Adventure Gamers - Forums
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
Post Marker Legend:
-
New posts -
No new posts
Currently online
Spontaneous CPT of Strangeland
Bon:
Or, to put it another way, even though the message of the story is that it would have been much healthier for the protagonist to stop trying to fight the cancer, in order to reach that point of acceptance, he had to keep fighting not cancer, but his inner demons (lies and denial).
I like this. Is it ever explicitly stated that the Stranger is fighting the cancer itself? I never thought so. The darkness never meant cancer to me; the darkness was one of three things, or any combination of them: His own inner demons, the demons of his beloved, or the shared demons that were born out of their relationship. Read this way, the cancer could just as well be allegorical—a mental or ‘spiritual’ illness, not necessarily a physical sickness.
DCast:
Same goes for defeatist attitude - as Stranger, you get to die many many times, and in many many ways, and in some cases he says something along the lines of “I’m done with it” to paraphrase it. It’s just that you get stuck in a loop of consistent resurrection, so you have no choice but to come back, but if that wasn’t the case - there were plenty of moments Stranger attempted to take himself out of the situation. As a matter of fact, the whole game is a battle with that defeatist attitude, and he loses in more cases than he wins.
Bon:
Honestly, I don’t remember any moment when the Stranger wanted to take himself out of the situation (if you mean suicide), nor that he ever said anything along such lines. He did say something along the lines of: “Ouch, that hurt!”, but I don’t remember him talking about giving up. Perhaps I’m wrong, though.
To Bon’s point, I actually tried to kill myself several times while playing the game. Jumping off of precipices, hanging myself, stabbing myself with the poisoned dagger. The Stranger doesn’t let you do any of this. He says something to the effect of ‘Maybe it’s *a* way out, but it’s not the *right* way out.’
He *does* lose more than he wins, if you consider every reincarnation from every ‘death’ you experience a loss. But these are not intentional losses—this is a death in battle, where the battle was engaged for the purpose of *winning*. You just happened to make a mistake and lose. When you do try to lose intentionally (as the player, not as the Stranger), the Stranger does not want to and does not let you.
At DCast: The Starfish puzzle worked well as a piece of storytelling, but it wasn’t a puzzle, so I was surprised to hear one of the game devs mention it as his favorite puzzle.
Dcast:
Resignation also have negative connotations for me. You usually resign to something when you no longer willing to (or simply can’t) fight it. It’s a passive reaction to something you underestimated. Acceptance on the other hand - that has a positive meaning. Accept something can be an active choice, and a powerful one at that (versus resign to something). I can 100% confirm my Stranger didn’t resign to anything.
Great distinction. I had trouble at the end, trying to figure out what the game meant by ‘resign’ because sometimes it is seen as a noble act, as the graceful and mature thing to do. But yes, I think acceptance is a much better word for the act of reconciliation with something that you struggle with, where even though the object/concept/person you are struggling with might be harmful or make you feel bad, a prolonged struggle will only be worse for you, so just accept it and move on. I think it’s called pragmatism—a word that contains the exact moral dichotomous distinction which you made between resignation and acceptance.
Player, purveyor, and propagator of smart toys and games for all ages.
Facebook.com/weplayfaves
IG @weplayfaves
@BB - Well, in the annotations and comments the cancer is a real thing. Are you saying that it is ALSO metaphorical in the world of a Stranger?
Ah, man. If I have time - I will dig some of the quotes out - where the Stranger looks on a way out as a relief, but if I won’t be able to (because, frankly - it’ll take a whole other replaying), I’m just going to agree to disagree - those are personal interpretations after all, and I remember him being open to the thoughts of ending it all. It’s the word defeatist that actually doesn’t fit anywhere in game. I wouldn’t use it describing someone who’s dealing with a huge personal trauma even if this person was losing the battle. I’d reserve it for everyday life when people are just easily defeated by general obstacles.
Sure he doesn’t let you lose - but how much of a game there will if there wasn’t this constant cycle? He very much lets you make a choice at the very end. But if there were all this deaths and we didn’t come back every time - there wouldn’t be much point to deaths or to a game, no?
