Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

2058 Posts in 165 Topics- by 669 Members - Latest Member: harrietpreston

May 24, 2013, 10:25:13 AM
Intuition Games ForumGamesGrayPost your Thoughts here:
Pages: 1 2 [3]
Print
Author Topic: Post your Thoughts here:  (Read 18412 times)
Fal
Egg
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


?


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: September 29, 2009, 06:25:34 PM »

Wow. I really enjoyed this game.

I thought it was interesting that when you talked to people, the conversation bubble had a black and a white area, and the waves you sent out came from your particular color, and that the whole point was to meet in the middle. Then, with every successful wave, their side of the bubble would grow more and more gray. I also thought it was interesting that even though you turned their side of the conversation bubble gray, instead of turning gray themselves, they still turned to one extreme (either black or white) when they "converted". I kind of saw that this way: Once you presented a valid argument, instead of just changing and reevaluating their view points, they blindly followed yours just because you made a good case. To me it was a very good example of people's need to be led, a weakness of will that seems to be present in many of us (especially in America). Just as your arguments are meeting theirs in the middle, you have to remember, their arguments are meeting yours as well. And since they are making valid points, it leads you to question your own beliefs. This brings the change.

When your character switches sides, maybe it's because he is confused. Through learning about the beliefs of the other group, he's realized that there is a good reason they are fighting for their own ideals. And this process repeats itself until he realizes that neither side is entirely correct, and that the only way to solve the conflict is to say, "To each, his own."

And I'm not sure how to look at what happens after your character turns gray. Maybe it's the fact that it was a neutral point of view, and therefore a very peaceful or non confrontational one, and there is an overabundance of people in the world who refuse to just let things be. It's this attitude of self-importance. Very few will put away their pride and agree to compromise. And in the United States, specifically, the majority of people seem to have a need, or a craving for dramatics. No one is willing to listen to the person who is telling them to just let their fellow man make his own choices instead of trying to force the views that they think are right. We all are indoctrinated to have a specific sense of right and wrong. Black and white. But there are so many variables, and so many different interpretations of things, that in all actuality, nothing is black and white. Just shades of gray. And it's those variables and interpretations which cause your character to switch sides in the first place. And there's always a point when you can't take the conflict any more, and to find any peace, you have to relinquish your opinions, because really, they are inconsequential. And far too many people never realize that in order for there to be true peace, you must let go of concrete belief. This can be said for politics, religion, war, interpersonal relationships...Pretty much every part of life.

The only thing that confused me is, why was your character the only one trying to talk to people. Everyone else was rioting in the streets. What makes you so special? Why weren't there other little guys running around trying to "talk sense" into the other faction? Why weren't there other grays? I guess maybe that's over-analytical. Those questions may not even matter, and are probably straying far from the overall point. Though, there is no exact point, since it's open for interpretation.

Lastly, I think that when interpreting this game, you have to take into consideration the commentary within the game. You can't just see things black and white. So in your interpretation, you always have to keep an open mind and leave room for alternative ideas. The way I looked at it might not be right. In fact, I can safely say it's not at all right. And the same can be said for everyone else on this forum. I've really enjoyed seeing how the meanings that other people carried away from it (or didn't) were so different from, or very similar to my own. Not once did I say, "Oh yeah, that guy is misled." All I want to know now is this: what about the artist's interpretation? There's no way the maker of this game could have just made it without any of their own ideas on the situation depicted.
[/size]

Maybe because the protagonist is suppose to interpret you. Maybe your gray isn't another persons gray. Why even be gray, why not think outside the box, not be blue or green or whatever but something else? Besides, from what I observe you may be gray and say you are a wise person among sheep, and many others think the same thing. The question is , are you (we) really not a sheep?
Logged

I live off your Replies ^^
Klatoo
Egg
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: October 11, 2009, 10:30:04 PM »

I took many ideas away from this game. It's hard to form them all into a cohesive whole, hence I must call this good art. I'll just list some of my thoughts point by point and make what connections I can. Sorry, but this is going to be jumbled and incomplete. I hope by writing about it I can get a better grip on it.




1. People like to crusade, and generally they aren't particularly interested in what side they are on so long as they are in motion.


“I have discovered that all human evil comes from this, man’s being unable to sit still in a room.” -Blaise Pascal

In this context I saw the protagonist as finally becoming tired of crusading and conflict, instead looking to find compromise and peace. Mutual peaceful coexistence. Noone else was able to understand what he was saying though, as if peaceful coexistence was an entirely foreign concept to them. The words/ideas passed right through them with no effect. He also became unable to understand anyone else just as they were unable to understand him. He became alienated from the social world around him. The protagonist ended up alone and frightened*, tossed around at the whims of the crowd and beset on all sides. Whatever views the two sides may have differed on they held at least one view in common, that rioting was the solution to their problems.

*(The movement animation for the protagonist changed in the final part to one that implies fear and alarm to me)

Conflict is part of the human condition. In trying to end all conflict he simply caused himself to experience more while leaving the overall levels of conflict unchanged.



2. Issues of perspective. It raises a number of questions and cautions about perspective that I find interesting.

At the start the protagonist is alone and surrounded by seemingly hostile forces that threaten to sweep him away. He works to remedy this by converting those around him to his way of thinking. We then get a shift of perspective. The protagonist, in trying to make his surroundings less hostile, has created the very same environment for either himself in the future or perhaps another person.

How different were the two sides really? Their direction and color were different, but their methods were identical regardless of their team.

Was the protagonist a tragic hero, a traitor, just some guy doing his best, or none of the above?

I look at him as just some guy doing his best. Realizing that his past efforts only moved the problem around rather than solve it, he stumbles on a new way of looking at things that seems to make no sense to anyone but himself. When talking to someone who makes no sense, how must the world look to them? Maybe you seem like part of some monolithic wave to them. Maybe they are frightened. Perhaps you seem as nonsensical to them as they seem to you, and perhaps you are both right about each other. Maybe neither of you makes any sense and you're both engaged in a giant False Dilemma. I see a little bit of a caution against dismissing an idea without fully understanding it. Don't be 'that guy', the one who keeps running with a little arrow in his hand after the grey guy babbles something you don't understand.



3. The perils of certainty. Certainty can sometimes lead one to cause their own problems and be a later source of regret. It makes me think of some of the works of Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris and their cautions about certainty and extremism. I interpreted the speech bubbles as a minigame representation of meme transmission which initially made me think of Dawkins. The perils of tribalism can also fit here.



4. The process of alienation and/or confusion. A story of one way in which a person can become alienated from society and/or become profoundly confused, told from their perspective.



Logged
Kotowari
Egg
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: December 08, 2009, 11:46:10 AM »

  Honestly my thoughts on it are diversity and discrimination. Two sides of whatever it is be it race,religion,etc grasp the mob majority back and forth in a never ending cycle of idiocy. The character you play as is one of the people who seems confused and hops back and forth between his views until he realizes theres a perfect balance between the two that can be grasped. But the mob isnt happy with peace and his new idea falls on deaf ears until he's alone but the fight/war still goes on.

  The jist of it is.. the average population dont want anything other than what they were spoonfed by the snakes and liars of their time, when people offer unity and peace and the truth they are ignored or called crazy and/or stupid for thinking such things. Ignorance is a plague in the world and if more people were "Grey" and found that medium and that bliss where everyone can be one together without having to pick sides or be drafted into one, the world would truly be a place we all could call home.

I hope what i said can make sense to more than me.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic