By Jim Rossignol on May 19th, 2009 at 12:03 pm.
I just spotted this exquisite little game by Adam Saltsman over on Offworld. Fathom starts with blistering chip-core-fuelled platform battling and… well, there’s a little surprise waiting in there, which I couldn’t possibly spoil. It might seem a little confusing, and it is cryptic, but all the clues are there. Oh, just go play it – and beware of spoilers in the comments, please.
19/05/2009 at 12:21 Dood says:
Ooh, that’s tragic
19/05/2009 at 12:26 dr_demento says:
I don’t get it. The first thing that happens is cool, but then there’s the second thing, which I don’t understand, and then the ending, which I also don’t understand.
I wish we had [spoiler] tags like the EG comments forums.
19/05/2009 at 12:29 apocalypsecow says:
+1 to the “I don’t get it” crowd
I don’t understand what it’s trying to say, how I completed it or what went on during proceedings.
Dreadful.
19/05/2009 at 12:30 Biscuitry says:
Huh. I’m genuinely not sure if I won or lost.
19/05/2009 at 12:46 bob arctor says:
First time round I got stuck by the tree and had to restard.
It’s about dying?
19/05/2009 at 12:53 Bruut says:
no comprendo senor. It must have some deep, philosophical meaning
19/05/2009 at 12:56 Chis says:
Cave Story, anyone?
19/05/2009 at 12:57 Evets says:
Okay, I’ll be that guy.
So, did I miss anything?
1. boss you can’t beat
2. find fishes
3. find item
4. cause thorny vine
5. open floor
6. enter light
19/05/2009 at 12:58 Zetetic Elench says:
Neat.
Someone in the TigSource comments mentioned An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge and that is basically what you should be thinking of, if you don’t get it.
19/05/2009 at 13:01 Helm says:
Evets, I don’t think you missed anything.
I really liked this, I’ve told Adam. I do think the middle puzzle section doesn’t service the narrative but I might be missing some significance myself also.
I guess I’m the ‘it’s evocative even if I don’t necessarily understand it’ type of person.
19/05/2009 at 13:09 Evets says:
Zetetic, that does help with what’s going on in the game. Thanks.
19/05/2009 at 13:13 dr_demento says:
It makes a bit more sense, but still not very much…. at least Braid dropped hints, this is just surreal.
19/05/2009 at 13:26 MC says:
Eh? That made no sense and was boring to play.
19/05/2009 at 13:33 Dorsch says:
This was really good. Thanks.
19/05/2009 at 13:35 Idle Threats & Bad Poetry says:
I also didn’t understand the point. I usually enjoy something artsy, but this was bewildering. It left me feeling that it didn’t really have a point, or that it was trying too hard to be tragic. It was like a good idea that didn’t go anywhere. Other games have been much more successful in this regard.
19/05/2009 at 13:56 feitclub says:
The first thing it does is say “Click for Instructions.” But clicking goes to the title screen. Is that them being clever, or are there actually instructions?
19/05/2009 at 13:56 Rosti says:
I’m sure there is a meaning to everything, but I didn’t even feel a hint of a mental direction to explore. Which isn’t to say that moments didn’t work, just that it feels a little to ‘mysterious’.
19/05/2009 at 13:57 BooleanBob says:
@Chis: One of the creators worked on the Wiiware version of Cave Story. Which goes some way to explaining the obvious liberties the game takes with Pixel’s trademark style.
As for the game itself, I can’t honestly say I enjoyed it, or found it particularly thought-provoking, or emotive. Mostly I just felt frustration at the absolutely diabolical combination of mechanics present in the underwater section.
Reverse steering + narrow, uneven corridors (ie bits to get stuck on) + inertia + a light source that only illuminates where you’ve just been + completely arbitrary requirements for, and means of, progression? Seriously?
It doesn’t make me feel big or clever to diss what is clearly the result of a lot of hard work, especially considering the experience was novel enough (and free). But when you consider the game it draws most of its inspiration from was also free, well… it’s a comparison that would perhaps be impolite to continue. Sorry. Just not my cup of tea.