I think it’s a good way to think that he “doesn’t want to or let you” lose overall, but considering that we started as a man on a brink of…well, everything, and we’re pulling him by the hair out of this darkness - to think that he suddenly “doesn’t want us” to lose is too optimistic in my opinion. He’s battling with “trying not to lose” the entire game. If he was coming from this place of reassurance out of sudden, I’d be really surprised he landed himself at this place to begin with.
Is it ever explicitly stated that the Stranger is fighting the cancer itself? I never thought so. The darkness never meant cancer to me; the darkness was one of three things, or any combination of them: His own inner demons, the demons of his beloved, or the shared demons that were born out of their relationship. Read this way, the cancer could just as well be allegorical—a mental or ‘spiritual’ illness, not necessarily a physical sickness.
True. It is never explicitly stated what the protagonist is fighting (what the Dark Thing represents). Just, I think whatever we choose to see, it must be something that is better accepted than fought. Because, such is the nature of the Dark Thing in this game.
He *does* lose more than he wins, if you consider every reincarnation from every ‘death’ you experience a loss. But these are not intentional losses—this is a death in battle, where the battle was engaged for the purpose of *winning*. You just happened to make a mistake and lose.
The Baron gets it!
It’s the word defeatist that actually doesn’t fit anywhere in game. I wouldn’t use it describing someone who’s dealing with a huge personal trauma even if this person was losing the battle. I’d reserve it for everyday life when people are just easily defeated by general obstacles.
Well, that’s what I’ve been saying. I said the protagonist never showed signs of a defeatist attitude.
Anyway, generally speaking, I agree to disagree. 
I, also, understand your point of view.
Another way to look at it is, by the way, that we are controlling the part of the Stranger’s psyche that wants to get better. At the same time, there’s a part of him that wants him to fail (hence “literal” falls). So, while the Stranger as a whole is not a warrior, the part of him that we are controlling (which is the part that, eventually, has the chance to change his destiny forever), is a warrior. I quite like this theory, I think I’m gonna go with it from now on 
As for resignation, I think it was meant “resign to acceptance”. Resign the fight so that you can accept the reality. Anyway, that’s a large part of the “happy” ending - accepting the Stranger’s shadow.
Well, that’s what I’ve been saying. I said the protagonist never showed signs of a defeatist attitude.
To explain here what I meant - “defeatist attitude” doesn’t really apply to people who are in the situation like the Stranger. It usually applies to people who are discouraged by little things in regular life. Like a car/bill/work problem has come up, and the person is like “Aw man, it’s terrible. I’m never gonna fixed it”. Defeatist is someone who surrenders easily. You don’t really used this word attached to someone who’s battling major demons - those are really tough battles. At least that’s the connotation I have with it in English language. I know I started using it myself after you offered it, but after awhile - I’m seeing it doesn’t really work when it comes to Stranger, so I reconsidered my own personal use of it. I can see where you coming from absolutely though
So, while the Stranger as a whole is not a warrior, the part of him that we are controlling (which is the part that, eventually, has the chance to change his destiny forever), is a warrior.
Unless you chose not to do it, for which there are two, arguably three ways. I totally went there, and made him as far from the warrior as possible on at least one occasion. It seems to be you specifically refer to the good ending of the game. The other two are the opposite of that “warrior” mentality, and third one (that one that I got) is really questionable, but I suppose you can see it warrior-ish, in a way.
Alright, I’m putting my brain through this one more time.
(someone told me I was a masochist in high school and I thought: yeah, nah. But after years of playing adventure games, I guess that person was right)
The annotation mode clears up a couple of things, at least about the author’s intent. All interpretations are valid as far as I’m concerned. In regards to “Strangeland”“, I prefer some of the stuff in this thread that isn’t brought up, or differs from the annotations. But, overal, it’s impressive, even it might be overly referential, balancing it’s heavy writing on some patchwork foundations that just barely support the weight.
I thought the choice to rely so heavy on Norse mythology was odd, in combination with leaning on Lacan in the psych and philosophy department. It fits the warrior theme, I suppose, but I’m not sure these two elements of the game really mesh well together. The myriad of allusions to different sources almost seem like a way to sneak in a couple of cross-references that do work, to tie some loose ends together.
