It's an interesting video, but really, I think the author's overthinking it. They say at the end that the game's story is basically that there are different perspectives through which you can look...
It's an interesting video, but really, I think the author's overthinking it. They say at the end that the game's story is basically that there are different perspectives through which you can look at anything. The game, in my opinion, conveys that very well. They may have a point with the crazy ship puzzle (though not solving that puzzle doesn't in any way affect the game if I recall - it's just for getting some additional content, I think). Linking the marketing text on the Steam page to the one puzzle where you have to hold the mouse button down for 30 minutes is a bit of a stretch. Marketing probably didn't play the game and came up with their text for the description after some set of focus groups or other nonsense. I played the game and loved it. I didn't solve those 2 ridiculously hard puzzles, so maybe I'm just dumb. I had fun, which is the point of a game.
I haven't played the game. So you don't need to do any of the super obscurely keyed puzzles to finish the game? If not, then it seems like the video's author is upset that 100%-ing the game is...
I haven't played the game. So you don't need to do any of the super obscurely keyed puzzles to finish the game? If not, then it seems like the video's author is upset that 100%-ing the game is very hard, which is what I'd expect from a puzzle game with optional components.
Given that you've watched the video you've had much of the game spoiled for you, but I feel obligated to warn you that I'm basically spoiling a little bit more with this comment. The Witness...
Exemplary
Given that you've watched the video you've had much of the game spoiled for you, but I feel obligated to warn you that I'm basically spoiling a little bit more with this comment.
The Witness explicitly doesn't do rewards. It's deliberately designed around this idea, which is why it's a game where the gameplay happens in your head more than it does on your screen. The game is about your own individual learning, problem-solving, and aesthetic appreciation inside the communicative structure of the game's world. There is a latent "reward" embedded into the game, which is progress. Getting further in the game, to new areas and puzzles, feels good. This is why the ending of the game is significant, as it returns you to the beginning of the game and resets your progress (I believe in early builds it straight up deleted your save, by the way). The whole game is about teaching you lessons and the last lesson it teaches you is that your progress in the game is ultimately illusory and you're not owed anything by the game.
It's why I believe the game isn't ultimately intended to be 100%ed. It's a possibility, but the game doesn't encourage you to do so (it actually directly steers you away from that with its ending). I think someone choosing to do so has to acknowledge that they're doing so because they want to rather than because the game is forcing them to. An obsessive obligation to complete every aspect of it lies in the player -- not the game -- and the game is deliberately trying to point that out to them!
This is actually where I think the video creator missed the mark the most, as I think he never got past the idea that the game owed him something and that he should complete everything in it. He pointed out the absurd environmental line in the video that takes forever, and he thinks it's Jonathan Blow fucking with him. I disagree. I think it's Jonathan Blow trying to say something to the kind of player who feels like they need to complete that task for the sake of completion. Everything in the game is instructive. Literally everything. Part of the reason it's such a good game is because it is so thoroughly and strategically didactic, and I think the video author missed some of the game's bigger lessons.
No, but I believe I happened to spur him on with some of my comments when he had just started playing it, and cajoled him into posting his own retrospective after completion.
No, but I believe I happened to spur him on with some of my comments when he had just started playing it, and cajoled him into posting his own retrospective after completion.
I appreciate this explanation because it makes me feel extremely smug about completing the 'main' game, doing a few of the secret puzzles, and then simply deciding I'd had enough.
I appreciate this explanation because it makes me feel extremely smug about completing the 'main' game, doing a few of the secret puzzles, and then simply deciding I'd had enough.
Right. You need to get 7 of the 11 lasers pointing at the top of the mountain to get into the mountain and complete the game. To do that, you will definitely hit some hard puzzles. (Though nothing...
Right. You need to get 7 of the 11 lasers pointing at the top of the mountain to get into the mountain and complete the game. To do that, you will definitely hit some hard puzzles. (Though nothing like the 2 he says are nearly impossible.) But you don't need to do the one inside the boat where there's an invisible second line and you have to figure out that the sounds are telling you how to solve the puzzle. That puzzle doesn't get you anything towards turning on one of the lasers. And none of the environmental puzzles (including the ones that you start with the movies) are required to complete the game.
Ha! That's a little harsh, maybe. Interestingly, I hadn't heard of him before I first saw this video in 2017, and I disagreed with everything in it as he plainly misunderstood major elements of...