19/05/2009 at 14:02 Lewis says:
Huh. I’ll have to think about that one. I’d be tempted to give it another go to try figure it out but I just found it deeply irritating to play once it got to the watery bits.
It seems to revolve around that first boss bit. As if the “game goes wrong” and everything dramatically changes as a result.
19/05/2009 at 14:14 Martin says:
SPOILERY:
An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge, of course. You didn’t really go down, collected fish and solved a puzzle, that’s just what you are imagining as you drown. Beautiful.
19/05/2009 at 14:16 a rob amongst many says:
I think it was trying to subvert the notion that videogames have to let you win; that whatever situation the narrative puts you in is somehow ‘winnable’. It therefore necessarily begins by appearing to be a pretty standard platformer where you’re killing stuff and collecting things for no obvious reason.
The assumption that the boss is unwinnable and that therefore the next section is simply part of the narrative leading you to a win state is natural for anyone who’s played similar games. Without spoiling, the actual ending then twists this assumption – instead you’re lead to an extended lose state, although this is obscured by the presence of an irritating puzzle. That’s all I got from it anyway. It’s like that bit in Cave Story only this time Curly doesn’t save you.
19/05/2009 at 14:32 Helm says:
rob: yes, exactly. Thank you for the post.
19/05/2009 at 14:40 Richard says:
It reminded me of Doom 3 as I couldn’t see anything for half of the game.
19/05/2009 at 14:47 Jazmeister says:
I liked the arty elements, but the actual gameplay was annoying in the later section. You can extrapolate meaning from the annoying elements too, but really, frustrating much? I can’t see where I’m going and keep knocking into walls? Really?
It’s gorgeous, though, and I liked it. I just wish I could say “ah I see what u did there” and then go and play the actual game, the shooty game that looked awesome. Y’know?
Also, true story: The Cortex Command guy knew about this before Offworld, called it a “GAMING ORGASM”, and linked to it, but it wouldn’t load for me until I followed the RPS link. Unless that was part of the metaphor.
19/05/2009 at 15:31 apocalypsecow says:
So the only winning move is, not to play?
19/05/2009 at 15:35 EGTF says:
What the hell am I meant to do in fathom? I couldn’t kill the giant snake boss and I’m now swimming by blowing bubbles with a torch and some fish. :/.
Damn, I haven’t been this stuck in a platformer since Burn the Rope.
19/05/2009 at 15:37 Lorc says:
I would have enjoyed this a lot more if i could see during the underwater sections. A weak flashlight that shines only in the direction you are not traveling does not help.
Having said that, I liked the idea and the craftsmanship. It was just the play experience that let it down.
19/05/2009 at 15:54 LionsPhil says:
Well, I found an ending. Best thing about it was easily the boss music.
19/05/2009 at 16:20 dmauro says:
Yay, I managed to make myself explode…. o_0
19/05/2009 at 16:30 Daniel Rivas says:
Wow, this game is pretty divisive. I personally really liked it, though I can see why others don’t. The idea of “repurposing” mechanics in a game is really appealing to me, and the fish thing I thought was really clever.
The controls *are* finnicky though, and I have to admit the tree made little sense to me.
19/05/2009 at 16:46 Rostov says:
What the fuck? People get all worked up over a stupid make-feel-good tearjerker like Today I Die but go “Durr I dungetit” over this?
19/05/2009 at 17:04 Robin says:
It’s a nice technical exercise, regardless of whether it has any deeper meaning.
(Is there some law that states that every artsy fartsy indie developer has a rip-off of the Metal Slug Mars People on their homepage?)
19/05/2009 at 17:13 Lewis says:
@Rostov: I found Today I Die to be more overtly clever than this, especially in how intrinsically it linked the mechanics into the story. Elements of this seem a little arbitrary by comparison. As people have said, there’s a whole section in the middle that seems incongruous to anything, and there’s very little flow between the sections. The abruptness of that to start with is effective, but after that it’s just a bit awkward.
19/05/2009 at 17:15 moyogo says:
I enjoyed it thoroughly.
[espoiler] someone mentioned the tree, well it got into the rocks and messed up the foundation somehow. SO that’s why the next thing happened.
19/05/2009 at 17:44 _Nocturnal says:
I think the headline fits the game quite nicely. As I understand it, this is basically a metaphor for gaming. I’ll consider everyone warned by that last sentence and start to explain now:
In the begining you have your health meter, your collect-a-thingies and your big bad boss – all of them well known, traditional gameplay elements. But you cannot win this way. Those elements just limit your possibilities (the falling foothold during the boss battle). You have to experiment and search for meaning, which is represented by diving in those dark waters. Your light points backwards, because as you break new ground, you can never know what’s ahead of you, only what is already known. The fish represent inspiration, intuition or insight that you pick up and that’s the only thing capable of guiding you. I could continue, but my point should already be clear, so I’ll leave the rest to you.
Whew.
19/05/2009 at 17:52 Xercies says:
I’m sorry but thats just artsy masturbation to me, the light means this and the falling on the ground meant this
What i thought was there was a good game at the start and he ruined it by putting a crap oceon thing there which i didn’t know what to do, and gave up because there was nothing there.
The people who are putting this art masterbation up is really looking deeper at something not there or I coudn’t see it at least.
Its rubbish actually waste of 5 minutes trying to play it. And it looked promising at the start as well.
19/05/2009 at 18:00 Dead Fish says:
rob’s explanation makes sense to me, but I wouldn’t have understood it otherwise. Its an interesting little thing, but for some reason I would have preferred the pretend-game in the beginning. :/
19/05/2009 at 18:11 Half Broken Glass says:
Last level of the game(After you plant the seed and go through the “door”) is really the first level, exactly the same in structure, minus the enemies. The last chamber in which you swim up towards the light is the same chamber you fought the boss.
Makes sense now?
19/05/2009 at 18:12 Chis says:
Thanks for the clarification, BooleanBob.
19/05/2009 at 18:22 Solar says:
Stay away from the light! Has no-one ever wondered what happened when you say ‘no’ at the continue countdown; consumed with despair and accepting defeat at trying to beat an impossible arcade boss? What did happen to your hero, left in the lurch with a Drillaconda?
He swam with the fishes, that’s what. Didn’t you know that happens to all your abandoned heroes?
Also of interest; the entire fish section is randomly generated and the boss is impossible.
Feitclub: The instructions are: z+x. Must say I sat in the dark for a while till the idea to press z crossed my mind.
19/05/2009 at 18:23 Eternal_newbie says:
Played this twice and found two game breaking bugs.
[possible spoilers]
First time I got to the ‘area of light’ with the item I heard a ping but nothing happened. Now this could be because I accidently skipped the boss fight. However there was no indication of this nor anyway to go back.
Second time I got passed this to the next section, but I couldn’t find the way forward. I found that you could go around the level, I thought perhaps this might be what you are meant to do. as you could still just about see your character I hit one end and couldnt go further so i tried the other direction, eventually you couldnt see the character anymore and the darkness was removed from the level and at this point you could no longer return to the level.
I dont mind the wandering around so much, esp as its an art game.
But the complete lack of indication of whether your going in the right direction + bugs = fail
19/05/2009 at 18:36 juv3nal says:
let’s try something here…
spoiler
19/05/2009 at 18:37 Rhygadon says:
When you re-enter the final area — the underwater repeat of the first zone — if you immediately swim back up and sideways, you can swim off the screen, and eventually the mask of darkness that surrounds you follows you, leaving the level visible again. Which is actually a rather nice, if almost-certainly inadvertent, bit of metaphor. (Ultimately you hit hidden edges and nothing happens.)
Overall, though … yeah. Too many elements that seemed like they might lead somewhere but didn’t. (Most obviously, the tree. Also, the fact that none of the things you’re beating up for parts in the first stage are trying to hurt you.)
In the end, I played through twice, found no variation, and shrugged. I still have hypotheses I’d like to see tested — Does anything change if you don’t shoot anything or collect any sprockets? Are there places you can only go with the light off? But it’s a sign of the game’s failings that I decided that testing these would be too tedious. Instead, I came here, knowing that a game like this would be catnip for the RPSers …
19/05/2009 at 18:38 Zetetic Elench says:
A surprising number of people seem to have missed that the fishes show you where to go.
