As you start playing through Portal, here’s a thread to post your thoughts, especially about the balance between storytelling and gameplay. Let’s assume that the “first part” refers to levels 1-14 or so, as things shift a bit after that point.
9 thoughts on “Thoughts on first part of Portal”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
We talked in class about how the beginnings of films will often show you how to consume the narrative. Beginnings usually introduce intrinsic norms (so that those norms can be used later), and they force us to recall extrinsic norms that are pertinent to this particular narrative. In general, they introduce implicit rules, rules that will guide our understanding of the film.
Portal is no different. The beginning of the game is designed to teach us, usually through a process of trail and error, sometimes explicitly, how to navigate the game narrative, where we can shoot portals and where we can’t, how to use the gun, how to crouch, how to jump, how to ‘fly’ by shooting portals under us and jumping from a height, how to press the door buttons, etc. Another set of ‘rules’ introduced through gameplay is the variety of threats posed to us. We learn pretty quickly after being shot by one of those sentries what they are capable of, we learn that we can sneak up behind them, we learn their searching range, we learn about the deadly green sludge, the glowing cannon balls, etc. Granted, these rules are used more interactively in the game medium in comparison with the film medium, but the idea is the same.
What struck me most about the narrative aspect of Portal, and of many video games for that matter, is the lack of depth the story can provide while still being narratively entertaining to it’s viewers. I believe this is because the main joy in playing Portal is derived from completing missions, solving puzzles and advancing further into the game rather than learning about the characters and the world the game portrays. With the added crutch of interactivity, the developers of Portal are given the freedom to pick and choose where they add narrative elements. Nothing is known about the controlled character, from why she’s being tested to her name. No opening cut-scene leads into the gameplay and no cut-scenes take place between challenges. Glados, the guide and seemingly omniscient narrator of the Portal universe, does not have to give a speech about where your character comes from and why you’re here, instead immediately becoming the funny, unreliable and somewhat suspicious guide throughout Portal. A film could not get away with providing no back-story or identity to it’s title characters. While films like SAW set up a framework similar to that of Portal, completing a puzzle in order to move onto another one, back-story on who is involved in these traps and why they are involved must be provided to keep the audience interested in the film (although, lately, not even this is saving the franchise). Although I am only through the first fourteen levels, and for all I know a giant cut-scene providing mounds and mounds of back-story is on it’s way, Portal (so far) seems to be a gamer’s game, using narrative as an added form of entertainment rather than a necessary part of the product.
Yeah I think a key factor is empathy. We have no choice but to empathize with the girl in Portal–we ARE the girl in Portal.
In order for a film to attain that level of empathetic response from the audience–which I doubt any film could do–it would have to use other methods drawing from character (e.g. backstory, identity) and situation (e.g. dilemmas, tribulations).
In our reading for this week, Bordwell talks about retardation in narrative structure and that a narrative text may be like a “spiral staircase which, littered with toys, dog leashes, and open umbrellas, impedes our progress (Bordwell 38).” Portal’s narrative operates very much in this manner. We are given almost no story depth as Andrew has said, yet, the puzzle solving serves as an integral part of the narrative and story. As we complete each techchamber’s puzzle, we get small snippets of Glados’ dialogue, feeding us little hints about the story. The desire for story depth motivates up to keep going through the gameplay. Something is clearly not right in this testing facility with a glitchy robot who lies, but we can only assume something is off and keep climbing the staircase, solving puzzles. The solving of puzzles functions as one of Portal’s complicating actions in its narrative.
For those of you interested in using a walkthrough:
http://www.portalwalkthroughs.com/
Even with a walkthrough you’ll end up super dizzy after level 18.
I think that the first part of Portal presents a lot of the ideas we read about in relation to schematas. It has been decided that the more conventional a show/movie/video game, the more passive you can be to just get a visceral experience out of it. Media out of the fixed box of a template makes the viewer/participant create new ideas and draw upon other knowledge to form assumptions.
We are so used to narrative video games having a story line and plot to follow that we become somewhat bamboozled (I love that word) when we have to think outside the box and start solving puzzles as opposed to kicking some evil ass, like I have been doing in Marvel Ultimate Alliance. I made the assumption when starting Portal that there would be a clear plot line and a story to boot, but there has really been no story besides the plot point of being tested by some computerized voice while completing tasks.
The inferences made when starting the game were totally debunked in the first few minutes of play, and therefore I had to start thinking outside of the template and start thinking along procedural lines as an active participant.
What is most interesting is that, to tell the truth, at first I was a bit bored and frustrated with the game. I didn’t like that there weren’t any other characters and that I was just doing puzzles by myself. I am so used to playing two player and character driven games that it seemed jarring to me. This proves that we tend to want something that will match a schema but will give us something new and refreshing. This was something completely new to me, but I learned to like the game as an unexpected new template.
With half a level left on level 19, I’m hoping there is more narrative to come. I relate to those who have mentioned that the game is engaging even though there is no heavy-handed narrative. But I still feel as if the game is designed amazingly intelligently and with a narrative in mind. There are little hints along the way, the caves with the red writing, the frequent references to cake, Glados’ quirky one-liners, “Don’t forget to bring your daughter to bring your daughter to work day,” (I don’t think I remembered that quite right), that all lead me to think something is going to tie this together. Essentially, I’m awaiting the twist. The secret answer that will resolve those lingering plot questions. Why cake? Why the setting we’re placed in? Why the boiler room atmosphere? Why is the protagonist a woman? Is she a mother? Does she have a daughter? What are we to make of Glados’ voice and its association with 2001: A Space Odyssey? Can we trust her or not? I’m guessing probably not.
I know I’m lame for this, but I’ve just started Portal and to be honest I really enjoy it. Sure, I haven’t gotten to any of the upper levels, hence, the lack of a headache, nonetheless, I love the fact that it challenges your cognitive/problem solving skills the deeper you get into the game. I’m more curious to understand if there is a story, or Fabula, involved to encapuslate me as a player/character mych like many narrative games we’re playing (i.e. God of War III).
I couldn’t help but compare this to the 1982 film, Tron, which takes a while to become immersed in the story as viewer. Here, I’m cued by the steady progression of learning more and more why I’m playing and what my purpose is. Although this is true, I’m still playing very early in the game and really don’t know what to expect, so hopefully these issues will be answered.
Wish me luck guys!
As I reflect back on my time playing Portal, I must say that the experience was so full of assumptions and hypothesizing. I made so many expectations based on simple prototype schemata, like the “buttons” and pressing them with the boxes, the only objects that stood out that appeared to have import; this was a result of the prior knowledge I had, not sure exactly from where, but it was definitely instilled in my logical common sense. Portals were also familiar schemata to me and the rules of the game directing me to shoot a portal only at certain walls allowed me to expect it to be that way for each level as a way to succeed. Similar obstacles, such as the momentum falling and jumping, also helped me cognitively assume I can do A and B, from earlier on, again for Z later in the game. The omniscient robot character, that was clearly a computer of some sort within the diegetic space, helped me and confused me at times with what I felt was retarded (the Bordwell sense, of course) information (weird dialogue) that delayed my speed in getting to the point. The “dead time” I experienced at the end of each level when I went into the elevator also got to me, especially as I was rolling through the levels. I am just glad that the incoherent world in which I played allowed me to rejuvenate even after I fell into the sludge and died; I had infinite lives. And I was thankful that I had an infinite time (up until the end, of course) so that I can figure things out.
Will comment more on my thoughts on the game in the post for tonight..