Hm, good to finally know why I hated poetry/literary analysis in high school and the insistence that there was one and only one correct meaning.

@hellkrai

8 ай бұрын

In a way there SORT of IS? but yeah too many people out too much stock In the idea of one meaning, and ultimately that the one they have on it is the right one.

@Kaizomusicofficial

8 ай бұрын

I’m currently in high school, and All my poetry classes promote the idea of multiple meanings and finding your own out of a work. It’s really great.

@ShyDigi

8 ай бұрын

Yeah no, literary analysis in terms of for example *novels* often *do* have one meaning intended by the author. You *can* however make your own meaning. This does not mean that its *wrong* that theres only one meaning. Think the difference between canon and fanon

@josephmatthews7698

8 ай бұрын

Dude what classes did you take? Every analysis class I've ever taken was about the audience being able to draw their own analysis regardless of the authors intention. In fact I had a lot of fun trying to connect the weirdest possible interpretation to the analysis like Frankenstein being about sleep paralysis and being forced to eat a dinner that tastes awful to look polite.

@josephmatthews7698

8 ай бұрын

I can't even imagine such a class where you sit around trying to divine an authors intention especially when the authors reasons for writing an entire novel is as nebulous and ever changing as our own interpretation. You'd have to go line by line and trying to decide why they used this word instead of that word. An exercise in futility. I've never met anyone in the literary community that doesn't ascribe at least somewhat to 'death of the author.' Most even saying an audiences interpretation is more valid than any authors intent because they just wrote some words but you took those words and let them shape your life. So in the case of real world action, your interpretation has a big influence.

Its certainly an interesting game because its almost... paradoxical in its nature. It says "a videogame cant tell you who I am, just because I made it doesnt mean you know me" but in doing so it kind of tries to say "this is who I am" also through a videogame...

@bugjams

8 ай бұрын

I don't think it's paradoxical as you may think. A person could make a video game that's just them pouring their heart out and telling you all about their life. You _still_ don't know that person, though. Not really. Does the act of saying "you don't know me" imply what there is to know? I don't necessarily think so, because people can be so many things.

@lilyofluck371

7 ай бұрын

​@@bugjamsbut you do know something about them, that they're the kind of person to say, "you don't know me," and that's not nothing.

@stjeep

7 ай бұрын

​@@lilyofluck371if all you know about someone is that they told you you dont know them, then you dont know them. lol

@ExpertContrarian

7 ай бұрын

@@lilyofluck371 sounds to me like you’re being extremely literal and an ass arguing semantics. You don’t know me is a short version of you don’t know everything about me. If someone was in front of you and said this, would you respond with, “actually I do know you” and list basic observable facts like their skin tone or height? Knowing a few things about a person does not mean you know them.

@theresnothinghere1745

6 ай бұрын

@@ExpertContrarian No he has a point. Not everyone will answer "You don't know me" to a stranger. As one of the most basic things it tells you they know some modern english, if its said in an accent it can also hint at possible history from growing up. It doesn't tell you anywhere near enough to know them, but it doesnt tell you nothing.

As someone who writes and has read a lot of books, the part about interpreting intent rings super true. It’s why so much of art criticism makes me so angry. “Oh he used a lot of black paint during this period, that must mean he was depressed.” No, it means that what he was painting and his vision required black paint. Some of my most accurate depictions of breakdowns and panic attacks that I’ve written were written during times that I finally felt happy and mentally stable. Being in a good place meant I felt safe enough to depict a panic attack without worry I would trigger one in myself. I still drew from my life, but only once I was out of the woods, so to speak. The best horror content I’ve written was during a time when my nightmares finally stopped and the fear my words invoked could no longer haunt me. Saying these things about art as if it’s a direct parallel does a disservice to both the person who created it and the one doing the so-called “analysis”. That’s arrogant speculation, and I really appreciate you calling it out. Sometimes we create things just because we have an idea in the back of our minds. Sometimes it’s a way to vent frustration or trauma. And, hell, sometimes it IS a way to express our current state of mind. But not always. The world is full of possibilities. Don’t trap yourself in only one.

@ASpooneyBard

7 ай бұрын

I saw a short documentary about Eli Roth probably a decade ago. He's the writer/director of Cabin Fever, Hostel, and Green Inferno, among other movies that are mostly disturbing horror. It mentioned that some people assume that he must be a creepy weirdo or that he must have had a traumatic childhood or something to bring out that kind of depraved imagination, but no. He's a normal down to earth guy who has fun on set the whole time they're filming. He also had a perfect, idyllic childhood with two supportive parents in a quiet suburb. He just enjoys making that kind of movie. There's no greater meaning. A lot of people (especially pretentious critics) have this weird obsession now with this idea that all art is an expression of our inner selves, or whatever, but that's not always true. Sometimes an artist just wants to explore an idea that they had, or they just want to have some fun writing a story. Just because you understand someone's art doesn't mean that you understand the artist. Then again, it's even a little arrogant to assume that you even understand the art in the first place.

I started writing a video essay about this game and it ended up being a multimedia experience that projects two videos to two projectors and I sit there and constantly pause the video to criticize it until, at one point after I pause it, the video unpauses itself and yells at me for constantly pausing it. And then me and the video have a conversation about consciousness and purpose. It really is impossible to just "write" about this game.

@bungiecrimes7247

6 ай бұрын

The only video you have is of a cat.... tf you waffling about?

@Eryph

6 ай бұрын

@@bungiecrimes7247 I wasn't gonna MAKE the video essay. That would be ridiculous. I was just writing it for funzies 😋

@EnvyOmicron

6 ай бұрын

That idea actually does sound pretty interesting though, I would love to see that video if it became a reality

beginner's guide was a real kick in the guts. the way it makes the player complicit in the narrator's transgression is shocking. absolutely floored me

The way you describe the games at the end, pitting Coda seeing the beauty in repetitive tasks against our narrator Davey's knowing of more things out there tickled my brain in a particular way, considering that the Beginner's Guide is the follow up to a game about a guy who presses buttons all day for a living being interrupted and sent on adventures by a narrator. Also did you know the youtuber DougDoug is Davey Wreden's brother? When I found that out I was like whoa that's crazy.

@Baiswith

8 ай бұрын

I'm not sure if that explains more about DougDoug or Davey... 🤔

@lawncrow

8 ай бұрын

Oooh, that explains why he just had the Stanley Parable creator on speed dial on that AI Peggle video

I feel like the beginner's guide seems very complicated and nuanced in the beginning, but once you've completed the game it all falls into place. The idea that you can take a random persons work, assume that the work is exactly what they wanted with zero context as to who that person is, why they created the work, why they stopped creating the work, and what limitations they ran into when developing the work, then correctly or meaningfully analyzing that work and extrapolating that analysis onto the person themselves is absolutely insane. This goes well beyond Death of the Author as a concept and turns it into Necromancy of the Author. I think this video does a great job of shining a light on the errors of modern day art criticism (especially as it pertains to the overabundance of online analysts and historical analysts.) I can't tell you how many times I was told in school, "the author meant..." or, "the author was trying to say...". This isn't an accurate method of analyzing or critiquing art of any type of genre. All you can do as someone who consumes someone else's work, is divine out your own meaning. Whether this meaning is what the author intended doesn't really matter, and that's the true beauty of art, that every person can make that art relevant to themselves and gain some sort of experience. I love the beginner's guide, but I had no idea so many people had such a tough time reading it. Though based on the state of online discourse, it really shouldn't have surprised me.

@fellamcgee

8 ай бұрын

I think at the end of the day, literary analysis tells you as much about the analyzer as the author, and that’s kinda what’s so fun about it: it becomes an exchange instead of the author talking at you, an interpretation is necessarily also a modification

@Zer0_Ph34r

8 ай бұрын

@@fellamcgee I'm not arguing against the idea that you can gleam meaning from a work, nor do I think that a work cannot or should not be analyzed. I just mean to say that any analysis done on a work must be understood to be done from the analyzer's perspective, rather than the authors. Saying, "From X thing in this game I thought of Y thing." is much different than saying, "The author's intent with X is Y" but far more people are prone to projecting on the author than not. In fact, most American schools teach this method of thought in English literature classes. Only the best teachers explain that the meaning you interpret are from your point of view, not the authors

@fellamcgee

7 ай бұрын

@@Zer0_Ph34r yeah i was agreeing with you, should've made that clearer

@RaptieFeathers

6 ай бұрын

These were the thoughts I had as well! Once you've finished it, you realized you just got taken advantage of by the kind of toxic fan who insists that they know more about something than the creator does, and that the creator is doing it "wrong". That and a whole lot of obsessiveness and issues with boundaries. I always thought that that was obvious, and I never even considered that it would be the kind of game that people try to deconstruct for deeper meaning. "The game is itself about deconstruction and such". It's like, no it isn't, and thinking that is ignoring the extremely problematic behavior that Davey did.