I’d say that the game has this in common with some contemporary art: it is so referential that it requires a level of “art literacy”, which to me at least, occasionally seems anecdotal, leaning too much on the suggestion provided by the allusion, rather than what it actually adds to it’s own meaning/the analogy it wants to make.
Is it good or bad? Well, in some ways, it’s really good. It’s structurally consistent, it has a couple of interesting puzzles, a couple of weird ones, as well, something I tend to enjoy. There are moments that go beyond the detachement of endless implication, moments that are directly moving: I think walas47 mentioned the streammaid’s plight, I felt that too.
That brings me to an aspect of the game that hasn’t been discussed yet. I could go on about all the stuff we’ve talked about before, but this is getting out of hand already. 
Besides that, I’m a little surprised this very conspicuous element did not receive much attention yet.
The game has a rather pointed approach to women. There’s “The Woman”, obviously, there are the three women whose faces are hidden under grotesque masks that are supposed to cancel out their gender. One of them suggests this is because there can only be one woman in this story, or something like that. That doesn’t seem to hold true, tough: the streammaid and Teratoma are women, twisted and put on display. But they are treated differently from “The Woman”, for reasons..
Someone mentioned this game being autobiographical. I don’t know if (and to what extent) this is true, but for that reason, I’ll refrain from drawing conclusions. I do feel a need to inspect at least one of these characters more closely.
There did not appear to be any annotation for Teratoma. I’m not sure if other people didn’t dwell on this part of the game because it’s symbolism is uncomfortable, or I’m just the least blasé person in the room.. this part of the game was the most unnerving for me.
After using a dagger infused with another woman’s suffering, we cut open a minor gap in the circus tent, revealing a suggestive opening that we enter, to find.. a creature that the clown very clearly refers to as a woman. She’s “swaying” her legs, haplessly, while Clown encourages us to.. touch her tender lips? We then get a set of.. “mouths” (there is a name for this) and we.. have to insert meat, closing the mouths, until an eye becomes exposed, which we grab, to leave the creature behind. The protagonist says: “I don’t want anything more to do with it.”
That was the most disturbing scene of the game for me. It was unavoidable and very apparent, which to me suggests it should probably tie into story behind the Stranger’s experiences in the game.
I’m not sure if I’d suggest this game to anyone else. Not without fair warning, for sure, but in general.. I need more time to process the experience. For now, I’ll say it’s artistic, it works as an adventure game and it offers a lot to unpack. It also has some really disturbing imagery. That may be a merit to some, but I think I need to let it land before I’d be comfortable telling anyone else to try the game.
Hi!
Terribly busy lately, I’ll write something when I can.
Dcast, good catch seeing me in the credits
Currently translating Strangeland into Spanish. Wish me luck, or send me money to my Paypal haha
@VP - In a podcast with one of the devs, he says that game is autobiographical.
I was not able to decipher what the Valkyries meant by ‘there can be only one woman in this story’, so I chose not to read anything more into it. Perhaps it is part of the autobiography that we are not privy to. I don’t know—I haven’t played with the commentary on. Maybe it’s a romantic allusion to the Stranger only having eyes (tee hee) for his love—she is his one and only priority in this strange deadland. He cannot be distracted.
Yes, the way the Stranger uses many of the construct-characters in this game is callous. Equally so to men and women and monsters of indeterminable sex. But if we read it that it is okay for him to *kill* some of them, because they are pernicious mental constructs, symptoms of his despair and mental illness, then why shouldn’t it also be okay to use them for what help they can offer, and then abandon them? These aren’t people. They’re pieces of a broken mind that is trying to heal, and if some of them aren’t entirely malignant, none of them are components of a sound mind. They are his to do with as he wishes; they have no independent agency.
Maybe the fact that some of the monsters and characters are male and some are female is a reflection of the people in the real world who might have planted the seeds from which these mental constructs were born.
So yeah, I don’t think there’s a sexist element. And besides, the entire game takes place in a dream, and so, by definition, the Stranger is not ‘woke’.