Also, I think reading anything into the light/fishes/direction mechanic is a bit far, but Rob’s interpretation seems spot-on to me.
19/05/2009 at 18:46 Dorimant says:
I have to say that, once I had the entire thing explained to me, I really liked it.
The problem that a lot of games with messages have is how to make the meaning understandable without whacking you over the head with it. It seems to me that Bioshock and other AAA games do it by sheer length, Fathom and other smaller games have a lot less leeway, to get it right. It’s the difference between a novel and poetry.
The other problem is that playing a game is a very goal-orientated process and people rarely play games with their literary-critical hats on.
19/05/2009 at 18:54 Zetetic Elench says:
Addendum: On replaying this, how did I not notice that the final area is an underwater copy of the first? That is a really nice touch.
As is the rather beautiful second title screen.
And the telling clue that when you go underwater, your health bar is empty.
19/05/2009 at 19:05 Dominic White says:
Anyone else pick up on the fact that your ‘enemies’ are non-aggressive flowerpots and sprinklers? They don’t do anything to harm you unless you run into them.
And yet you run and jump and shoot and kill them and take their stuff, because that’s what videogames are about, right? And you’re a guy with a gun! That’s what Gun Guys do!
19/05/2009 at 19:13 fishmitten says:
It was OK, but I wouldn’t spend too much time stroking my chin over it personally.
19/05/2009 at 19:26 TCM says:
@Xercies
You are the cancer that is killing videogames! [/indie]
(In all seriousness though, giving up that easily is an indication of…something, I dunno what.)
19/05/2009 at 19:39 Jeremy says:
I don’t think it’s necessarily supposed to be incredibly thought provoking, but just an interesting twist on a medium where winning is the goal. It is also done in a charming and creative way I think, because I compulsively went about doing something that actually had no impact on the game whatsoever. At the very least, it was clever :)
19/05/2009 at 20:00 Markoff Chaney says:
Enjoyable game, even if the mechanics were frustrating in the middle before you realized those limitations were superb foreshadowings. I love some of these better deconstructions of the gaming genre. They get you thinking about our own preconceived notions of winning and habitation in a finite existence with what we believe to be carefully defined rulesets only to take them away and give you something else to play with.
I’m more surprised I caught the relationship the Orpheus myth had on Don’t Look Back and I missed this apparent nod toward an excellent work of fiction. Thanks for some elucidating comments above.
19/05/2009 at 20:01 Lewis says:
@Xercies I’m really worried you’re being somewhat blinkered again. No matter how you hedge it, you’re looking down your nose at a certain type of game, and that isn’t constructive for anyone.
19/05/2009 at 20:04 Devan says:
One other thing I haven’t seen mentioned is that the splash screen showing the CPU thing, there are some icons showing that water means death. At first I thought this meant the sprinklers would hurt me, but when I got to the water part it was pretty clear what the level was meant to be.
The fish idea was good, but too much was just arbitrary head-scratchery.
19/05/2009 at 20:17 The Hammer says:
@Lewis:
I appear to be looking up your nose.
…I’ll get my coat.
19/05/2009 at 21:03 Coulla says:
I thought it was good. A nice little interactive metaphor. You lose and then you die. You just happen to see it in a more personal way this time. Instead of watching your little guy drown, you see what he sees as he drowns.
I really don’t understand the people who are upset that it didn’t fit into their preconceptions. It wasn’t supposed to be a fun little shooter, it was supposed to be an artsy metaphor and not (strictly speaking) a game. It was a huge success in my eyes.
19/05/2009 at 22:03 R. says:
Nice idea but I don’t believe in a no-win situation.
19/05/2009 at 22:34 Jetsetlemming says:
I fucking hate the artsy point that this game is trying to make. No-win situations are the devil. I can accept the bad guys winning but it’s not an interactive game if I can’t find some way to beat it, or at least have my guy survive.