Ha! That's a little harsh, maybe. Interestingly, I hadn't heard of him before I first saw this video in 2017, and I disagreed with everything in it as he plainly misunderstood major elements of the game. I watched it again a few times since but his name never registered until his channel was recommended to me in 2019, and I browsed through his posted videos, very impressed by the depth of his analysis and thoughts on games I had never played... until I got to this one and realized, "Wait, this is the guy who was so clueless on The Witness?" I still haven't decided if this one's just the outlier or if it compromises the rest of his work, but he can be interesting to listen to, and the fact that no one else is doing what he is makes it worth checking out at the least.
For me it was not. I watched him at first, but I kept finding myself screaming at the screen "What are you talking about, you've got this all wrong and this part that you spent 10 minutes on...
I still haven't decided if this one's just the outlier
For me it was not. I watched him at first, but I kept finding myself screaming at the screen "What are you talking about, you've got this all wrong and this part that you spent 10 minutes on doesn't even matter!", so eventually I unsubscribed. My other pet peeve was that the videos were just too damn long, and he kept repeating himself, like dude, there's a way to structure your thoughts that will not take up 4 hours of my time.
the fact that no one else is doing what he is makes it worth checking out at the least
How so? Video game essays are the new let's plays of YouTube, there's a lot of those to go around, and quite a few of them are good
I don't know any of them that go to the level of detail he does. Admittedly, you have likely watched more of his content than I, because I mainly checked out his two-hour videos.
I don't know any of them that go to the level of detail he does. Admittedly, you have likely watched more of his content than I, because I mainly checked out his two-hour videos.
Maybe overthinking in the wrong direction but this is a Jonathan Blow game. It's had more "thinking" put into it than probably any game ever released, like crazy mind games all the way through....
It's an interesting video, but really, I think the author's overthinking it.
Maybe overthinking in the wrong direction but this is a Jonathan Blow game. It's had more "thinking" put into it than probably any game ever released, like crazy mind games all the way through. Even just how the backgrounds are laid out and in what meta-meta way the puzzle ideas and audio logs connect. It's a game designed to obsess over.
"Marketing" very likely was Jonathan Blow himself, and possibly a member or two of his team which maxed out at something like 15 people during development IIRC. The text is just as precise and...
"Marketing" very likely was Jonathan Blow himself, and possibly a member or two of his team which maxed out at something like 15 people during development IIRC. The text is just as precise and meaningful as the game itself, but given his frustration it's no surprise he doesn't see it that way.
I've seen this video enough times that I can't help but feel pity anytime someone references it to represent their experience with the game, because there is so much that they've missed out on,...
I've seen this video enough times that I can't help but feel pity anytime someone references it to represent their experience with the game, because there is so much that they've missed out on, primarily because they come to the game with a set of (admittedly common) expectations about what a video game is "supposed" to to do instead of playing it on its own merits. The YouTube comments section here actually does a good job of refuting Anderson's gripes, so if you are interested in playing it yourself at all I'd say browse through it and take Anderson's opinion with a large helping of salt. If you don't intend to play it (which would be a crying shame IMO), my standard response to Anderson is probably the definitive video analysis of the game from someone who does get it - Electron Dance's The Unbearable Now. It's one of the best video essays you'll find on Youtube.
(...I just noticed Anderson's vid is at 3.4 million views, while Electron Dance's is at 93 thousand. Sigh.)
That was unbelievably good. Spoiler I watched both. How could I not? :) Thank you for linking it. Not only is his commentary and analysis great, but his video composition was excellent. I love how...
That was unbelievably good.
Spoiler
I watched both. How could I not? :)
Thank you for linking it. Not only is his commentary and analysis great, but his video composition was excellent. I love how well he captured how discovering the environmental lines felt in the moment. I consider it one of the greatest moments I've ever had in all of gaming, and I got goosebumps all over again as I watched him demonstrate that realization in the video. He even does it again with the environmental line in the candle video, which was my exact response as well!
I recognized the Electron Dance name but couldn't quite place it, until I realized that he wrote an analysis of Kairo (spoiler warning, of course) which is another first-person puzzle game with a compelling environment. Based on the quality of both of these works, I think he's someone whose writing and videos I'm going to have to explore more. If you have any other recommendations for his content, let me know!
Glad you enjoyed! I was first introduced to ED's work through his wonderful The Five Stages of Starseed Pilgrim video, which is hilariously apt for those who've beaten it and likely confusing for...