@lancesmith8298

2 ай бұрын

There comes a point where you, as a consumer of critical media analysis, begin to realize that a huge amount of people on the internet are phoning it in. The “it was all a coma dream” theory of media has simultaneously evolved, grown, and stagnated, like a memetic cancer cell. Trauma, late stage capitalism, neurodivergence, whatever is the alleged core of the work, you strip back all the words and end up with “this art made me feel an emotion that I project onto this other thing”, to varying results. The end result is a media market of people who are both thought influencers and who have a deep fear of being open about themselves. >And you’re different how, exactly? You’re a commentator on a KZread video trying to describe a phenomenon you dislike, and your diagnosis of the problem is awfully specific and relevant to you and your own perceived shortcomings as an individual. Because I’m painfully self-aware about it? >Like those guys are automata with nothing behind the eyes? Look I’m not gonna have navel-gazing therapy with myself right now, and I’m not gonna make a dollar off of it either.

So happy to see people are still analysing The Beginner's Guide. It's such an interesting piece, using the creator, player, narrator in ways only games can. Even though it probably sounds pretentious, this is one of those "games are art" releases, and I absolutely love it.

I feel the need to say that Coda isn't much of a name. I Google it, it's another way to say "queue". It may be the list of games that Davey just found. Was Coda a user name? A surname? I feel like The Beginners Guide is just art. It's not supposed to be a game, not supposed to be played like anything else. It's played like a strange song, played like a experimental animation or film. It's not supposed to be enjoyed, it's not entertainment, not supposed to be anyway. It's art for art, not for enjoyment or money or to easily express their feelings. I often look up lyrics meanings to "creepy" songs. Little Dark Age by MGMT, Hotel California by Eagles, Scarecrow in the garden by Chris Stapleton. Why does the river turn to blood, what was the Hotel, what even are they singing about in Little Dark Age? But it doesn't matter. The Eagles wanted a song that evokes the feelings of The Twilight Zone, and I'm guessing Chris wanted to do the same. I'm sure that Litlle Dark Age is just a Euphemism for depression. Sometimes we're so caught up in what something is supposed to actually mean that we bypass the work it's self.

@uniquename6925

8 ай бұрын

Coda is likely a shortened form of another name. Perhaps 'Dakota'.

@synkree

8 ай бұрын

reference to micheal kirkbride's C0DA.

@tbotalpha8133

8 ай бұрын

"Coda" is a literary term. It refers to the concluding part of a narrative, usually separate from the "real" ending. Like an epilogue, or a post-credits scene (if you want a more modern example). I'm not sure why the artist character in the game is called Coda. But given the meta subtext of the work, it's not hard to imagine potential allusions.

@Crisjola

8 ай бұрын

If I remember the inteview/article correctly, Hotel California was written not to invoke the Twilight Zone per se, but that it just was how being in California _was_ when you came from somewhere else that might as well have been the complete middle of nowhere in the mid 70s. And as someone who grew up in Florida, and later moved to the north, nowheresville part of the state, it’s not that hard to look back on the times we’d drive down to Miami and that Very iconic state road, beach, and board walk, (so iconic that it too was used as a GTA setting a-la NYC and LA) and the memories of the neon lights and the people and the cars (or lack of) is _very_ surreal. Which I is absolutely the same vibe in Hotel California.

@AlienZizi

6 ай бұрын

i recently found out about codependents anonymous, shortened to CODA. immediately thought of this game and i think its funny since davey shows codependent behavior towards coda. i like that we can find this many "meanings" in a nickname

When I played, when it was new, I was concerned about Davey's friend Coda. I thought it was real. I didn't understand that there was a context beyond the game to be looking at and responded to the ending with concern for Davey. I emailed him with an attempt at empathy, and I don't know of any other piece of art that's made me feel something real like that before. I kind of understand the people that believed War of the Worlds.

I think it makes sense that a lot of discussion around the beginners guide become discussions around discussing the beginner's guide because it's just, there. But yeah when I played it my experience wasn't about art analysis, it was about how I felt more and more like an intruder in someone's work and life and as someone who tried to make art and failed to make anything I was satisfied with imagining someone picking apart my unfinished discarded works is dreadful. I think those self referential videos make sense, it's what someone who does game critique will get out of the game and it has value to them to talk about that. But it does indeed leave an important chunk of the game unexplored. Also I find it very interesting that I never see the game discussed about as an horror story, the discussion is always about what the game is about and not what it makes you feel. Which is extremely ironic.

The deconstructive subversion of the video essay genre. A tour de force, Hellkrai

I don't personally see any issue with video essayists seeing the game from their own perspective. Ultimately The Beginner's Guide is an emotional and introspective game with many lessons to teach and perspectives to have. It is a bit ironic when a reviewer reports on the game as being about reviewing, but ultimately I don't fault them for that. That was how they related to the game. I heavily related to Coda in this game and took very different meanings. To me it was a cautionary tale about putting my sense of self worth into something as fragile as games I had made. I'm so glad I played the game myself before watching any essays.

@hellkrai

7 ай бұрын

It's not that there's an "issue" with it (outside of leadhead) the issue is that it's the only way they've talked about the game while there is so much more that can be said about it

it's so weird hearing Leadhead's voice from before she came out I completely forgot that's what her voice sounded like at that time

Man every video on this game makes me more confused and I think I understand less the more I think about it.

@Scottthespy13

8 ай бұрын

My personal take is that people try too hard to understand things, place greater meanings, and they sometimes end up causing rifts or working themselves up about it. Not everything *has* to mean something. I'm not sure if that's a message the game is *trying* to send, but looking at everything people have written about it and the discussions, that's a conclusion I've come to.

@bungiecrimes7247

6 ай бұрын

​@@Scottthespy13you just found meaning in it tho...

@starfrog1999

6 ай бұрын

@@Scottthespy13By stating that there is no meaning, you have created meaning. Also, do you seriously think that someone spent hours and time and money creating something for no reason? That seems like a far more baffling idea.

@aukora129

2 ай бұрын

@@starfrog1999 "What if he just really liked making prisons?"

I wonder if anyone has drawn parallels from this game and the book Pale Fire, which is also about someone making rampant interpretations of someone else's art

Although I have my own thoughts and interpretation about this game, you've captured the essence of exactly why this is one of my favorite games here perfectly. I had a *visceral* reaction that led to me having to not just stop playing for a moment but get up and physically remove myself from the same room as the game while playing. There was no thought behind it. I just recoiled and went to go stand in the living room. And no one else who I have talked to who *wasn't an artist of some kind* has understood that moment, while all of the people who were immediately knew what moment I was talking about. I believe this game does have something to say about the nature of critique, but it mostly made me uncomfortable *as an artist* to know I had been misled and to have seen how *easy* it was for someone to have done so.

the homestuck of video games

The author is dead, on the floor… anyone gonna clean em up?

@Roadent1241

8 ай бұрын

Now I want a mod - Viscera Cleanup Mystery Solver

The beginners guide is my favorite piece of art... well that's all I can really say

I can't help but watching nearly every new video essay that comes out on The Beginner's Guide because it's, perhaps ironically, such a magnet for discussion and analysis. I still tend to see myself in Coda in a lot of ways, particularly when it comes to the sheer joy of creating and be experimental for my own sake, no matter what anyone might say or project.

I want to hear people talk about it as a game-the way its designed, how Wreden wrote Davey in such a way to manipulate the player, the way it makes the player feel increasingly icky, and maybe even talk about the issues the game actually raises.

To me it was more of an "death of the Critic " as if you want to critique something your chance to know the intent is like hitting the right Nail out of millions. Possible yes but also unlikely so saying that you have figured it out is saying something about you not the art itself. It also helps me out if I want to create but feel like I can't . But I lack the introspection to explain why it works that way for me.

The beginners guide feels like a game that doesn't exist, despite that it does. I can't say I have ever played it myself, I think I watched somebody play it at around the time it released, but maybe I should play it sometime considering what the experience firsthand may be like. It did stick with me though, I never really got why this game seemingly came to the market but then, never took off I guess? Like I don't know if that's even the right way to describe it, occasionally I just remember that it exists and it makes me feel weird, it's like a video game that's a ghost, it just haunts you with the fact that it's out there.

The Beginner's Guide was an interesting play that read to me as a story with three characters: Coda, the creator, Davey, the player, and the created levels themselves. Davey acknowledges that he found Coda's work when a lot of the content shared was already made and abandoned, and then goes on to proactively encourage Coda to do more. Davey is already creating a narrative in his mind about what Coda's intent is, and wants to explore further. Coda, on the other hand, always read as a beginner, exploring the tools available to him for level creation and design. The game opens with the modified CS:GO map. Anyone who has dabbled in game creation knows that this is where the curiosity starts: modifying what already exists as a stepping off point to learn. As such, you see the design of these levels evolve as Coda gets a better understanding of the level creation tools he has at hand, taking advantage of new and different tools, creating more complex scenes as he goes. He is truly nothing more than a beginner in game design playing around to see what he can pull off. In this way there is an evolution of level design as Coda's skills improve, but each level is nothing more than a snapshot of what Coda found interesting in the moment he was creating. Davey, finds this work and mistaken concludes "If Coda created these, it must be for some reason" leading him to start looking for meaning in disjointed vignettes. He also proactively encourages Coda to continue, which is where things begin to turn. What used to be a safe space to explore, almost like a journal of level creation, is now gaining some outside attention. It appears that Coda doesn't appreciate it and tries to push away Davey. Davey, blinded by his desire to find a cohesive narrative, fails to acknowledge the request for privacy, and continues his dive into Coda's work, missing red flags about his own behavior right up until the end. What I took away from my playthrough was that it's okay to create simply to explore what you can do without being worried about judgement from outside. Also, if you find a content creator who is getting their bearings, don't put too much on them too quickly, or you might hurt the creative outlet in a way you never imagined. To me, The Beginner's Guide is a tragedy of a creator pushed too hard by a fan that wanted the best for them, that only resulted in a loss of passion in the long run.

I remember making a lot of little source engine mods and games and people wanted to string them together to make them have meaning to have a narrative. Suddenly my work became theirs as they took things which had nothing to do with each other and tried to make them fit together like puzzle pieces. When I played the Beginner's Guide I felt like I was Coda in a lot of ways.

I love beginner’s guide! So glad to see more videos on it!

The Beginner's Guide in 2023? Colour me surprised! Interesting insight, thank you.

In one of Dan Olson's videos about Pink Floyd's the wall he talks about how you can't critique The Wall without revealing yourself, since it is such an earnest work of art. I think that is why professional critics cant help but latch on to the Davey reveal and his meddling. It must seem like a dark mirror of what they're trying to do as analyists. It is a shame as you stated because Coda's work is interesting in its own merits with or without Davey's lenses applied to it. The classroom experience where you begin as a student and then switch with the lecturer is a favorite of mine. Simply taking the position as an expert is so anxiety inducing for me and whenever I give presentations for work I always think of it. I cant remember what Davey was yammering on about, but I can remember the black hole behind the audience. It made me feel so much terror. I find it hugely relatable as an artist.

2 minutes in and bro thats the best intro ive ever heard on one of these videos thank u for spicing it up man that was cool af

thank you so much for talking about the beginners guide,, its my favourite game of all time

I've watched a few minutes in already but, if just for my sake, am going to put my thoughts down first, so as to have them down before they may change. I think analyzing The Beginner's Guide, in itself, puts you in a position in which you're doing a similar (SIMILAR, not the same) thing as Davey the narrator does. Picking a thing up, a thing with so much nuance, so much intentional room for interpretation, and deciding your thoughts on it, your interpretation, is how the game is. And that's not a bad thing! That's a great thing! The Beginner's Guide is a thing that is absolutely begging, daring you to pick it up and asking if you'll do to it what Davey did. And the thing is, whether you do or not, you're interacting with it as intended. Intepreting it, or just simply taking it as is, either way, it's what was intended. This was a thing designed not just to provoke thoughts but to consider if you even need to. To make you look at a thing and wonder, with our lack of context, if we even can. And this is just my interpretation, and it's just the same as every other one in this video, I think. When there's no answer given they're all about as right as each other in the end, because putting something in an empty space like this fills it no matter what it is. And now, to enjoy the video, and see another view :)

i stopped like halfway through the video to actually go play the game myself, cuz even though i have a habit of watching analysis videos on games i havent played (and it works out great for me most of the time) i felt like i was missing crucial information that i just needed to experience myself to really understand your essay. and i m glad i did it. this gives me a different perspective on analysing media and i m glad for it cuz i feel like it can make me a better creator too

@hellkrai

6 ай бұрын

🙏 I'm so glad to hear that, I think more videos like this should be made in tandem with the art rather than attempting to substitute it.

YES New Hellkrai video just dropped so exited!

I always enjoy your humility and analysis Hellk. You're cool beans.

This video is impossible to watch because I have no clue who is talking at any point. The Beginner’s Guide’s narrator? This video’s narrator? The narrator of a video that this video is critiquing? Also, who wrote the text on the screen at any time? Very confusing.

It's been a while since i've heard of Beginner's Guide, but an aspect of it thatt has always bugged me, though perhaps not inherently a bad thing about the game, I've recently encountered while watching my girlfriend play American Arcadia. American Arcadia is a very well made game from every aspect I can name, for what I feel it's trying to do as a game , though my view on the game shifted drastically at the ending. I feel it's a game well worth the money, so I will do my best to discuss without spoiling it. Focusing on its story, AA is very engaging and has characters and themes which I found very gripping and impactful for myself, even as I wasn't the one controlling the character, yet the resolution of the story in the ending left me bitter and left me view the story in hindsight as... shallow. A lot of the themes became at once contradictory with themselves, hypocritical to what I took from them prior, and so I personally hate its ending. My girlfriend is of the opinion however that due to the circumstances and world laid out in the game, the ending makes sense, that the resolution is realistic and that it was well written, at no detriment to what was done prior. I had a lot of trouble voicing my emotions and opinions on what bothered me so much about it, besides thinking that the writers invalidate all that they have built up and what I presumed as reasonable to take away from the story. I noticed that... no matter how I tried to look at it afterwards, I had no way of actually tackling the topic anymore but several days after I had got a new opinion on what that meant... that this was an intentional attempt at protection from interpretation. The game is not meta on the level of Beginner's Guide, but is still meta and incites discussion because of whether or not there even was a true intent behind it by the end. No matter how hard I tried to voice my opinion, I found myself stopping because I thought of a way in which it could be deflected, debunked or made invalid. It bothers me because I'm not trying to *impose* my thoughts on others or the work, but I'm trying to voice them, to find a meaningful stance for *myself* that I believe first of all. I think the Beginner's Guide has something similar going on, where there's constant pulling between a lot of factors, from intent, narrative, themes, what is actually said or shown, concepts outside the game like death of the author, how we have grown to think of and play games and many more. I feel like after a point, while I definitely recognize that an expression IS trying to come through somebody's work, as elements of- i dont know the correct name for them- irony, or abstraction or whatever are put into the work, expressing things in regards to that work becomes much harder. What do I seek to take from this game? Is what I saw in it what the author wanted, does it even matter? Do I have to weigh my interpretations against others? What am I seeking exactly? Should I even engage with this work seeking something, maybe I shouldn't try think of art as always meant to express something in the end? As the discussion gets more convoluted in this manner it both feels like it's *meant* for you to deconstruct it and play the role of Davy, to actually put the lid on the search for meaning once and for all, but at the same time the only course of actions is to let the work be there and you take what you will from it- while both of these equally feel like the wrong choice at times: I can live with my opinion but others may come impart knowledge and I will be compelled to fall in the rabbit hole again, and in the rabbit hole I must willingly stop because it's nearly impossible to find the real end. I don't expect clarity from art, or bluntness, but something in the way we approach art nowadays, and how expression continues to evolve and elevate itself to new layers of thought makes it sometimes just impossible to actually take... anything anymore from it, and I don't know whether that is the right interpretation for me to have yet. I sometimes feel like, if there are so many interpretations that are valid of one work, but if the work is constructed to clash various ideas, is there any point to bother with the art anymore? The Beginner's Guide and American Arcadia make me believe that there can exist such a pitfall where the construction of your work makes it imprevious to "meaningful" engagement. One game plays its story and themes against each other to where you are not sure if anything actually is being said, or whether or not its up to you to make your own meaning, or if this whole essay is the real intent behind the work; the goalpost always moves, even asking about if there should be a goalpost moves the goalpost. It looks like a self-serving nothing burger. Another is built in a manner where anything that is taken away cannot stand just on its own against other facets of the game and narrative, or where from any point taken away from the game you can value or devalue other points, where it constantly is possible to limit the worth of an interpretation because of vagueness, conflict, presuming, and just not having a framework that is constant, on top of the paragraph above, on top of how it equally matters and does not matter what you say and do regarding the work and others who interact with it, always having something that *could* be instead of what we discussed already. This holds at least for me, others are more intelligent I am certain, and I hope they can get even more out of it. There's always the argument that I did not understand the work... but who did? We're back at square one. If we never even left anywhere, are we doing the author's expressions a disservice by not getting it? To own up to my... complaints you can say, I will be blunt: I believe there is time when you can be directly expressive, where too much abstraction and layering hurts your art. I don't believe you should stop and reconsider, but go forward at least knowing that. I am not immune to anything I say, if I ever decide to create art, but I still believe I'll make art. Thus, I believe that if The Beginner's Guide had one real intent it is lost, not necessarily because it's hard to see, but because the discussions make it impossible to tell it apart from incorrect intents. Thus, I believe that in constructing art like American Arcadia did where you shield yourself from owning up to things you want to say, or playing that there is a higher meaning to your actions other than what others can take or what is blatant, you do not actually intend for your art to have said higher meaning. I can only hope the author is glad I am spinning the hamster wheel, and coming back to it from time to time, as like you've said, we can't know unless we asked- and even then, I just said that can't be trusted. Great video, I'll be sticking around.

@hellkrai

8 ай бұрын

I'll have to check out AA. Art often, especially video games have sort of multiple meanings. Think of a painting, even something as simple as a landscape. Within that landscape you have more than one subject that you as an artist have to consider, the placement of a tree can be anything from a central theme, a slight error, or even just thinking it would look nice there. I think oftentimes the issue is people stop at attempts to divine intent, which is fruitless rather than: At first appreciating the tree (appreciate in the fullest sense of the word, to also asses it as well as accepting it.), then see how that reflects on what the central theme is and how that elevates it. If it fails to elevate the tree and give it more life, then you can either decide it was just aesthetic or reconsider your thoughts on what the theme itself is. The Beginner's Guide is definitely a complex piece of art, but that's what makes it so cool.

