Thoughts on Portal 3

If the comments sections under any blog/article about Portal 2 are to believed, one of the popular demands for a new Portal (either full game or DLC) would involve Doug Rattmann as a playable character.

If you are reading this and you don't know who Rattmann is, you can see him here.  He is also responsible for all of the graffiti around Aperture Laboratories in both Portal games.

The scribbled ramblings of a man we can trust.

My gut reaction said "No, that's a dumb idea."  If you read the comic, you can see that Doug Rattmann's survival was questionable at best.  It's very tricky in storytelling to confirm or deny the survival of a character, especially one in his position.  In addition, it breaks Chell's set tradition of having a silent, somewhat detached protagonist, and Atlas and P-Body's (somewhat forced) silence in the Portal 2 co-op campaign.  Chell, I think, added a lot to Portal because she could have been any one of us, and we experienced Aperture Science in just the way we did.  Doug Rattmann adds a history to the Enrichment Center that separates him from us, the players.

However, after playing Portal 2, I've kind of changed my mind for a couple of reasons.  One thing that initially occurred to me as a negative was the possibility of Rattmann responding to GLaDOS, and actually carrying on a conversation.  After all, he is identified as not being mute, and he does talk back to GLaDOS in Lab Rat.  Adding this to Portal 3, though, would greatly separate the game from Portal and Portal 2, setting it apart.  Considering Valve's level of polish on whatever it is they do, it's likely that Rattmann's conversations with GLaDOS would add to the game in a good way, rather than a bad way.

In addition to Rattmann's possession of a voice, Rattmann has another quality which sets him apart from the other characters of the Portal series: he is a paranoid schizophrenic.  If you haven't read Lab Rat yet, read it, and you'll see the way Rattmann sees the world.  It's all kinds of fucked up.  Things seem to blend into one another, and because he has held off on his medication, his schizophrenia has taken an even deeper root in his mind.  Thinking of this from a level-design point of view opens things up.  Things have been pretty sterile in Aperture, save the takeover by nature.  Even then, though, things obeyed the laws of the land.  Playing from Rattmann's point of view could allow for some unnatural occurrences, like twisted or untrustworthy perspectives, or (literally) insane levels.  The gameplay element of the Portal Gun would allow for levels like that.  Think about the original Half-Life, and the Xen levels.  You could twist and alter the already messed-up landscape even more for Rattmann levels, even as challenge levels akin to the special levels in Super Mario Sunshine.

I'm talking about a twisted, distorted version of this crap.

So you know what?  I kind of hope that I get to see this kind of level design in a future Portal game.  Gabe Newell has said that Chell would have an impact on the Half-Life universe, so I doubt that we would not see her again.  But if I had to wait 'til Portal 4 for that to happen, and I played as Doug Rattmann while we waited, I'd be A-Okay with it.

My Blog About Indie Games

Alternatively called: Why I End Up Buying Every Humble Indie Bundle

So on one of these past episodes of 8-Bit Banter, The Internet and Gaming, the subject of indie games was brought up.  Now, I have a small reputation among the people I know as being a little of a Gaming Hippie, in that I support indie gaming a lot.  I make a post every time that the Humble Indie Bundle comes around, and the HIB is about as hippie as gaming tends to get outside of games like Harvest Moon and Animal Crossing.

But in an attempt to not be the Gaming Hipster among my friends (Oh, you haven't heard of this game?), I want to clarify something about my stance on Indie Games.  Being a game developed by a small developer is not an automatic way to get more points from me.  Occasionally, I worry that I send that message.

I like Indie games that are GOOD.  Now to decrease the douchiness of that sentence, I have enjoyed a great number of indie games.  As I have stated, VVVVVV is one of my favorite games ever.  I loved the gameplay mechanic, the style of the game, the humor, and especially the music.

Oh look the title is all over the walls

I liked some other indie games from this current wave, too; Super Meat Boy is infuriatingly difficult, but absolutely satisfying.  Cthulhu Saves the World is one of my favorite JRPGs, too, with it's bringing back a huge amount of nostalgia for the older Final Fantasy games as well as having some of the most ridiculous writing in any game I have ever played.

But that is not to say that there are no bad indie games.  I won't list any, because that would be a little rude towards people who have put a lot of love in their projects.  I will say, though, that they exist.  

Importantly, this is just as true for big-name games.  It's a tragedy to see any game do poorly, because there is a genuine desire to make a good game on some level, even if it gets lost in the hype machine and the desire to spite competitors (Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3, I'm looking at both of you.).

So I think this is what I have been trying to say.  I like indie games, and whenever I see one become a great success, it feels great because you know that it was not the result of a multi-million dollar ad campaign or the result of yearly releases.  It's a genuine win for a genuinely great game.  And I buy every Humble Indie Bundle because I want to be a part of every great success that I can be.