Glad you enjoyed! I was first introduced to ED's work through his wonderful The Five Stages of Starseed Pilgrim video, which is hilariously apt for those who've beaten it and likely confusing for newcomers - it perfectly represents the trouble with evangelizing that maddeningly precious little puzzle game. I haven't played anything else that he's published a video for, but he is one of the few people I went through the trouble of signing in, subscribing to, and looking out for, because the quality in his content is obvious. I'm overdue for a return to his website to delve further into his writing, but as I recall, both his posts and the community's comments matched the standard on his channel.
Thanks for the link. It's a great video and a stark contrast from the one I posted. It's odd how I've now watched over an hour of video about The Witness having never played a minute of it. I'll...
Thanks for the link. It's a great video and a stark contrast from the one I posted.
It's odd how I've now watched over an hour of video about The Witness having never played a minute of it. I'll have to wait a few years to forget all the spoilers should I decide to play it.
You've perfectly summed up my feelings on 75% of TLOU2 videos on YouTube.
I can't help but feel pity anytime someone references it to represent their experience with the game, because there is so much that they've missed out on, primarily because they come to the game with a set of (admittedly common) expectations about what a video game is "supposed" to to do instead of playing it on its own merits.
You've perfectly summed up my feelings on 75% of TLOU2 videos on YouTube.
I think it's because gaming is beginning to leave "gamers" behind, in a sense. At the least, it's expanding beyond them. I'm hoping those are just the death throes of a certain flavor of ignorance.
I think it's because gaming is beginning to leave "gamers" behind, in a sense. At the least, it's expanding beyond them. I'm hoping those are just the death throes of a certain flavor of ignorance.
I have lots of feelings about this game. If I had to summarize those feelings, it would be that I hate what the game represents. When it comes to the actual gameplay design, I hate just about...
I have lots of feelings about this game. If I had to summarize those feelings, it would be that I hate what the game represents.
When it comes to the actual gameplay design, I hate just about every choice. I hate that there is no real instructions to any puzzles. I hate that so many solutions are based off of easily missable things. I hate that things rely on perspective, since there is a million potential ways to look at the environment.
There is a mechanic that Demon's Souls introduced that this game uses and I hate it more than anything else. I call it "come back later". It's when a designer places a lock in the form of an unreasonable difficulty spike. And the problem with this is that my brain simply can't accept that mechanic - I will simply try and try again until I give up. I have gotten better with this over time, but the problem with this mechanic is that it's also a direct punishment to the player - it's a taunt telling you that you are an idiot. I can't tell if it's better or worse in this game - in Dark Souls, you die and get sent back, but in The Witness, you just have these sets of obtuse symbols that you will have to memorize - you may easily not know when or where to go back.
And to be honest, the thing I hate the most may simply be the people who love it, because that's what really drives in the feeling that I'm an idiot. I knew from the start that there were going to be puzzles in the environment, and I looked and looked and never found one anywhere. I remember going up the mountain and seeing that useless panel and I never made the connection that there was a puzzle down there. And that means that there were probably many other simple puzzles I could have figured out if my brain were wired that way. But for all intents and purposes, my lack of the type of thinking this game requires means that it is impossible for me to finish in any meaningful way.
You know, this comment crystallizes something about my opinion of this game very well, in a way that I hadn't previously realized that I could describe it - it's a mirror. There's always range in...
You know, this comment crystallizes something about my opinion of this game very well, in a way that I hadn't previously realized that I could describe it - it's a mirror. There's always range in player experiences with games due to the intersection of, or conflict between, both the way various developers think/learn and the way various players think/learn, but more than any other that I've come across this game reflects and reveals a lot about how players approach problem-solving, and in a wider perspective, life. No condescension or anything intended, just that your comment reminded me of convos I've had offline about those personality surveys where they ask you what kinds of working environments you like, if you're the type to always read instruction manuals first or just dive in and figure a gadget out by trial and error, etc.
Beyond that, I think you are perhaps being too hard on yourself (and the devs) with the whole "not smart enough" and "taunt to the player" thing. For a long time I used to feel similar frustration about not understanding art in general, and was fortunate enough to have an experience that helped me re-evaluate my own assumptions.
Are you someone who stands in front of a locked door cursing the developer for not having left it unlocked? Just because the key is stored in your mind rather than your character's inventory...