By the way…where exactly *is* the physical Stranger while all this is taking place? At home in bed? A dark corner? An asylum? I mean, he’s wearing a strait jacket, but that could just be another thing he dreamed up for himself.
Player, purveyor, and propagator of smart toys and games for all ages.
Facebook.com/weplayfaves
IG @weplayfaves
So yeah, I don’t think there’s a sexist element. And besides, the entire game takes place in a dream, and so, by definition, the Stranger is not ‘woke’.
As far as Teratoma - at this point I did see it as a manifestation of some kind of illness, and since it’s his wife who he lost to it - it made sense for it to be female and grotesque, abhorrent even. It’s like seeing your loved one tortured by a terrible disease - it’s quite horrifying, and at some point many people going through a complete exhaustion/rejection period where they don’t want anything to do with the disease AND the person who has it (it will be all ridden with self-guilt later), but it’s this general feeling of resentment at everything and everyone that is very much in human nature - for the fact that you losing someone, for the fact that life got turned upside down, even sincere feeling of being sorry for oneself all wrapped in one. I kinda saw Teratoma as this manifestation of something that resembles and have traces of what we love yet something ugly that takes it away from us.
I like the way it was depicted, and I thought our actions were in the gross/cool category. I haven’t seen anything sexist in this game at all. I’d say the fact that we are privy to Streammaid suffering shows the opposite - we get to see her feelings and proverbially weep with her, that’s quite touching, even if a bit too late. Otherwise - there wouldn’t be any much consideration for her feelings at all, they simply wouldn’t matter, and here - they do.
The question that I have, however, is this - in the annotations and commentary, the writer says that he based this game on the grief from the loss of his grandparents. Now how did he end up with THIS story from the one he’s talking about in comments is a hell of a twisty path and a mystery to me. Writers gonna write, I suppose. And again, sublimation is ultimately a really good thing.
I didn’t call it sexist, or describe anything that implies as much.. it does use symbolism that is a) obviously gendered and b) in the case of Teratoma, obviously sexual.
Killing/death, in a dream/metaphor, would generally indicate an abrupt ending. It might imply aggression/destruction, but it can also symbolize stopping something that causes pain, to find peace.
This is also true for symbolism related to sexuality, though this obviously tends to be more specific to a persons particular organs, orientation, expectations, fears, desires, etc. The metaphors that build on these tendencies are not sexual fantasies or projections of internalized attitudes perse. I didn’t call them out as such. I get why you’d jump to conclusions with me, but it seems a bit reflexive in this case.
I’m not saying: take anything in this game as a literal act towards an actual person. I mostly just described a scene that featured prominently in the game. For whatever reason, it wasn’t discussed by anyone else, which seemed a bit odd. I think I described the scene fairly and accurately, however you want to interpret (or defend) it is up to you. I have a theory (that is probably not as dark as you might suspect, given your reactions), but I will refrain from sharing it because the game is said to be autobiographical.
@Baron_blubba, regarding the last question: I think “The Stranger” might be in a (literal) dream. I think the game heavily implies an extreme identity crisis (a near complete loss of reference point for the self), so it might just be an extensive metaphor for this experience. While we’re dealing with the crisis, our protagonist could just be going through the motions of his daily life, in an almost zombie-like state.
@ VP, I like that idea that this could all be taking place while the Stranger lives his daily life.
Regarding the sexist thing, I wasn’t calling you out, just sharing my own interpretation. I think that, with the exception of the Valkyries (who I really can’t parse) and the Woman, the genders of the monsters is coincidental, in the sense that I don’t think the gender is representative of anything. Might be wrong. Might be interesting to send a message to the developer and ask why the different monsters are each formed the way they are.
Maybe this is answered in the commentary track…I haven’t played with it turned on yet.
Player, purveyor, and propagator of smart toys and games for all ages.
Facebook.com/weplayfaves
IG @weplayfaves
No problem Baron, I didn’t think you were. (edit: or Dcast, for that matter)
I don’t think Teratoma is explained in the annotation mode, but you’re right, there might be something in the commentary track. Maybe I’ll check it out at some point, because I do wonder. But “Strangeland” was pretty heavy and I don’t have the energy right now.