Actually, no, there have been situations in gamings where my character dies as part of the scripted events or plot and I’ve accepted it. I remember this one HL mod called “A night at the office”, at the end of it you have basically three choices- Die alone, die trying to save the other survivors, or live and leave everyone else to die in an explosion. The best ending is going up to try and save the other people, even if you die in the process, just because it feels right.
Also the game didn’t torture me with an aggravating gameplay sequence before going “Yeah, you died pointlessly, game over.”
20/05/2009 at 00:26 James T. Kirk says:
Wait, you all died?
For me, the boss spontaneously exploded and then several Orion slave girls came down and the screen faded to black.
Guess I’m just awesome.
20/05/2009 at 00:43 OJ 287 says:
I thought he had the bends. You rise up too quick and die from the nitrogen bubbles in your blood, which causes you to have delusions about how you got into the water in the first place. In reality, youre in Corfu diving for tropical fish.
20/05/2009 at 01:08 Dorian Cornelius Jasper says:
Wait, so that’s what the game was about?
Would not have gotten it if it weren’t for rob. But I figured the dead ending was the real ending anyway, considering it was the only conclusion. Going through the last section underwater was also pretty spooky and probably should’ve clued me in as to what was really going on.
But then again I’m an idiot.
20/05/2009 at 01:18 Adventurous Putty says:
The point is, indeed, obscured by the horrendous deep-sea diving gameplay.
Great point, though, if a lackluster execution. The idea of hallucinations and death-throes in gaming are really unexplored avenues for storytelling, outside of the indie world.
20/05/2009 at 01:39 Zeus Poplar says:
SPOILERS:
Another day, another pixel art flash game about the afterlife.
Let’s see, there’s Today I Die, Don’t Look Back, Fathom here, Nekogames’ Underworld Trip… am I missing anything?
Makes me wish for the days when I was sent to rescue a princess and she wasn’t OMIGODSHOCKACTUALLY DEAD!
20/05/2009 at 02:10 Zyrxil says:
An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge, of course. You didn’t really go down, collected fish and solved a puzzle, that’s just what you are imagining as you drown. Beautiful.
Except you’re not clearly having a dream in the moments before death, you’re doing bunch of completely incomprehensible actions in the moments before death.
The fish don’t really lead you anywhere, the triangle thingamajig doesn’t have any clear identity, nor is there any reason for the growing tree or the giant vine door or really anything. At the end, it doesn’t even seem like you’re escaping a watery grave, just that you’re swimming up. Furthermore, it looks like you’re a robot, and there is never any idea introduced that you’d drown anyway.
The whole thing is just rubbish. If An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge was never written (or really any story in that vein), this game could not even claim to be a digital interpretation of that idea. Just terrible.
20/05/2009 at 04:52 Hypocee says:
I have a word to describe my experience, and that word is ‘cocktease’. If this is supposed to be AOAOCB, then that last few seconds could be made so much clearer with just a few frames of animation, a final spasm, a fade, the tips of the drills, a different sound effect (maybe a single heartbeat, or heartbeats growing in tempo with the light then becoming arrhythmic?), some falling-spreading rock debris…something. If I have to be told what the point is, the art didn’t work on me. I read it as a non-sequitur explosion and went ‘Wha? Oh, Game You Can’t Win. Nihilism much?’ Also, the Owl Creek Bridge/Brazil twist ending doesn’t work if the things that ‘happen’ are all surreal instead of serving something the protagonist wants.
All that said, top marks for polish, I thoroughly enjoyed the play mechanics (yes, including just tooling around and spinning lazily with the light), duplicating the play area was well fucking spooky even though I didn’t catch The Meaning, and the fish-leading-you algorithm was an inspired inclusion excellently blended in. I felt so pleased when the fishes’ loops got strong enough that I noticed they were leading me, and I was terrified to go in the boss chamber because I somehow knew there would be nothing there and that would be horrific for reasons I couldn’t, er, fathom.
I love Today I Die.
20/05/2009 at 04:55 Hypocee says:
Zeus – I’m sorry, but the Princess is in another castle.