Are you someone who stands in front of a locked door cursing the developer for not having left it unlocked? Just because the key is stored in your mind rather than your character's inventory doesn't make it any less of a locked door.
While I'm one of those people who loved The Witness and all kinds of similar games, I can sort of relate to the frustration a bit. A locked door is a very clear message: "come back when you have a...
While I'm one of those people who loved The Witness and all kinds of similar games, I can sort of relate to the frustration a bit.
A locked door is a very clear message: "come back when you have a key", while the equivalent in The Witness is a bit more ambiguous: "here's a puzzle, come back when you can solve it".
If you're not already on board with the games pattern of tutorial sections and challenges, I can see how this could be interpreted as "come back when you're smart enough", which can be frustrating, especially if the rest of the game isn't clicking for you.
I think it's just different preferences for what you want to get out of a game, and The Witness can have a type of barrier that a lot of players aren't interested in. I'd say that the comparison...
I think it's just different preferences for what you want to get out of a game, and The Witness can have a type of barrier that a lot of players aren't interested in. I'd say that the comparison to Dark Souls that @Akir made isn't even really quite correct or going far enough:
This section of the game requires something you haven't found yet - this is like you're talking about, with a locked door. It's a low barrier, and just means that you have to go somewhere else in the game first before you can proceed. You'll still be able to make steady progress in the game, you just have to do something else first before this part.
This section of the game is too difficult for you to get past - this is more the style of barriers you get in Dark Souls. The way to get past it is still "inside" the game and usually apparent (e.g. "I need to stop getting hit by that attack"), but you might have to spend a significant amount of time repeating the same section of the game to practice, or might need to figure out a different strategy. It can feel like you're not making any progress while you're doing this, because the progress is basically internal—it's your personal skill that's progressing, not something in the game.
This section of the game requires something you don't even understand - this is what you run into in games like The Witness and Baba is You. There's not really anything to practice, and to be able to progress you basically have to make a new connection in your mind. Spending more time in the game often won't help at all (and can even make it worse), and you might end up finally realizing the solution while doing something else entirely.
None of these types of barriers are really "good" or "bad", they're just different approaches to game design that will give a different experience to players. Some people (like @Akir, it sounds like) don't like having their progress through a game interrupted, but other people will find a game boring if they can just breeze through the whole thing without ever having to "work" at anything.
I'd definitely disagree that Demon's Souls introduced games being very hard to progress in though. That was the norm for a long time with video games, and it's only relatively modern games where you could expect to be able to beat most games.
My wife and I were actually just talking the other day about how we both owned NES games that we played a lot but never got to see the last levels in, because the games were so hard that we never made it there. The games weren't long at all, they were just difficult and constantly forced you to start over.
I remember getting permanently stuck in a bunch of adventure games as a kid too, ones like Myst and the King's Quest games. Looking up the answer on the internet wasn't possible.
I think the two types of games (Dark souls and the witness) share a similar theming in that difficulty spikes cause a certain types of player to bang their heads against the wall until they break...
I think the two types of games (Dark souls and the witness) share a similar theming in that difficulty spikes cause a certain types of player to bang their heads against the wall until they break through. I'm like this, and it sounds like @Akir is as well. I don't think it's a problem though as long as you analyze your own play, and are comfortable with your own behavior forcing you to swallow unnecessary challenges at times. In Dark souls, pinwheel was the first post asylum boss I beat, because I grinded my way through an area that was meant for later, knowing full well that I probably went the wrong way. With the witness, I did the desert then the bunker, even though I did a couple of the cherry blossoms in between, and realized it would probably have been quite a bit easier. Ultimately I think it may just be an issue of expectation setting with games. I think spiky difficulty is pretty fun personally. There's a nice feeling of being challenged and struggling, followed by a feeling of just crushing the next thing to come up.
Zisteau's done some really interesting things in the last few years, including some frankly surreal storytelling within a Minecraft Let's Play. He's been playing games for other people's...
Zisteau's done some really interesting things in the last few years, including some frankly surreal storytelling within a Minecraft Let's Play. He's been playing games for other people's entertainment for a long time, and he's working on ways to keep himself entertained. It leads to some fascinating and weird places.