“Maniac Mansion” might be the perfect antidote.
Oh, and the whole question/answer thing, reading it again, the question is great and I’m actually rather pleased with my second idea as well. 
Didn’t really think beyond the whole dream thing before I read your question, which is one of the things I really like about these CPTs.
No problem Baron, I didn’t think you were. (edit: or Dcast, for that matter)
No, just to clarify - I totally wasn’t.
It’s just when you mentioned “pointed approach to women” I can see how that’s the primary thing that can come along in interpreting it, and I picked up my agreement with BB’s point of view. I also found general gender approach coincidental, but in case of Teratoma - it made sense to me to make it female, as per my speculation above.
I’m a huge fan of horror genre, so I suppose that particular scene wasn’t as disturbing to me or didn’t left that much of a lasting impression all together. Just another macabre part of a macabre-ish game.
I’m also going to agree on BB’s opinion that some of the allusions and allegories I just skipped mentally (because the game is extra dense). Kudos to those who’d be able to get ALL of them or spend their time deciphering it, but one regular playthough and one with commentary and annotations (you can turn them both at the same time, since one is written and one is audio - they don’t conflict each other but make for a much longer playthrough) was definitely enough for me.
There’s really too much in this thread for me to reply to all, and perhaps it’s best to leave the game up to the interpretation of the player. I will hit a few things quickly. But before that, let me just say that it means a great deal to see you all thinking and talking about the game. I really enjoyed the varying interpretations, and of course it’s always helpful to get constructive criticism.
> Dialogues being mandatory
Actually, only a very small number of the dialogue topics are necessary to complete the game. You can bypass the Masquettes, Gershom, and Eitri entirely, the only thing you need from Fimbul Fambi is the word “doves” topic, the only thing you need from 83 is the work order topic, etc. But of course it’s hard to know which topics you need to ask, so perhaps it’s functionally the same as all being required.
> Teratoma
There is a commentary track. I had wanted a giant teratoma (unspecified beyond that), and Vic (the artist) gave it its specific depiction. I can’t say what inspirations he had there. It was not exactly what I had in mind, but I thought it was suitably horrific. I think it is fair to assume Vic intended some sexual connotations to it, but I’m not sure why.
> “Room for one woman”
They are teasing the Stranger for the narrowness of his vision, though of course, there’s also only one man in the story. The interpretations regarding a roving eye or whatnot weren’t my intent, but ultimately what matters is how it’s understood, not how it’s intended. To me, the game is about someone who is stuck in darkness, found a light of his life, lost her, and lost his way. The first half is fairly autobiographical, the second half relied on seeing what happened with my grandmother’s decline into dementia and my grandfather’s laying down his burden after her death.
The game is meant to overall be a subversion of the idea that the Stranger is rescuing her; he is the “Hansel in distress” (i.e., lost in the woods, bereft of family); she’s past saving and it was never in his power to save her.
> Gershom
It’s just a reference to the Biblical “Stranger in a strange land.” The dripping acid is a synthesis of the Tree of Knowledge and Loki’s punishment in the Lokasenna.
> Division of labor
I was curious about that commentary track when Vic recorded it. Primordia started with his premise of two stoner robots rescuing a girl robot who was carried off to a distant city (I think Vic had just played Machinarium!), and then we iterated it from there. Strangeland started with my premise of a man coping with the loss of the light of his life, and we iterated from there (for instance, with Vic changing the setting from a Gormenghastian decaying castle to a carnival, which entailed various downstream changes as well). I would say the division might be 55/45 one, 45/55 the other, but perhaps that makes all the difference. It’s true that much of the tonal difference of the games starts from the fact that one is a hero journey about robots, the other is an inward-looking journey of self-awareness.
(To be clear, 55/45 or 45/55 just refers to the division between me and Vic; overall, James, the third of our musketeers and the coder, had a hugely important role, too.)
> Dark Thing
The Stranger thinks it represents cancer early on, but it reveals itself more generally to be his melancholy. At least, that was the authorial intention. That’s why killing the crab doesn’t do away with it.
