Hello.
My name is Mason Miller.
And this is [game array]
Playdead’s Inside recently released on PC,
Xbox One and Playstation 4.
It, like Limbo before it, is a memorable game
if only for its stringent adherence to minimalist
values.
Minimalism in video games has always been
an interesting subject to me, especially since
I find it so difficult to express why minimalist
games work so well.
It might come as a surprise, but my favorite
use of minimalism doesn’t come from the
world of video games.
It doesn’t from the world of Film or TV.
It doesn’t even come from the world of Art
or Sculpture, where minimalist ideals got
their start in the mid 1950s.
It comes from the world of cooking.
From an Italian Chef named Chef Massimo Bottura.
Massimo did something that I find remarkable
with a simple dish of pasta.
When every other Italian Chef in the country
was serving bowls filled with tortellini he
decided to serve a single plate with six pieces
surrounded by broth on both sides.
His reasoning?
That when you eat a bowl of pasta, “most
of the time, you lose yourself in the process
of eating.”
By only serving six pieces, you force the
guest to acknowledge each one.
To respect each piece.
It sounds ridiculous, but I like the decision
because of the way it considers the process
of eating, the physical interaction between
the guest.
And the food.
I don’t think that relationship is too different
from how we digest video games.
We might consume a spoonful of pasta the same
way we power through the latest game from
Ubisoft.
Minimalism isn’t anything new for video
games.
Back in 2001 Fumito Ueda famously used what
he called “design by subtraction” to create
Ico.
Ueda believed that in order for Ico to maintain
immersion he needed to winnow its assets to
a bare minimum so that each asset would receive
the attention it needed to support the game’s
own reality.
Even Peter Molyneux learned, during the troubled
development of Fable III and perhaps too late,
that “it’s not the number of features
you have, it’s how well executed those features
are.”
What Ueda and Molynuex are both getting at
is that sometimes you need to minimize your
project’s scope in order to refine it into
something truly splendid.
That’s certainly true, after all it’s
Inside’s mechanical minimalism and refinement
that allowed the designers to create these
tense chase scenes where the enemy is always
right on the boy’s heels.
That precise timing would have been impossible
to achieve in a game with a more varied move
set.
Phil Fish, in describing his development of
Fez, pointed out that Ico ended up being about
“a boy, a girl and a castle.”
There was no inventory.
No shops.
No villagers.
Ueda knew that whole of Ico should be about
this thematic idea of boy meets girl, and
if any piece of the game didn’t serve as
a part of that whole, he removed it.
Fish did the same thing to his own game.
And so did Jenova Chen when designing Journey.
Chen himself said that “A lot of games today
have a list of quests, places to go, items
to collect and rewards to receive...
We just ignore each other.
So in order to make players care about each
other, we have to remove their power, and
remove their tasks."
Chen removed server lobbies, he removed leaderboards
and avatar customization so that Journey could
focus on one thing: the magic of two strangers
cooperating in an unknown land.
By removing what isn’t needed, designers
return power to what’s left.
This is the reason why Inside’s animations
are so more compelling.
Why it’s backgrounds resonate.
Why I’m still thinking about the mind control
puzzles, and my own cold apathy towards those
under my control, some two weeks after viewing
the credits.
All that remains of Inside after its six year
development serves as a part of its whole.
It all ties into Inside’s themes and setting.
Even its gameplay and puzzles echo the same
bleak indifference this dystopian world has
for its inhabitants.
Inside’s puzzles benefit from its design
choices more so than almost any other part
of the game.
Director Arnt Jensen, looked back at each
of Limbo’s puzzles during its design and
asked “What is really necessary?
What can we throw out?
What doesn’t have to be there?”
I think it’s safe to assume he carried over
that mentality to Inside.
Every action, every object has a purpose.
If a player can interact with it, then they
will need to in order to progress.
This allows Inside to easily communicate what
the rules and boundaries are for each puzzle.
It’s also what allows Inside to create complex
puzzles over large stretches of game without
overwhelming its players
Jensen isn’t afraid of reusing puzzle mechanisms
either because why add something to a game
when something that’s already there will
do just as good if not better?
Inside lets each of its mechanisms stick around
so they can unfold in interesting and unexpected
ways.
These sequences could have been several obstacles
linked together only by location, but by creating
a mechanical theme they give the player a
real sense of progression.
And by limiting the amount of objects and
assets used in the game, Inside can curate
player experience and direct player focus.
Take a look at this water puzzle about a third
of the way through the game.
We see this chain rope and we immediately
know it’s the goal because we’ve seen
and interacted with that rope before.
And then there’s Inside’s control scheme.
Two buttons and an analogue stick.
One button for interaction.
Another for jumping.
And unlike other platformers, Inside isn’t
a test of your reflexes.
Anytime you jump or interact with something,
you do it for a purpose and with an expected
outcome.
It’s really no different than Chef Massimo
and his tortellini.
If other platformers are the bowls of pasta
that you get lost in the process of playing,
than Inside is the plate with six tortellini
that forces you to consider and respect every
button press.
My favorite moments with Inside came from
the way it played with that relationship.
When it took what I expected to happen and
turned that expectation on its head.
When jumping over a fence causes the fence
to give way.
Or when pulling this box does the opposite
of what you you’re trying to accomplish.
But it’s Inside’s ending that stuck with
me the most.
It’s the reason why I like this game so
much more than Limbo.
It’s why Inside might still be remembered
a few years from now when other games are
long forgotten.
It works in part because the rest of the game
is so quiet in comparison.
Aside from a few key moments this is what
you can expect from Inside’s first hour.
And here’s what you can expect from the
ending.
But that isn’t the reason it resonated so
well with me.
At least I don’t think so.
Imagine you’re eating tortellini.
One at a time.
And the last piece of pasta has a different
filling.
Maybe it’s pork loin and prosciutto instead
of cheese.
That blast of flavor catches you off guard
and changes the entire experience of that
meal.
I think Inside does the same thing.
You spend so much time being consciously aware
of every action, that you feel at home inside
the player character.
So when that player character suddenly changes,
that transformation resonates.
It stays with you.
And it makes Inside a truly memorable experience.
Go ahead and compare it to Resident Evil 6
where-- spoilers-- one of the characters transforms
into this thing during the climax of their
respective campaign.
I totally forgot this happened until I was
halfway through this script.
It doesn’t have any lasting impact because
Resident Evil 6 is such a bloated mess of
convoluted controls and action sequences that
this small change doesn’t add much to the
whole.
And at the end of the day, that’s all anyone
will remember.
Inside knew that.
It knew that it would need to cut any sequence
or feature that didn’t serve its whole,
so that the whole would be a more memorable
experience in the end.
It saw the virtues of restraint.
And like Ico and Journey before it, Inside
stands as a prime example of what can be accomplished
with minimalism in video games.
Thanks so much for watching.
I hope you enjoyed the video.
If you did enjoy the video go ahead subscribe
to the channel.
If you REALLY liked the video and want to
see more than you can find a link to my Patreon
account in the summary.
I really appreciate the support guys.
Stay tuned because there’s more to come.
Thanks again.