It's an interesting video, but really, I think the author's overthinking it. They say at the end that the game's story is basically that there are different perspectives through which you can look at anything. The game, in my opinion, conveys that very well. They may have a point with the crazy ship puzzle (though not solving that puzzle doesn't in any way affect the game if I recall - it's just for getting some additional content, I think). Linking the marketing text on the Steam page to the one puzzle where you have to hold the mouse button down for 30 minutes is a bit of a stretch. Marketing probably didn't play the game and came up with their text for the description after some set of focus groups or other nonsense. I played the game and loved it. I didn't solve those 2 ridiculously hard puzzles, so maybe I'm just dumb. I had fun, which is the point of a game.
I haven't played the game. So you don't need to do any of the super obscurely keyed puzzles to finish the game? If not, then it seems like the video's author is upset that 100%-ing the game is very hard, which is what I'd expect from a puzzle game with optional components.
Given that you've watched the video you've had much of the game spoiled for you, but I feel obligated to warn you that I'm basically spoiling a little bit more with this comment.
The Witness explicitly doesn't do rewards. It's deliberately designed around this idea, which is why it's a game where the gameplay happens in your head more than it does on your screen. The game is about your own individual learning, problem-solving, and aesthetic appreciation inside the communicative structure of the game's world. There is a latent "reward" embedded into the game, which is progress. Getting further in the game, to new areas and puzzles, feels good. This is why the ending of the game is significant, as it returns you to the beginning of the game and resets your progress (I believe in early builds it straight up deleted your save, by the way). The whole game is about teaching you lessons and the last lesson it teaches you is that your progress in the game is ultimately illusory and you're not owed anything by the game.
It's why I believe the game isn't ultimately intended to be 100%ed. It's a possibility, but the game doesn't encourage you to do so (it actually directly steers you away from that with its ending). I think someone choosing to do so has to acknowledge that they're doing so because they want to rather than because the game is forcing them to. An obsessive obligation to complete every aspect of it lies in the player -- not the game -- and the game is deliberately trying to point that out to them!
This is actually where I think the video creator missed the mark the most, as I think he never got past the idea that the game owed him something and that he should complete everything in it. He pointed out the absurd environmental line in the video that takes forever, and he thinks it's Jonathan Blow fucking with him. I disagree. I think it's Jonathan Blow trying to say something to the kind of player who feels like they need to complete that task for the sake of completion. Everything in the game is instructive. Literally everything. Part of the reason it's such a good game is because it is so thoroughly and strategically didactic, and I think the video author missed some of the game's bigger lessons.
As you know, for quite some time I've been interested in what you took from the game, so I'm more than a little happy to read this :)
My love for the game has only grown since I played it. :)
Did you recommend the game to kfwyre?
No, but I believe I happened to spur him on with some of my comments when he had just started playing it, and cajoled him into posting his own retrospective after completion.
I appreciate this explanation because it makes me feel extremely smug about completing the 'main' game, doing a few of the secret puzzles, and then simply deciding I'd had enough.
Right. You need to get 7 of the 11 lasers pointing at the top of the mountain to get into the mountain and complete the game. To do that, you will definitely hit some hard puzzles. (Though nothing like the 2 he says are nearly impossible.) But you don't need to do the one inside the boat where there's an invisible second line and you have to figure out that the sounds are telling you how to solve the puzzle. That puzzle doesn't get you anything towards turning on one of the lasers. And none of the environmental puzzles (including the ones that you start with the movies) are required to complete the game.
No, you don't. And yes, 100%ing the game is very hard. Outside of achievements, there's just a lot of very obfuscated puzzles.
That's the point of Joseph Anderson, I feel. It's a great channel that you shouldn't watch
Ha! That's a little harsh, maybe. Interestingly, I hadn't heard of him before I first saw this video in 2017, and I disagreed with everything in it as he plainly misunderstood major elements of the game. I watched it again a few times since but his name never registered until his channel was recommended to me in 2019, and I browsed through his posted videos, very impressed by the depth of his analysis and thoughts on games I had never played... until I got to this one and realized, "Wait, this is the guy who was so clueless on The Witness?" I still haven't decided if this one's just the outlier or if it compromises the rest of his work, but he can be interesting to listen to, and the fact that no one else is doing what he is makes it worth checking out at the least.
For me it was not. I watched him at first, but I kept finding myself screaming at the screen "What are you talking about, you've got this all wrong and this part that you spent 10 minutes on doesn't even matter!", so eventually I unsubscribed. My other pet peeve was that the videos were just too damn long, and he kept repeating himself, like dude, there's a way to structure your thoughts that will not take up 4 hours of my time.