> Humor
I, too, thought there was a fair amount of it in the game!
> Are the devs at Wormwood Jewish as well?
Sort of. Vic and James are not, and depending on how you slice it, I am or am not.
> many people who can relate to the themes expressed here might not *want* to relate to them
I have seen that reaction from two players (in one instance, strongly expressed, in one instance, softly expressed), but the opposite reaction very forcefully expressed by a large number of players who have sent messages or posted reviews that it spoke directly to their own griefs and challenges in a way that they found moving and consoling. For me, it is not meant to be “unremittingly bleak”; just the opposite. But not everyone will make it to the ending. It’s not a happy ending, I don’t think, but perhaps a gentle one. Obviously, to the extent it makes unhappy people unhappier, that would be a colossal backfire.
> Starfish
Generally, when I’ve watched LPs, players have figured it out and haven’t just guessed. Once you realize what things upset the starfish, etc., you can pick the words relatively easily. It seems like there’s an initial “what am I trying to do here?” confusion, but once people realize they are trying to make it unhappy, it goes smoothly. That said, everyone experiences puzzles differently, some people find them logical, some illogical, some hard, some easy. Using the grapple to go down the well stumps a lot of players, whereas to me that seems as easy as pie.
> Division of labor
I was curious about that commentary track when Vic recorded it. Primordia started with his premise of two stoner robots rescuing a girl robot who was carried off to a distant city (I think Vic had just played Machinarium!), and then we iterated it from there. Strangeland started with my premise of a man coping with the loss of the light of his life, and we iterated from there (for instance, with Vic changing the setting from a Gormenghastian decaying castle to a carnival, which entailed various downstream changes as well). I would say the division might be 55/45 one, 45/55 the other, but perhaps that makes all the difference.
(To be clear, 55/45 or 45/55 just refers to the division between me and Vic; overall, James, the third of our musketeers and the coder, had a hugely important role, too.)
That was a very interesting tidbit - thank you! And I found James’ comments very interesting in the track. It’s pretty cool what he was able to do with AGS.
And it was also very interesting to hear how much of an influence Legend of Kyrandia had on the artist. I’m going to be honest - I didn’t really see it, but after he mentioned it - it made some creative sense.
> Humor
I, too, thought there was a fair amount of it in the game!
I suppose Bon saw this game much closer to the way you, as a writer, intended then. I definitely found a few things that made me smile internally, but overall dark theme wouldn’t let me call it full of humor, or anything. I suppose it’s quite fascinating to see how people react to something that you have created differently.
> many people who can relate to the themes expressed here might not *want* to relate to them
I have seen that reaction from two players (in one instance, strongly expressed, in one instance, softly expressed), but the opposite reaction very forcefully expressed by a large number of players who have sent messages or posted reviews that it spoke directly to their own griefs and challenges in a way that they found moving and consoling. For me, it is not meant to be “unremittingly bleak”; just the opposite. But not everyone will make it to the ending. It’s not a happy ending, I don’t think, but perhaps a gentle one. Obviously, to the extent it makes unhappy people unhappier, that would be a colossal backfire.
I really like that phrasing “gentle ending”. I was one of those that didn’t see any epic, transformative, overhauling things in the ending, yes, even in the good one, so I think gentle is a good way to describe it. Although, I didn’t even get it at first. In a nature that is very similar to my true one - I died fighting . And I have to be honest - I think I had more enjoyment leading Stranger to the bad ones, because the good one is kind of an obvious goal for a player, so I was curious what else we could do in this situation.
Thank you for your reply! I’m hoping that the Fallen Gods game is coming along smoothly.
Yeah, ‘gentle ending’ stood out to me as well. Nicely put.
I’m really surprised that the Gershom reference had nothing to do with what I thought it did, because the connections seemed spot on to me. Cool coincidence.
And Wormwood, I’m backing everything you make no matter what, no need to keep endearing yourself to me with Gormenghast references. (No need to, but please do—I love those books like very few others.)
Player, purveyor, and propagator of smart toys and games for all ages.
Facebook.com/weplayfaves
IG @weplayfaves
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