@Berryloss

8 ай бұрын

Having just gotten through American Arcadia myself this caught my eye. It definitely is a really unique game and ultimately I liked the ending, but I used liked here in a bit of an abstract. I think a person's views on a lot of the game and of the ending especially probably changes a lot with how you see and where you're at in the real world. I don't mean that to have any negative implications at all, it's just a reality that our feelings about art often reflect our lived experiences. I do agree with a lot of your points about how hard it can be to really understand the meaning of a piece of art. A lot of this for me honestly comes down to some of the points brought up in this video and some of your own; the nature of online discourse about art and especially video games as art really affects how you see things. As a person I often have some pretty out there interpretations of art and have kind of just learned to accept that a lot of people would see me as "wrong" but like you said: who does understand the work? I think there's a pressure on the individual to draw meaning from things and to engage with media that people can feel and when we share those things since we often draw from so much personal experience in our interpretations it can get really personal. That to me means that these more abstractly messaged games or other media leads to division in interpretation and is genuinely stressful. Where I do disagree is that the intent is lost because of a lack of directness. Ultimately I see art on a personal level as an expression of concept from the artist. Not all art is meant to be interpreted as plenty of artists never display or share their art. Art can be solitary for personal reasons or made public. When made public I think questions like "what did the artist mean by this?" and the like lose a lot of meaning. There's a lot of media and memes about things going over people's head. Gundam is about big robots shooting each other, fallout is about big mutants shooting each other, the Stanley Parable is about an annoying guy talking at you and seeing you can mess with the narrator, and the Beginner's Guide is about a creepy stalker going through somebody else's computer. There's a lot to disagree with these interpretations but by disagreeing with them you imply that they are wrong. The only you can really be wrong about an interpretation is if there is a correct one. A lot of those examples are pretty on the nose and I know there's probably not a ton of value in them to most but it just brings me back to your question on who does understand the work? I don't think when we share our ideas, our interpretations, and the messages we got from a piece of art that we are really sharing anything about the art itself. I think we're sharing a little piece of ourselves, we are sharing our feelings. When a piece of art is displayed the artist loses control of it, the viewer gains control because the viewer is the only sure fact in their existence and their thoughts are the only thoughts they can truly know. If you were actually a creepy stalker who played this game and had snooped through people's computers regularly it probably would hit very differently compared to a person who had suffered the violation of people going through their stuff. If you've never been through that then it probably feels like a reach. If you've been creative and put things onthe internet and seen people be so wrong it feels satirical it probably hits different, and if you've made things but never shared them because of some barrier then there's more. I mostly just feel a lot of similar feelings sometimes when I see other people's ideas compared to the wild stuff I read and wonder if I'm just an idiot or if I'm just reading way too much into things. I don't really think it matters, which is a bit nihilistic, but ultimately I just really enjoy things that feel like they make me think. I like thinking, probably too much and I feel like that's really common with people who make these kinds of games, and make lengthy videos about them. Your comment made me think too, and I hope you have a good day and that nothing I said here comes across as upsetting or insulting.

@XplosivDS

8 ай бұрын

Damn, this thread is just incredible. I won't keep it long but I think all of your views are insanely interesting

@simontingle6739

8 ай бұрын

I loved reading this thread and thought I would share a couple of my own thoughts and opinions (spoilers for American Arcadia though I tried to be vague). I really liked the ending to American Arcadia because I think that it is super interesting to have an ending which stands in stark contrast to many of the themes in the game, and undermines some of the sacrifices made by the characters in that game. I like that because it feels more realistic in that often in the real world things that you think matter end up being unimportant, and things you fight for were either out of your reach the entire time, or not worth fighting for. It felt refreshing to me as in many pieces of media and art it can reflect either an overly positive or overly negative view on the world whereas I felt like the ending to AA did more of a nuanced mixture of the two. I enjoyed Berryloss' wondering if they were being too nihilistic and that none of this matters which in my view is a sentiment shared by the story told in AA. That there isn't as much importance in things as you may think, but there are still things you can gain, like new thoughts/perspectives or a somewhat happy ending. I also enjoyed reading the idea that "when we share our ideas, our interpretations, and the messages we got from a piece of art that we are really sharing anything about the art itself. I think we're sharing a little piece of ourselves, we are sharing our feelings." because I would relate that straight back to the beginner's guide and caution other people from taking someone else's thoughts on art (or anything else) and thinking they can glean intent/personality from them. In particular just like 2 people may disagree on what red looks like, it is impossible to truly know if you understand a piece of art in the same way as someone else does.

@uncledeath2246

8 ай бұрын

@@hellkrai I am definitely certain I have more to experience before I get a good idea of how I would like to see art. I also believe it'll be okay for me to have different interpretations for similar concepts depending on my mood, context and other factors. These were just some instances where I have more trouble than usual finding something I can be content with, but I'm sure I'll get there eventually, and what I said in the final paragraph might change as time goes on, which I am okay with. Hope you like AA, I still think it's a good game. What I said is definitely not set in stone; the themes in the game just made me believe the devs wanted to say something with them(political commentary), but the ending made me think they walked back on those parts which partly upset me, which I won't hold onto for dear life, but was my first impression on first watch-through.

5:45 i'd say so. I mean really given how ive found narrative to be that's one of the best tools storytellers have to make you question your own thoughts. Just telling you "youre wrong for thinking this" usually doesnt really reach people. But having someone who thinks a certain way, you identify with it, and then showing that character how their thought process was wrong, it more indirectly tells you something in an organic way that can more easily tell you something. Because its not just telling you what to think, its displaying the consequences of that way of thinking.

I'm really enjoying this essay so far. I'm 17 minutes in but didnt want to forget to come back and comment. I'm quite jealous of your way with words and how you structured this video, especially with such a topic

I had the game sitting in my library untouched for a while (years). And halfway through the video I decided, fck it and buckled down to play it. Took just over two hours. I already knew some things about it. I had seen a playthrough whne it came out, but I forogt most of it by now, though I still remembered how the narrator wasnt at all reliable. Still I wouldnt have needed to know this for the narrators conclusions to rub me the wrong way. Personally I do not like assuming things I cannot verify and especially not the way the narrator has done. I have also found him to be unreliable. Like at the point where he said Codas games would become more focused from here. And I did not share this sentiment at all. Theres also contradictions like the first cs level where he talks about the floating boxes reminding us that it was made by a person, but with the prison sequence where the walls started to move revealing stacks of furniture he said it was weird for weirdness sake. Which leads to another thing I dislike about the narrator. Sometimes I feel like he just cuts away too soon, before I was 'done' with a particular level. Needless to say I didnt like his perspective very much and so spend more time thinking about what the actual dev was intending. Something that I feel is lost on people. Coda might not exist, but all the environemnts of his games had to be made. And I apreciated the architecture. The lighting and the kind of design choices that were made. Something that was pointed out for example the missing floor in the space station level. This of course being done deliberately. And I also thought a lot about how we designers know how people will interact with what we make even if they dont have to. In the descend level with the blocks for example. You could just jump straight down. But we know the vast majority of players will jump from block to block slowly making their way down. I did too despite even in the moment fully knowing it, because I wanted to apreciate what the dev had made and contemplate its purpose. That is also the reason why I didnt press enter on the stair level and instead made my way up the slow way. I took that time to contemplate over what an actual dev making this actual game would try to communicate. Maybe it was just wanting you to try to sit and contemplate. How would you get a player to sit and contempalte for a short while without complaining of getting bored? And I thought about how games as a medium are in a unique position to get people to have these kind of experiences. And so I went through the levels trying to apreciate the architecture and design work that went into them more than anything and that was my main takeaway from the game, rather than the narrative. Frankly narrative wise I even like the backwards walking game more. And on that note something that really wowed me, not because it was technically difficult but just from a concept perspective was the train. You walk in through the door, walk through the train and leave through another door to exit at your destination. This is of course somewhat how real trains work, but the abstraction of the journey being reduced to a walk through the train, tickled my fancy in just the right way. I probably didnt adequatly explain my entire experience with The Beginners Guide. Probably left out quite a few things cause the brain can just remember a limited amount of things at a given time. Like hell I wanted to say something about the Machine because I found the model for it to be an interesting choice, since it looks just like a motor with belts, gears and pipes. But I almost forgot about it. Still I very much feel your video in that I can appreciate most people not being able to think about works of art outside of their own perspective. Probably at no fault of their own. But its still sometimes sad to see how these often self imposed limits can lead to missing some genuinly great things. Anyways thats my hat in the ring, thank you for reading my wall of text I guess.

This was an interesting video, but I definitely see what you mean about the game needing to be experienced by playing it rather than secondhand. For the most part I was able to follow what you were saying but only just. I think I'll have to check this game out. Also, at 14:52 Thanks for the heart attack.

Great video. Great game. My favorite game is the house cleaning game. There are many ways you can interpret it, my favorite being a comparison to an analogy that compares depression to shoveling snow from your driveway. This video also got me to play the game which was great as I only ever watched a playthrough.