How so? Video game essays are the new let's plays of YouTube, there's a lot of those to go around, and quite a few of them are good
I don't know any of them that go to the level of detail he does. Admittedly, you have likely watched more of his content than I, because I mainly checked out his two-hour videos.
If I remember correctly, I stopped watching after Hollow Knight essay
There was this thread in r/Games that collected quite a number of excellent gaming analysis channels.
Maybe overthinking in the wrong direction but this is a Jonathan Blow game. It's had more "thinking" put into it than probably any game ever released, like crazy mind games all the way through. Even just how the backgrounds are laid out and in what meta-meta way the puzzle ideas and audio logs connect. It's a game designed to obsess over.
"Marketing" very likely was Jonathan Blow himself, and possibly a member or two of his team which maxed out at something like 15 people during development IIRC. The text is just as precise and meaningful as the game itself, but given his frustration it's no surprise he doesn't see it that way.
I've seen this video enough times that I can't help but feel pity anytime someone references it to represent their experience with the game, because there is so much that they've missed out on, primarily because they come to the game with a set of (admittedly common) expectations about what a video game is "supposed" to to do instead of playing it on its own merits. The YouTube comments section here actually does a good job of refuting Anderson's gripes, so if you are interested in playing it yourself at all I'd say browse through it and take Anderson's opinion with a large helping of salt. If you don't intend to play it (which would be a crying shame IMO), my standard response to Anderson is probably the definitive video analysis of the game from someone who does get it - Electron Dance's The Unbearable Now. It's one of the best video essays you'll find on Youtube.
(...I just noticed Anderson's vid is at 3.4 million views, while Electron Dance's is at 93 thousand. Sigh.)
That was unbelievably good.
Spoiler
I watched both. How could I not? :)Thank you for linking it. Not only is his commentary and analysis great, but his video composition was excellent. I love how well he captured how discovering the environmental lines felt in the moment. I consider it one of the greatest moments I've ever had in all of gaming, and I got goosebumps all over again as I watched him demonstrate that realization in the video. He even does it again with the environmental line in the candle video, which was my exact response as well!
I recognized the Electron Dance name but couldn't quite place it, until I realized that he wrote an analysis of Kairo (spoiler warning, of course) which is another first-person puzzle game with a compelling environment. Based on the quality of both of these works, I think he's someone whose writing and videos I'm going to have to explore more. If you have any other recommendations for his content, let me know!
Glad you enjoyed! I was first introduced to ED's work through his wonderful The Five Stages of Starseed Pilgrim video, which is hilariously apt for those who've beaten it and likely confusing for newcomers - it perfectly represents the trouble with evangelizing that maddeningly precious little puzzle game. I haven't played anything else that he's published a video for, but he is one of the few people I went through the trouble of signing in, subscribing to, and looking out for, because the quality in his content is obvious. I'm overdue for a return to his website to delve further into his writing, but as I recall, both his posts and the community's comments matched the standard on his channel.
Thanks for the link. It's a great video and a stark contrast from the one I posted.
It's odd how I've now watched over an hour of video about The Witness having never played a minute of it. I'll have to wait a few years to forget all the spoilers should I decide to play it.
Electron Dance's video is awesome. Please post it as a standalone video with heavy spoiler warnings!
Maybe you should if you have any thoughts that you'd like expand upon? I feel like I post about this game rather often, lol.
You've perfectly summed up my feelings on 75% of TLOU2 videos on YouTube.
I think it's because gaming is beginning to leave "gamers" behind, in a sense. At the least, it's expanding beyond them. I'm hoping those are just the death throes of a certain flavor of ignorance.
I have lots of feelings about this game. If I had to summarize those feelings, it would be that I hate what the game represents.
When it comes to the actual gameplay design, I hate just about every choice. I hate that there is no real instructions to any puzzles. I hate that so many solutions are based off of easily missable things. I hate that things rely on perspective, since there is a million potential ways to look at the environment.
There is a mechanic that Demon's Souls introduced that this game uses and I hate it more than anything else. I call it "come back later". It's when a designer places a lock in the form of an unreasonable difficulty spike. And the problem with this is that my brain simply can't accept that mechanic - I will simply try and try again until I give up. I have gotten better with this over time, but the problem with this mechanic is that it's also a direct punishment to the player - it's a taunt telling you that you are an idiot. I can't tell if it's better or worse in this game - in Dark Souls, you die and get sent back, but in The Witness, you just have these sets of obtuse symbols that you will have to memorize - you may easily not know when or where to go back.
