty well represented in the review.
The interesting details in this review: (1) Allistair went to film school. (2)He finishes with an open fantasy of sleeping with (non-existent) students from his (non-existent)media class. A frustrated creative spirit with your standard inadequate personal life. No further comment. Enough said
@orctowngrot: Pretty much. Mentioning Uncharted 3 (Bang shoot man falls down action game) and The Stanley Parable (similar exploration idea, much different thesis) in the same breath as this game is way off base and shows that the reviewer has no good point of reference to base his very flimsy critiques on.
Allistair Pinsof wrote:
"I think my issues with the design (including the level design) is pretty well represented in the review."
You haven't. The parts where you simply found dead ends far from main route, I've found points of interests like some symbolizing objects, allusions and even hidden noises/dialogs. By the way, some objects are changing in each play-through.
This review wasn't harsh enough, I would review this in 3 words:
TrollFace, the game.
Oh it looks very good in places, the cave is the highlight and possibly worth the price of admission alone.
However...
The music is piecemeal, stylistically narrow and disconnected from the visuals.
The "experience" tasks you with exploring an island, an island that happens to be no more than a narrow corridor with an odd dead end. Don't even think of challenging the invisible walls, follow the corridor.
You are left with a stream of consciousness stretched out over 4 chapters, nothing connected, no narrative, no story. When they ran out of ideas they started writing on the walls. Of course they couldn't be bothered writing anything original so they just copy/pasted some Bible verses.
There is only the surface, and the surface is you holding the W key down with your middle finger for 70 minutes.
I agree with this review. This gaming is boring and awful. Please avoid it. We can't continue to support developers like these that don't know anything about video games.
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Contest:
12:00 PM on 02.13.2012 | 
After-all, I paid more then $10 to see that pile of crap Cop Out, (which, in my defense I knew literately nothing about before seeing) so in that example, even if this game completely destroys my computer, it is worth it.
Point is, I hate Tracy Morgan.
So, your mileage may vary.
Travel without purpose?
He stated a few times that he was reviewing it as an interactive story, not a game. Which is what it is. An interactive story. I detected no trolling in this article.
I'm still excited about it as i was excited about the mod.
P.S. Also, it's absolutely not like the Path, if someone thinks it is. The Path actually shoves in some videogame mechanics - 1, is very frustraiting and not really interesting to explore - 2. DE is just on an empty beautiful island, music and voice. Not a lot of people will be able and want to to push themselves though a sad story of loss. And that's understandable, especially given it's price.
Some guy reading a book while I'm walking around doesn't turn this into an interactive story.
I kind of expected that from a gameplay perspective, and a "fufilling lengthful" perspective that this was going to be a bust, but that's not what really interested me in it. It's just mind blowing to me how all of this was achieved in Source Engine, the same engine that powered Portal 2. But yeah, it is a shame he is charging $10 for this, because to 98% of the population its only worth about $3-$5, but ah well.
I just don't think thechineseroom intended it to be anything more than a hike across a mysterious island (with a story told via voiceover of course). I suspect an awful lot of people are going to buy it under the false impression that because it's being released on Steam that it's a 'game' in the traditional sense. The devs at thechineseroom have always been very interested in storytelling using game technology as the vehicle - in the case of Dear Esther, I think this is especially true.
A pen and paper RPG might take the form of a book, but that doesn't make it a novel. Dear Esther takes the form of a video game, but in most areas, that isn't what it is.
It's reviewed because Dtoid likes reviewing things, as do I. The rating and words above convey my experience with the game, which is all a review comes down to: How did it make the writer feel?
The answer: Not very awesome.
Like I said, I've no issue with you reviewing DE - it's good publicity if nothing else, and I enjoyed reading it :)
With regards to your first point, is anything you build in a video game engine automatically a game? I mean, obviously we'll call it that, because pretty much every alternative sounds like a massive wank ('interactive experience' anyone?) but is it true? Is an empty room a game? How about an empty field? An empty field with a narrator? Already we're close to DE without being close to any regular concept of a 'game'.
Anyway, I wasn't trying to devalue your opinion. I personally wouldn't give DE a numerical score because I don't feel that it has any factors with which to quantify a score. It's an experiment in interactive storytelling, and I can't think of a fair way to rate something like that until it has contemporaries with which to compare it.
Congratulations, you missed the point. I still don't know anything about the story nor do you, as it seemed you didn't get it.
Reviewing it as a game just because you can walk around is the wrong way in my opinion.
What I still wonder is if you are a CoD fan or someone whose attention span is really low. Then I'd categorize the review as trolling on Jim's level.
I 'played' the old mod of it, and loved it. Not as a 'game', or as an 'experience', simply as a thing. It was an interesting island to walk around while an amazing voice told you words which didn't really make sense. That was it. I'd recommend the mod to others, but mainly because it was interesting, and also ~free~.