I literally got this game about a week ago and it became one of my top 20. Maybe even 10. It’s amazing

"Authorial intent exists" isn't as cut and dry as this video portrays imo. Accidents DO happen. People can be influenced in subtle or obvious ways due to factors both within or out of their control. If you start getting really annoying about it, you could argue that intention is just a series of random patterns from a preset, throwing everything at the wall until something sticks. Why make decision A (which doesn't really affect anything) when, had things been a millimeter or two out of place, you could have also made decision B (which doesn't really affect anything)? Then there is of course the original crux of the problem, which is that you can't know what the author was thinking at the time of making their work. They probably won't remember perfectly either. They can also lie, of course. So, you have a completely unreliable account on several levels. At this point, I'm just gonna give up. The real meaning was the friends we made along the way. Also: Going by Ockham's Razor, somewhere within the layers of the meta lasagna, there's a reasonable discussion about the merits of videogame critique. I don't think the other essayists are necessarily wrong on that front. I may have also completely misinterpreted your point, in which case, forget everything I just said. Too much brain juice for me. No thanks. Bye-bye

@hellkrai

8 ай бұрын

It's the over focus on all of them either focusing on the act of essay, or weird fanfiction on the authors intent I draw issue with. "Authors have intent" isnt REALLY debatable. They do, some things will be outside of their intent sure, but they had the intent when making the art.

@juststatedtheobvious9633

8 ай бұрын

To me, it's what the title promises...a beginner's guide to beginnings. And possibilities. And missed opportunities. In a show, don't tell kind of way? And the real gameplay is what you do with your life after finishing the tutorial that is the entire game? But I only say this to reassure you that you didn't interfere with my finding my own meaning. I wouldn't even know this game existed without you and the KZread algorithm. Thank you.

@hello-xm5il

7 ай бұрын

I agree with this commenter's takaway more than I do with the video I just watched. Art is a product of intent, but it's more of a byproduct than a perfect reflection. Corners must always be cut, due to skill level, or bugetary restrictions, or time restraints, or any other number of reasons, and when the work is done, sometimes you, as the person who created the work, look at the work and wonder why you made it, or what it is about. Artists, authors, and all manner of creative folk can never show another person their original intent, because by the time they have brought it into the world it has undergone rigorous changes. The change of medium, from thoughts to something more physical, is a tremendous change on its own, disregarding any edits that must be made to the vision to make it more cohesive or such. Back in highschool I made an art piece. It was a glass jar, full of bleach, with a bouquet of flowers sticking out the top. About halfway through making the piece I realized I had to present this to the class and decided that it was about flourishing in less than ideal conditions, so the class wouldn't think I was suicidal, or weird. By the time it was finished, I had forgotten what it was supposed to be about, and I still do not remember. Does this mean that my intent was to make something about flourishing in less than ideal conditions, or was it the first, forever unknowable thing? Or is it both? The best answer is: it doesn't matter. And it might not exist in any tangible way. You need a computer to make digital art, but once the art is done it makes no difference whether it was done on an ipad, a pc, or a 3ds. You can look at a piece of art and try to figure out which of these it was made on, and decide it was made on a phone. In reality, the piece may have been sketched traditonally, photographed, drawn on a phone, then transferred to a pc for shading and background. Intent is a lot like that. It gets muddied as it's filtered through different limitations, and our own inconsistancy as human beings. Even more so if multiple people are working on one project.

@juststatedtheobvious9633

7 ай бұрын

@@hello-xm5il You tell the beginning of the story. Intent matters a lot more with mastery.

@hello-xm5il

7 ай бұрын

@@juststatedtheobvious9633 at what point do I become a master? I've been drawing seriously for nearly a decade now (and i'm not nearly quite as crap at it as when I started) and I still lose track of intent. The initial motivation doesn't seem to matter, as long as I have enough material already down to continue by the time i forget what a project was "about"

I am absolutely smitten with this videos style. Do more good thinks please. I am excited to see what you observe next!

I often struggle with creating these days and part of that is definitely that part of my brain that goes "does this have a point? is this good content? will the output be worth the energy you put in?" and other stifling shit like that. On one hand it's a necessary part of me, especially when it asks "is this worth the energy?" bc my carpal tunnel makes drawing more strenuous than it used to be and my ADHD limits my mental energy which then needs to be split up between both hobbies, everyday tasks and social interactions. It makes it feel like when I can finally muster up the will and physical ability to create something, it needs to count, yanno? So on the other hand, that pressure does nothing for my creative flow, not to mention my motivation. And then I end up making nothing and feel bad about that. so yeah your interpretation of the game rly spoke to me in that regard. great video, thank you for sharing :3

@hellkrai

6 ай бұрын

I'm glad to hear that and I hope despite everything holding you back, you find the energy in yourself to keep making things!!

it would be fine to just look at Coda games on their own but Davey being outed as the guy that keeps posting Lamps for no reason, besides his ego getting in the way, kinda opens the gate to the question: "What else did he edit?" "Is there a single work of CODA that is 100% intact?" "Why stop at just placing lamps? whats stops Dave from making a WHOLE new game and call it part of the Coda Experience™" I cannot willingly ignore this and go ahead and examine what Coda was trying to do cause i dont know what belongs to who to say "this is what i think he was trying to do"

I may just be interpreting your creation in a way that uniquely resonates with my experiences here, but this video really made me consider how I think about writing in my own head. I feel like if I want any kind of media i write to appeal to enough people I have to make sure my story follows certain conventions like a three-act structure with perfect pacing and grammar + sentence structure in a way that hijacks any ability for me to just create anything beyond just ideas. I feel like the more I learn about and understand media analysis and criticisms, the more they have to be catered to in my own work.

@hellkrai

6 ай бұрын

I believe the conventions exist as a tool. Think of it like a ruler. It doesn't need to be followed exactly, sometimes a line with some variance has more character. Sometimes the point of the work is that the line shouldn't be perfectly straight. Sometimes the point of the art requires the line to be perfectly straight. Consider the best use of your tools and the resulting artwork will be the best it can be.

NGL I expected you to follow up questioning what The Beginners Guide is with “a work of art”, since I believe it is a marker that cannot be escaped. If you consider something as art, it is. Warning, ramble ahead and I’m falling asleep so no editing, but amazing vid. I love making analogs between fields, so here’s one from physics: there are no perfect models, only useful ones. That is my personal answer to the irony poisoning death spiral, while you may be able to construct a framework to analyze a work through one hundred layers of irony, that framework will be almost useless. Irony as a concept is all about unifying disparate elements, so the more layers you operate under the more diffuse everything gets. And when I strip away all those layers of irony, the answer I find is that it is art, because I think it is.

This meta meta commentary on meta commentary is making my brain juices curdle.

Phenomenal video 100% Ur voice is weirdly soothing too

I can never hear enough about this game.

A *KZreadr with 1000-30000 subscribers about to show you the greatest audiovisual work you will see in a long time* moment

That song thing you mentioned with the limitation of the author hit hard. I experienced this to such a weirdly large extent when I first heard “Skynut” by The Gentle Men. I had no idea what this band was, the song just popped up on my Spotify recommended, and when I first heard it and tried to analyse it, it felt like a brutal anti-government almost hit piece, using irony and vulgar speech in a way that is very reminiscent of old Punk music. It felt like a song about how fucked up the fact that when we make a child, we involuntarily make another cog in the societal machine. I found this so fascinating that I look into the song more, and when watching the music video it becomes apparent that the lyrics are meant literally, the world it was written for is a fantasy world, so not ours, and the people behind it does comedy music, not hard hitting social critiques. And ever since that I ended up not liking the song as much 🫠

@arstotzkanplaguedoctor

8 ай бұрын

Silly!

@bugjams

8 ай бұрын

I mean, I can't imagine someone made a fictional piece of work - fantasy or otherwise ‐ about children being literal "cogs in a machine," and _didn't_ intend people to read into it at least somewhat. Even if the song is for a fantasy world, maybe then the fantasy world is the jab at the real world? Dunno enough about it to say, I suppose. Some people also tackle dark themes through comedy, absurdism, etc. Sorry the song was ruined for you. But at least it made you think about a neat concept, something you can now write/talk about on your own.

very beautiful video

This video was, oddly, more about why you're analysing it right in comparison to others than about analysing it, all the while using NOCLIP footage of these games you seem to care so much about and reducing them to mere b roll. Tbh I wish you could have just talked about Coda's games if that's what you're trying to highlight, because I liked them too, and it's not even satisfying to notice this contradiction with the video. If there's any merit I can give you, is that you made me remember Coda's games without Davey involved, and you reminded me how much I wished there was a version of the game without Davey; to have that folder full of executables and just tour around them myself. But above all, you really made me wish people would just shut up about this game lol. I've long abstained from talking about what the game meant for me because it's almost been done for sport at this point, with this game in particular. Not that I don't think mine is any less interesting, I just think the air's been way too polluted. Instead, here's what I thought of your video.