And to be honest, the thing I hate the most may simply be the people who love it, because that's what really drives in the feeling that I'm an idiot. I knew from the start that there were going to be puzzles in the environment, and I looked and looked and never found one anywhere. I remember going up the mountain and seeing that useless panel and I never made the connection that there was a puzzle down there. And that means that there were probably many other simple puzzles I could have figured out if my brain were wired that way. But for all intents and purposes, my lack of the type of thinking this game requires means that it is impossible for me to finish in any meaningful way.
You know, this comment crystallizes something about my opinion of this game very well, in a way that I hadn't previously realized that I could describe it - it's a mirror. There's always range in player experiences with games due to the intersection of, or conflict between, both the way various developers think/learn and the way various players think/learn, but more than any other that I've come across this game reflects and reveals a lot about how players approach problem-solving, and in a wider perspective, life. No condescension or anything intended, just that your comment reminded me of convos I've had offline about those personality surveys where they ask you what kinds of working environments you like, if you're the type to always read instruction manuals first or just dive in and figure a gadget out by trial and error, etc.
Beyond that, I think you are perhaps being too hard on yourself (and the devs) with the whole "not smart enough" and "taunt to the player" thing. For a long time I used to feel similar frustration about not understanding art in general, and was fortunate enough to have an experience that helped me re-evaluate my own assumptions.
Are you someone who stands in front of a locked door cursing the developer for not having left it unlocked? Just because the key is stored in your mind rather than your character's inventory doesn't make it any less of a locked door.
While I'm one of those people who loved The Witness and all kinds of similar games, I can sort of relate to the frustration a bit.
A locked door is a very clear message: "come back when you have a key", while the equivalent in The Witness is a bit more ambiguous: "here's a puzzle, come back when you can solve it".
If you're not already on board with the games pattern of tutorial sections and challenges, I can see how this could be interpreted as "come back when you're smart enough", which can be frustrating, especially if the rest of the game isn't clicking for you.
I think it's just different preferences for what you want to get out of a game, and The Witness can have a type of barrier that a lot of players aren't interested in. I'd say that the comparison to Dark Souls that @Akir made isn't even really quite correct or going far enough:
None of these types of barriers are really "good" or "bad", they're just different approaches to game design that will give a different experience to players. Some people (like @Akir, it sounds like) don't like having their progress through a game interrupted, but other people will find a game boring if they can just breeze through the whole thing without ever having to "work" at anything.
I'd definitely disagree that Demon's Souls introduced games being very hard to progress in though. That was the norm for a long time with video games, and it's only relatively modern games where you could expect to be able to beat most games.
My wife and I were actually just talking the other day about how we both owned NES games that we played a lot but never got to see the last levels in, because the games were so hard that we never made it there. The games weren't long at all, they were just difficult and constantly forced you to start over.
I remember getting permanently stuck in a bunch of adventure games as a kid too, ones like Myst and the King's Quest games. Looking up the answer on the internet wasn't possible.
I think the two types of games (Dark souls and the witness) share a similar theming in that difficulty spikes cause a certain types of player to bang their heads against the wall until they break through. I'm like this, and it sounds like @Akir is as well. I don't think it's a problem though as long as you analyze your own play, and are comfortable with your own behavior forcing you to swallow unnecessary challenges at times. In Dark souls, pinwheel was the first post asylum boss I beat, because I grinded my way through an area that was meant for later, knowing full well that I probably went the wrong way. With the witness, I did the desert then the bunker, even though I did a couple of the cherry blossoms in between, and realized it would probably have been quite a bit easier. Ultimately I think it may just be an issue of expectation setting with games. I think spiky difficulty is pretty fun personally. There's a nice feeling of being challenged and struggling, followed by a feeling of just crushing the next thing to come up.
A remember watching Zisteau play this on twitch a couple of years ago and there were quite a few times I had absolutely no idea how he solved it.
Sweet, the guy looks like a fun watch. I love me some Witness VODs.
Zisteau's done some really interesting things in the last few years, including some frankly surreal storytelling within a Minecraft Let's Play. He's been playing games for other people's entertainment for a long time, and he's working on ways to keep himself entertained. It leads to some fascinating and weird places.
His Terraria series with Etho and his Roller Coaster Tycoon videos are good too. The later are uploaded twitch streams