I've not played this version, and don't really intend to, but if its simply the mod with higher production qualities and more lines, then I can 100% agree with any 'mileage may vary' comments. It's a 'thing' that shouldn't really be reviewed in any standard way, because people will always react differently to it.
So, what I'm trying to say is, fuck people who attack the reviewer for not reacting in the same way you do. Especially the people calling it 'trolling' and calling platform-preferences into question.
You've missed the point almost entirely with this review. For the price of a movie ticket you have a series of landscapes and caves painstakingly handmade by a well-talented artist, compelling writing, narrative, and a brilliantly composed soundtrack to match. Alongside this you have a story thats rotates in perspective with each playthrough. If the 2 hours playing through the story are thoroughly enjoyed (again, at the price of the movie ticket), then it will have succeeded most people's expectations.
This game was brilliantly refreshing, regardless of how it was paced; soaking in the ambiance and atmosphere is exactly how it's meant to be played. Marking it as a game when the game doesn't follow any traditional gameplay elements and then going on to compare to other AAA and Indie games alike which were promising gameplay over an audio/visual experience anyway is a very flawed perspective, especially coming from an accomplished reviewer such as yourself.
Reviews are generally responsible for critiquing elements of the game for what they promise to do, not what they 'should/could have been'. If they do it well, then it deserves a score that reflects that judgement.
You pay for what you get in this case, if you want a story driven experience with great visuals, emotional score, and top-notch writing, then I highly recommend you give Dear Esther your pocket change. Don't bother listening to this misconstrued review.
Fucking ADHD CoD gamurs.
Didn't expect more from this shitty website anyway.
I'm out.
Some people trying to defend "the reviewing sites that premierly target young xbox audience who thinks Modern Warfare series are the best games ever" by arguing we are "trolling reviewers with claiming they are trolling just because they don't share exactly our opinions".
Man... we don't want reviewers to have "EXACTLY SAME AS" our opinions, we just want "honest" reviewers.
For example in this Dear Esther situation. Yes, while it was still a mod, I played it and I can admit it was a bit boring. However, Dear Esther developer remaked the game with improving level design and graphics. After that, I got interested for the new product and started to wait.
It can be boring because it is not prepared for "fun", but describing this game as a "w-pressing application", is just pure trolling both us and the developer.
There are many visual novels (or visual novel games), mostly eroge games. you just mouse click all the way from the beginning to the end. you don't do anything just choose your path. however, that doesn't makes them mouse-clicking application.
We just want to have a honest review.
Surely there should be a professional level design, an atmosphering story telling or may ge a graphical art?
I am a newbie level designer, so it would be exciting for me (or for level designers, game developers or artists) to read the aspects of levels in this game and what is their pros and cons.
Instead of those, I see a wall of text complaining as "this is not a game, this is not fun and this is a w-pressing application".
if you don't like playing adventure games, visual novels and prefer to go and play some more Halo or Gears Of War,
then why you are reviewing this game but not some other reviewer who likes adventure games or visual novels?
You won't get some mindblowing story like Braid but it still manages to keep your interest.
What I really dislike is the way such games are handled. That shit wouldn't have happened if Burch was still around. Maybe the same score but at least a review that doesn't focus it's point that Dear Esther is not an actual game.
I mean, what the fuck is this line?
"There are rules and keys and narrative triggers and all those things we come to expect of a $9.99 purchase on Steam."
So because it has trigger points or in other words A mechanic you immediately categorize it into a standard game? With that kind of logic you could even say a movie is a game. Oo
A step beyond that is Interactive Fiction, which is how I label Dear Esther and the similar, more successful games I compared it to (Gravity Bone, The Stanley Parable; not Call of Duty).
Glad you guys got something out of it and enjoyed your time with the game. I think my issues with the design (including the level design) is pretty well represented in the review.
"I think my issues with the design (including the level design) is pretty well represented in the review."
You haven't. The parts where you simply found dead ends far from main route, I've found points of interests like some symbolizing objects, allusions and even hidden noises/dialogs. By the way, some objects are changing in each play-through.
TrollFace, the game.
Oh it looks very good in places, the cave is the highlight and possibly worth the price of admission alone.
However...
The music is piecemeal, stylistically narrow and disconnected from the visuals.
The "experience" tasks you with exploring an island, an island that happens to be no more than a narrow corridor with an odd dead end. Don't even think of challenging the invisible walls, follow the corridor.
You are left with a stream of consciousness stretched out over 4 chapters, nothing connected, no narrative, no story. When they ran out of ideas they started writing on the walls. Of course they couldn't be bothered writing anything original so they just copy/pasted some Bible verses.
There is only the surface, and the surface is you holding the W key down with your middle finger for 70 minutes.
Okay I should've used 4 words:
W key, the game.