@hellkrai

8 ай бұрын

Well it was about how it's been talked about vs what I find interesting to talk about it. (Also you can disable the narrator in the options and it does modify how the games operate)

@Norrum

8 ай бұрын

@@hellkrai And you present this as a point of view that they "could never hope to understand". No, I think they understand that there might be value in interpreting Coda's games, but they're analysing The Beginner's Guide, which includes the Narrator, and they understand the irony, they don't wish to escape it, and neither do you. Even you yourself seem to care about what other people think about the game enough that you watched at least 3 videos altogether, so what the game can say about analysis and critique is obviously relevant and worthy of exploration, and it should be to you since you're analysing and criticizing THEM, using the game as background. That's why I don't buy that you "got lost" watching those reviews. In your video, you managed to be even more removed from the game than Ian talking about other people's reviews, by talking about other people's reviews including Ian talking about other people's reviews. You were worse than them in what you criticized them for. You can't just say you're not a pedant while saying your analysis would be the right way to do it, on the grounds that to ignore "Coda's intentions" and focus specifically on the Reviewer/Developer dynamic is apparently selfish and it defeats the purpose. Brother, the Reviewer/Developer dynamic is the main feature of The Beginner's Guide. Furthermore, the game gives us no reason to believe Coda's a real person, so "their" intentions would be entirely fictional, unless we believe these games were done by someone else with Coda's exact same expression and privacy pretences, and later repurposed to feature in a game about art critique, but that would have to be an assumption, and we'd have no reference for who that person could be. Occam's razor should tell us these games were done by Davey also, OR a known friend who consented to be put in the game, in which case their intentions would necessarily be different to Coda's as a character. So, ironically, you're even advocating for the revival of the author the wrong way. The author we know is real here is Davey Wreden the person, not Coda, and Davey made a game about analysis and critique. To discuss Coda's intentions would just be indulging in the game's lore, not a review of the game nor a consideration of the author's intent. For these reasons, you came off to me as a phoney. That's why I think you failed the skill check, or rather we could say you passed it with flying colours. And I say this with no contempt rawr I just think you'd care, and also I had to rewatch your video a couple times to figure out why I didn't like it lol.

great video. when it comes to art, all forms of it, it’s natural to consider the creator’s intent. that doesn’t define the art itself, though. even if the artist told you exactly what the intent was and what the meaning was, it doesn’t solely define the work. we all have lenses we perceive art through and all of the lenses are different. i’m reminded of david lynch and his refusal to explain his paintings, his films, etc. “When you finish anything, people want you to then talk about it. And I think it’s almost like a crime,” “A film or a painting - each thing is its own sort of language and it’s not right to try to say the same thing in words. The words are not there. The language of film, cinema, is the language it was put into, and the English language - it’s not going to translate. It’s going to lose.”

Neeerrrd In all seriousness i love it when people do analysis on things like this.

this is the best davey redden game made by coder made by davidly

@tuc-kaankaraayan

8 ай бұрын

Real.

i i dont even know actually i feel like this video is on the verge of going off on its own topics, but its sticking and staying to the game in some way

Yay! Such a good video!!!!

I believe my first encounter was the video from the author. He did a great job. Not sure what you're talking about with the essayists, lol.

Must say thank you for making this video, I was legitimately starting to think I was going insane or something as almost no one really talked (seriously) about the first massive red flag of the game (Davey's claim to learn all about another person via their creation only). I only just played this game a few days ago and have been thinking about it since, so much so that I was (and still am) very seriously creating a "video essay" on this game that.... Honestly, isn't total garbage or spends more time fellating/soothing one's self over the events of the game, all the while making claims that it "resists/impossible/etc" to "inteperet". Most of the videos feel way too much like an self congratulatory pleasure fest or something (for claiming it can't be critiqued or whatever) given how little it feels like they actually tried genuinely researching this, making the connections, really understanding what is underneath (I mean... the theme of the game is quite literally an abusive relationship yet I don't see anyone ACTUALLY talking about the dynamics or dangers... Or even how the creative process itself can take a toll on a creator in unexpected ways). I don't agree with everything you've said but I do agree with quite a bit and do appreciate the fact that you have actively put more effort in attempting to decode and understand this game for what it is rather than your personal projections. This, if I'm not mistaken, is currently the only video essay that I respect on this subject as you were the first one not to take any of the easy outs and actually, legitimately tried to get to the core... However, in my view, you still fall into the same trap as all the rest in that you end up focusing almost entirely on your personal perspective and what meaning *YOU* take from this... Still though, you did title the video about this game being "impossible" to talk about, which I vehemently disagree with, the catch is the only way to talk about this in any real depth is to touch upon some seriously dark topics such as abuse and manipulation (especially of the psycological variety). To be clear, I'm not saying I'm better than any of these other creators, I'm simplying saying that when it came to this particular topic... Not a single one of them genuinely understood what this game was and the proof is literally in their inability to, in any way whatsoever, adequately express any of the underlying themes, the various contradictions (eg: saying the 2nd "game"'s teleporter being broken due to bug but then proceeds to hang SO MUCH on that very bug, that was not intented to begin with), the multitude of red flags, and how there seems to be an underlying romantic element that has an incredible amount of parsing through (eg: why the female elements appear when they do in spite of both characters supposedly being male, and the various possibilities, the intense attachment, the begging at the end, etc), and more. I've only just started a very rough draft for my thoughts and the various things I've noticed (especially the really subtle things that give very strong clues about Davey's actual nature if one knows what to look for) and I already have 3,500 words on the various elements and their various connections. One of the most incredible things about this game is how the Davey (the actual dev, not the character) literally showed people how to stop people like Davey from taking advantage of themselves or others. The best part is how all of warning signs/red flags are actually direct from Davey's (the character) own mouth. The fact that most are extremely subtle, but noticable, is just nothing short of incredible. I also have much more to say on the subject. No clue when I'll have a video myself (as I believe all of these elements are very important in order to understand and get at the actual underlying messages.... and yes, there is more than one, a few actually... Some from "Coda" via his games, some via Davey (the character) and how he manipulates the situation, and from Davey (the Dev) with how this is put together). To be honest, the only truly difficult thing I find about this is trying to figure out what exactly did Davey (the character) change in Coda's games, as some of the changes are obvious and upfront (maze skipping), but some changes are completely hidden (cleaning house section)... Were the female references and figures Coda's actual work.... Or were they altered into those via Davey? If Davey altered them... Then why? Could it possible that this was a relationship gone sour over time (the prison section *could* suggest a connection to coda if done by coda (eg woman being representative of either coda or davey... or neither and mean nothing), but if done by davey, then it only furthers fuels his own obsession. This is only but an example of just how deeply I'm trying to objectively look at the story being presented from not one, not two, not three, but four different perspectives. First being Coda and their "games", Second being Davey and their constructed (and manipulative) narrative, the third being that of the Developer, and the last being of the player (in this case, myself). Basically goes like "What was Coda's motivation/reason/concept/thoughts behind a particular 'game', and was it actually supposed to mean something or was it just a random experiment with a random concept?", then "What is important to Davey, why are they ignoring x, y, and z but projecting this onto that... Why? Why did they feel the need to construct the narrative in they way that they did as it shows obvious intent and premeditation given just how much is obfuscated by Davey (the character)", then "Why did Davey (The Dev) create this game in the way that he did? What messages was he trying to say with coda? What about Davey (the character)? Are all three saying the same thing from different angles, or do they each have their own unique messages?", and finally things like "What did I feel, why? Is there something I feel that others might actually find useful, such as point out both obvious and subtle red flags to be wary of? Do I have any perspective to offer that could ADD value to *Davey's* (the dev's) message, or am I too stuck in own head and perspective that I can't separate them?". I have so many questions about this from many different angles and I believe there something much deeper here than what anyone has said so far as so many things in this game feel so layered (some obvious, some subtle, but some extremely subtle). Most of these questions are likely dead ends, misdirections, subversions placed by davey (the character), but there's a few subtle things I've noticed that I've yet to see anyone touch on, but idk if that is becuase it's thought to be insignifigant or if most just don't realize (or see/notice) the subtle connections which is entirely possible given just how Davey manipulates the narrative as well as your emotion and attention (classic misdirection). Many are likely to think I'm projecting myself into all of this, except I never fell for davey's (the character's) trickery because I managed to recognize the red flags early on (there are actually a LOT, many are subtle and require thinking about what Davey is actively doing vs what he is saying to you, for easy example, think about the cleaning and how Davey (the character) "finishes" that level... That was never meant to be finished, their words vs their actions, they mismatch more than one might think). edit: format edits, hopefully slightly easier read for those curious. I'd condense this more if I could, but I don't feel like I could (at this time) while still providing adequate enough reasons for some of my questions and thoughts to make some logical sense as to why I'm thinking those things.

@hellkrai

3 ай бұрын

I find this comment quite amusing because you end up noticing the same holes that are quite easy to fall in while trying to provide a fresh perspective. The purpose of this video was not to provide my views exactly. Nor was it to explain the thing. It's "The Beginner's Guide" to "The Beginner's Guide". It's stated purpose was to point out an obvious trap so that going forward the way we can talk about the art doesn't quite fall into as easily again. To me the whole point of the video and actually a handful of my videos is to open up the conversation that feels like it was hard shut for little good reason. But also to do so in a way that doesn't imply that I'm better than others for it.

@squall7734

3 ай бұрын

​@@hellkrai My apologies if my comment made you feel like I was trying to say you were explain your view or the thing, as I recognized this video was not intended to be or do either of those things. I actually like your video because you aren't focused on the "Meta", you had actually pointed out one (of several) huge red flag which is something almost no one has done (as far as I'm aware) in their video essay.... I mean... Honestly, that's actually how i ended up coming across your video, I was trying to find one that actually touched upon the objective things I noticed (such as the first red flag, the idea of getting to know a creator solely by their works alone), especially in a MEANINGFUL way, which you did by so beautifully highlighting the natural separation that exists between a creator and their creations. Just because you make something does not mean that its about yourself, rather at best, it is usually a concept that a developer is toying, maybe trying to understand or even warn people of certain dangers (like this game) Yes, and I love your video for that (especially loved the "The Death of the Author" information as I didn't know that before). I would also absolutely love to just slam these doors wide open because there is so much I see here that really should be discussed. I really appreciate this video of yours, especially given that it's the first video that I came across that felt like you, yourself, were extremely dissatisfied with how any conversation around the game focused largely on the fallacies of the "meta" and ultimately self-indulgent as am I. We see something more important and meaningful underneath (whether those things are the same, currently unknown). Also, didn't get the feeling you were trying to imply anything (and neither am I). I don't feel I'm better at anything than anyone else (actually struggle with self esteem and confidence issues, as well as being on the autistic spectrum (Asperger to be specific), I just feel like most videos are just falling into that trap over and over and over again, getting stuck on what the game meant to them rather than what the game itself is ACTUALLY trying to say, which is what your video was actually trying to get at (and why I really like it). I would like to break down each level and figure out what exactly Davey changed and what he didn't, to try and understand Coda's actual intent provided there was one. For example, the CS level... To me, that literally does not say anything about Coda in any way shape or form. The completely random nature of where and how these boxes are placed and the "glitch" spot don't suggest any kind of meaning, rather they actually suggest someone's first time opening the Source Engine and playing around with it, trying to learn what it can and can't do, these kinds of things... I genuinely believe the CS level has NO meaning whatsoever when it comes to Coda, however, if we look at Davey.... Suddenly, there is meaning, meaning that Davey himself (the character) was projecting onto the "game" and then attempting to tell us that is what Coda intended (I didn't feel like there was anything there). I mean... Why have boxes all over the place stacked randomly, or suspended in midair with no support, or even nestled into each other similar to a russian nesting doll. This doesn't say "meaning", but rather "experimentation with tools and bounds, learning about the related activity" kind of thing. The second "game" teleporter (you touched upon this, probably where I have a minor disagreement)... Davey freely admits that the levitation was a bug, but then proceeds to immediately *tell* you (not ponder, not suggest, *TELLS* you) that what he says Coda intended... My question is "How can that be the case, if the thing you're basing on is literately unintentional and is actually a bug?" It literally doesn't make sense to me, so the question is if the bug is intentional or accidental by Coda... I'd argue that it is accidental and the only reason they didn't fix it was because the "game" was finished (as far as coda was concerned, again, this "game" just feels like another experimental level rather than anything with any deeper meaning except for what Davey projects both onto Coda's work and us, the player). That isn't to say there is no meaning, but rather if there is one, it is likely more related with experimenting with concepts of what kind of games Coda actually wants to make. There's a massive difference between what you *think* you would like to do and what you discover you *actually* like to do that relates to Coda and Davey. Coda seems interested in making FPS style games at first, but quickly switches (thinks vs actual). Davey desires meaning and attention and implies that Coda was someone who created meaning with everything they did while refusing to just take them as they are and realize that these games may not have been for him for which, they were not (thinks vs actual). In other words, just because you think you'd like to make FPS games, you may discover that you actually prefer trying to create narrative, abstract games (to use Coda as an example, I mean, they started with a CS level, then the 2nd "game" literally has you having a gun, but everything past this "game" is more abstract puzzle like with environmental story telling). Another way to put is that may be more relatable to anyone who reads this, just because you think you'd like to be ripped does not necessarily mean that you would actually like/enjoy it due to the work, attention, time, and effort it takes to not only achieve it, but to actually maintain it. Yet another way is you might think you like meat but later realize that you really only like beef or just chicken (narrow, extreme example, but should hopefully highlight the archetypal element I'm attempting to elucidate. The only true way to find out if one likes something or not is usually to try it (most common with music, games, food, and shows; but applies to pretty much everything). Apologies for the long winded nature, but these are just a fragment of my thoughts and approaches, all while avoiding the various pitfalls (... I hope 😅), it is hard to find and map the boundaries on something such as this, but I'm trying as I believe there is some truly valuable stuff that Davey (the dev) was genuinely trying to impart (something I think we all recognize, just struggle to figure out what those things are exactly). I'm all for the conversation and in my pursuit, I'm starting to think that either davey is a either a genius or has struggled with this concept for so long that there is more than we realize, OR the way things fall together has unintended bonus messages that Davey (the dev) may had not intended but are not any less valid (eg: the possibility of the relationship actually being a romantic one at one point, or is related to romance.... The "prison" games are a large part of this suspicion I have, but are supported elsewhere in subtle details, however, this would likely be an unintended effect/message from davey while abusive para-social relationships dynamic itself might be the intended alternative/secondary message with "Developers are not their games and games are not their developers" being the fundamental, primary one. We need to first identify all the fallacies, *then* account for them by offsetting them, for example: removing davey's (the character) projections, removing your own projections, remove the projection that every game has to mean something, but ALSO remove the projection that "X" environment = isolation (prison & tower)/ loneliness (mystical foggy floating place)/, and so on.

@squall7734

3 ай бұрын

... I typed too much so had to cut and paste, the below is the last of my previous comment 😅💀 Only by fully identifying each and every part individually, can we really start piecing things back together... This game may have only taken less than two hours to play... It may require someone to spend 20, 40, 60, or even more hours in fully dissecting the multitude of layers. I get the feeling this was something more than just a game, or even just a "passion project" to Davey (the dev), but rather I get the feeling that he was so personally affected by the (negative) events of him releasing The Stanely Parable (eg: the misunderstandings, bad reviews, people thinking he's frustrated or angry, etc) that this game is simultaneous a commentary on our society today (especially online), how quick and easily we (society) judge not by what we (society) can verify but rather just by what we (society) are told or what we (society) project rather than observe, the fact that we (society) often attempt to assign excessive meaning to places where it is not needed or does not belong/fit, to that how no matter what you (individually) do that nothing you create is truly meaningless even to yourself but that also does not change that the fact it has a meaning at all but changes the question to whether or not that meaning actually meaningful/important/ or is even valuable at all in the first place; and so on. One thing I can say for sure is that Davey (the dev) did not create a meaningless game, nor did he create a game with meaning. Davey (the creator) created a commentary, statement, and demonstrates those with a proof of concept that puts you directly in the path of Davey (the character), the commentary and statement manipulator... That is a stand-in for *us*, *we* are Davey (the character)... But *we* are also Coda and the player. Everything about this is centered around the player but not individually, as a collective whole simple because we chose to trust what Davey (the character) was telling us rather than questioning their intent (given how early the red flags start flying...)... I think I'm gonna end it here, I've already rambled far too long 😅. I guess in short, what I'm trying to say is that I really like and appreciate your video (although, I don't quite agree with everything, it's more observational differences eg: coda's bug being intentional simply because Coda didn't fix it... Even though it was literally the end of the "game" regardless, a very minor difference of opinion), enough so that I was actually willing to drop down into the comments to show my appreciation and share my thoughts with you (and your audience) as I feel you have a better handle on topic than most others I've seen regarding the subject at hand... I really could keep going, but I actually need to get these down on paper, organize, and construct an actual cohesive essay rather than just going off the top of my head😅. I hope this gives you some different things to think about (if you hadn't already noticed and thought about them). I'm glad that my comment amuses you (in a good way I hope lol), and hopefully I manage to elucidate in a way that was useful somehow. Thank you for taking the time to read and respond, I know I tend to go a little overboard walls of text, but i try repeating myself, I tend to reinforce my points from multiple angles and a way of "showing my work" so to speak, so it tends to be a little long at times unfortunately. ... I really need to figure out how to reign that in! 😅😅

thanks! in a way this video still was more about "the art of critique" and not so much the game but i'm curious to see if there'll be more people talking about the actual game instead of themselves. When i played it for the first time when i was younger i took it all more literal, i just thought wow davey was so mean nooo

@hellkrai

6 ай бұрын

There is a follow up video in the works, that does what I'm referring to. It's a lot like the section in the middle where I do actually talk about the game.

ahhh, your nuance sir, is muchly appreciated! I know it isn't much, but here, I think you have more than earned my sub with this. and I think this is the first of your videos I have ever watched. imo, your intent in making this video was quite likely most, if not all, of the reasons listed, sans the first few (perhaps).

@hellkrai

8 ай бұрын

That's when you're supposed to find some interview and believe that the actual intent was because I wanted to impress some girl.

destigmatize the term walking sim. embrace it - its valid

It almost feels like an unofficial prequel to The Stanley Parable, there is also that eerie game where your walking through a house that keeps changing, and not the doom wad, and that kinda reminds me of this game as well.

Hey, I'm making a video right now covering these kinds of games and I'm at a segment in it where I'm talking about this game and what how it made me feel. I'm not planning to go that in depth in the video I'm making as it would be far too long on top of everything else I'm mentioning. I was wondering if you would like to, in shorter words, come on and give your thoughts in a little summary, about how close to home The Beginner's Guide may have hit, or why you are so fond of it. A tribute if you will.

@hellkrai

3 ай бұрын

Sure, feel free to DM me on discord, same username.

I wonder why you say that the other essayists refuse to talk about the game itself. Is Davey the narrator not a part of the game?

@hellkrai

8 ай бұрын

The point is that they're all weirdly focused on themselves over the art, and all talk about the same thing when there's so much more that could be said about the game.

@sneeze4100

8 ай бұрын

Other critics and essayists do talk about the game, and Davey the narrator is part of it, but they eschew the actual games you played entirely in favour of discussing the Davey/Coda dynamic and what it means to them. They don't see the games, they see an artsy and poignant take down of their own works. The irony is self evident.

@9sven6

8 ай бұрын

@sneeze4100 I would argue splitting off the internal games from the Davey/Coda dynamic is also ignoring half (or even more then half) of the beginners guide. The games "coda" made, don't exist outside the context of the narator/coda dynamic. They were created by Davey with that dynamic in mind.

@hellkrai

8 ай бұрын

@@9sven6 Yeah but even in the example I gave when I split off from it I returned back to it to reinform what the game is about.

@sneeze4100

8 ай бұрын

@@9sven6 This rings to me like placing a restriction on your understanding arbitrarily based on an authorial intent you don't reasonably know. The analysis of both sides of this dichotomy, Davey's presentation of the games Coda made as a whole, and with Davey's presentation of them wholly separate, would undoubtedly result in a more holistic understanding of the narrative. Hellkrai is not saying that all other analysis is outright failure, only that people are shown this message that compels them to feel things, yet so rarely do people accept Coda without the influence of Davey, despite it likely being the best thing you can do in response. You can't unsee Coda's work, despite it being shown to you without his consent. You CAN take the reigns back from Davey, and do the best with what you have. Although these games don't exist outside of the narrative constructed by a real life person, they were written to occupy this vague space in-between reality and fiction. If they were made competently, which I believe they are, they stand on their own conceptually divorced from The Beginner's Guide. Were they made poorly, there would be nothing to understand but what Davey tells us. This is because interpreting art is not problematic, it's everything else our narrator pretends is interpretation and attempts to understand. Manipulation, assigning intent, forming a parasocial bond, etc. As such, I don't see a reason to box myself into thinking only about the relationship between these two when it is clearly all relevant.

A beginners guide video. Yippee

The impossibleist game you’ve NEVER played

You voice fits this game pretty well

6 months HRT... this'll be fun to look back at in a few years :p Did socially transition a lot earlier, but still

I've always felt some of the most interesting aspects of the Beginner's Guide are the things that narrator!Davey doesn't point out or downplays, perhaps because narrator!Davey doesn't have anything to say about them. Like, I may not definitively be able to say "Coda is trans and Davey refuses to acknowledge that fact" (though Davey the game creator did make a tumblr post implying queerness loudly), but I can say the phone booth scene feels a lot like someone talking to their past self after a big identity realization, and the islands game has a moment of Big Yonic Symbolism, and the only voice we hear in Coda's games is a crying woman, the choice to make the viewpoint character in Machine a 'ma'am', and none of this is ever mentioned. Or that there's some interesting tarot symbolism that runs through the whole game, starting with two "Devil Tower Star" messages in 'This Game is Connected to the Internet' and ending with 151617 in The Tower (itself named for a tarot card; in fact number 16). But there's so much focus on Davey and his flawed perspective that people are gunshy about trying to talk about things like that, for fear of being the same sort of asshole as Davey.

Ok this video was pretty amazing. I’ve always hated peoples idea of the death of the author like yeah obviously you can’t know or at least fully know what the author intent was unless he spells it out for you in a comprehensive way but that doesn’t mean that you can't see some of their intent in the art Like you said art is at its best when it is an reflection of the authors experiences and worldview, if we remove the author and his intent doesn't matter then we might as well just use ai art.

Roland Barthes' "Death of the Author" was so good! I can't wait for him to write "Death of the Critic".

I haven't seen many other video essay's on the Beginner's Guide, but I thought the game came out before the rise of Video Essayists on KZread. If the game does have a meta theme that is focusing on the external role of the player, wouldn't that role be more likely the Let's Player or the Video Game Reviewer. However, I am not saying its invalid to view the Beginner's Guide through the lens of a Video Essayist, and it shows the depth of the work that it can be understood through a lens that wasn't widespread at the time of release.

@hellkrai

8 ай бұрын

Video essayists have been around a good while. The most recent rise was the "hour long" video essayists. Errant Signal is one I appreciate that was making videos back then (that I watched)

@vand1

8 ай бұрын

@@hellkrai I’ll have to check out Errant Signal, but I wasn’t saying that they didn’t exist just that they weren’t in the broader zeitgeist of KZread at the time. Although I do associate rise of Lindsey Ellis in 2016 as the beginning of the rise of the Video Essayists.

How do you know the difference between the aspects of Coda's original game and Davey's changes to the game?

@hellkrai

8 ай бұрын

A lot of it depends on inferences, put the lamp post was something that "coda" pointed out specifically in the story.

If over analyzing art and putting meaning where there is none is the death of the author, then the beginners guide to me is like the super death of the author, going beyond interpretation of the artists work to take it into your own hands and physically alter it and change it into a bastardization of what the artist originally made. Imagine if a fan fic writer makes a story using pre-existing characters from one Fandom, and people start to treate the fan fic as thought it *was* canon to everything. That is what the beginners guide is to me

i'm sure you know, but just in case i wanted to be sure i interpreted it correctly, 6:38 the text is very difficult to read "does a weird thing (in) its (latter) half that is really hard to illustrate" is that right?

@hellkrai

7 ай бұрын

yup

Wait this is a Hellkrai video

Exactly what i was thinking years ago. ...with less words of course.

Always fun to see videos about this game. Doubly so when the person making it doesn’t pretend to have some mock-breakdown after coming to the “realization” that the game is hostile to the video they’re making.

@hellkrai

8 ай бұрын

GUH I need to rethink my whole career because a video game points out how I could really easily do a bad thing!!!!

"The memories you have and the role you were assigned are burdens you have to carry. It doesn't matter if they were real or not. That's never the point. ... There's no such thing in the world as absolute reality. Most of what they call real is actually fiction. What you think you see is only as real as your brain tells you it is. ... Listen, don't obsess over words so much. Find the meaning behind the words, then decide." - Solid Snake, Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty

oh are you KIDDING ME BRO I'M LITERALLY WORKING ON A VIDEO ESSAY ON THE CONCEPT OF THE DEATH OF THE AUTHOR RN AND THIS VIDEO JUST POPPED UP ON MY FOR YOU PAGE. Idk if i'm discouraged now or incouraged more ehyjfdkjfdkjsdkjhsdzbhiu what are the fricking odds

@hellkrai

8 ай бұрын

Do it! you wont!

Jacob's influence goes far

I don't see a problem with making one's interpretation of a piece of art exclusively about oneself the art is not the object it is the event that takes place between the self and the object, the author is dead because they aren't relevant to that event if the video essayist is gonna make it about themself, good for them, that's the event they experienced not necessarily responding to anything in the video just the half-baked thoughts that occured to me while watching

@hellkrai

7 ай бұрын

Yeah I don't necessarily disagree I just find it boring in some regards. Because then we're not really talking about new ways to look at the games we like. And then the others aspect is when they start to try to take the thing that is definitely about themselves and push it on to the creator. Gets mad weird

@SpousterFreak

7 ай бұрын

Can you make a video explaining the combating yiik?​@@hellkrai

if i make art, i don't want people to try and figure out who i am. i want people to enjoy it, to learn what i was teaching sure, but in their own way. paradoxically, it would be fine for people to learn what i wanted to teach by trying to know me, but not to seek out me as an end.

Funny thing is the story kind of falls apart if you know a thing or two about programming namely Coda would have to be beyond petty to program some of those things just to call out one person.

@juststatedtheobvious9633

8 ай бұрын

The human race has accomplished many great and beautiful things in the name of petty revenge.

./whispers: "it's latter, not ladder"

i liked this video

When next part?

Speaking of your point about nobody discussing Coda's games sans Davey's meddling, let's not forget that Coda doesn't exist and that these games were created by IRL Davey and the other people that worked on the game. I imagine they had an idea of what Coda's intent was for each game, but the artistry also exists in all of their intended juxtapositions. And not necessarily even just from the perspective of painting the narrator as a villain.

@hellkrai

7 ай бұрын

The games are shown to have their own meaning, which is misinterpreted by Davey they aren't not just "random things thrown together" it's kind of the whole point of the narrative?

This video made me realize why I never liked those "X explained!" videos. The mystery is often better than the truth.

I believe the pursuit of meaning in a work is an entirely selfish pursuit, not neceserally in a negative way. But you seek to find a meaning only you can see. The purely negative one is when one insists their interpretation is the only TRUTH and that disaagreing is BLIND. Going as far as creating cults of followers devoted to this one TRUTH they themselves created. You see this all the time, reviews, analysis, fandoms, philosophy, heck, we have multiple religions devoted to the same concept of one God, but are literally murdering one another and themselves because each one of them cant accept that they can have different interpretations of this one God etc.

@hellkrai

8 ай бұрын

Exactly 💯 I think sharing the meaning you get is important, but you shouldn't act as if it is THE meaning. I akin the aspect of "trying to understand the authors intent" to trying to understand what someone says in conversation. There's a disconnect where the artist isn't in front of you so they can't correct you. (This is why the ending of my video is a question to the artist) But it's similarly an expression of sorts.

@bungiecrimes7247

6 ай бұрын

What if my meaning is to fight for what I think is true?

🧐📝

Video essay about one of my favorite games of all time! It deserves more of these.

Trying to understand what's on the screen while listening to the 'LeadHead' bit was genuinely confusing

Where is next video 🙏

on a more serious note, the main thing that made this game be so stuck in my brain is the music