20/05/2009 at 09:05 Idle Threats & Bad Poetry says:
I really feel Zyrxil was right on about this. It was trying to be too deep about something as simple as an old-school platformer, as if taunting, “You’re platforming is meaningless because in the end you die!” It just didn’t work and felt pretentious. I’m not knocking that many of you enjoyed it. I just wanted to say that this is not a step in the right direction for a video game that wants to be art.
20/05/2009 at 12:43 CdrJameson says:
That was quite fun under the water, but.. pointless?
I jumped down the first pit to see what was there, apparently an underwater area, but hey! I’ve played platformers before where there’s an underwater bit in the pits, and I’m a robot. Doesn’t hurt, don’t have to breathe (perfectly valid tactic in Hired Guns, folks).
Had a pleasant swim around underwater collecting fish for a while, and having random trees grow and holes open, entered a second underwater area, got to the end and then apparently I was dead.
Um.
Making the second underwater level the same as the above world level would be clever (and is an easy trick – get two levels out of one design), but as I’d only gone a little way in the above world before I jumped in the pit, I didn’t get to it.
Defying genre conventions? Confounding expectations? No – just putting a screen up saying ‘Ha Ha! You Lose Suxxxor’ at the end.
EDIT – Just played it again, and the second underwater level isn’t the same, as it’s missing the pit I jumped down. Also, y’know, why would I be in bits in some water? INTERNAL CONSISTENCY FAIL
20/05/2009 at 13:04 Ian says:
So I got to an underwater bit, kept trying to go down, found some fish friends and eventually got bored and gave up.
For what it’s worth, I’m sure it’s my fault and not the game or it’s creator’s.
20/05/2009 at 15:44 brulleks says:
Yeah, I think it probably seems even more futile if, like me, you fall down the very first pit and only get to see the underwater section rather than the rest of the game…
20/05/2009 at 16:09 bonuswavepilot says:
@Xercies: You find “artsy” intention more masturbatory than a game you just play for the pleasure of playing? I would have thought that even if poorly executed, an attempt at an artsy message in a game is less like wanking than the standard revenge-fantasy plotline, twitch-gamed through to make the numbers go up…
20/05/2009 at 16:20 moyogo says:
RPS should re-post that video from TIGSource every single day. A game as good as this getting trolled for not being a standard platformer,
20/05/2009 at 19:59 Hypocee says:
Yes, they should definitely have had only the one water opening.
20/05/2009 at 20:52 KafkaTamura says:
Did anyone else notice that when you went through the opening in the watery bit you end up in a watery version of the level at which you started, and then the bit where you go up towards the light is the bit where you fought the unwinnable boss battle?
Plus, you should always follow the fishes.
20/05/2009 at 21:01 Scandalon says:
All the handwaving and shouting seems to be getting the concept and the execution mixed up – most of the complaints aren’t that’s it’s something different, it’s that it’s something different, done not so well. (Interesting to me that the “standard side-scroller shooter” part is done so well, but the latter part…)
Artsy, “deeper” games with meaning are great, *if* they get across their meaning/story/point, etc. This one failed on multiple accounts. The “jet backward” mechanic was interesting, the “jet backward then rotate around wildly so you can see where the *(%# you’re going – why don’t you point your flashlight forward you twit” mechanic wasn’t. Nor were the “oh, I picked something up, wonder what it is?” and “Something’s rumbling for some reason, guess I crossed an invisible trigger, oh, a giant tree randomly appeared” and later “something rumbling again, finally, but I can’t freakin’ see anything” or the “hmm, going up toward a light, yup, I’ve been dead the whole time, this is the end….uh, I think those parts are supposed to be me? I guess I’m dead…” parts something to praise.
Title screen changes after first playthrough, and I liked the fishies. (But if they were supposed to be a navigation aid, they too, failed.)
21/05/2009 at 11:11 Melf_Himself says:
“1. boss you can’t beat
2. find fishes
3. find item”
Guess I got bored of either 2 or 3…. didn’t care to keep sticking around swimming in circles.
At first I thought the music track was designed to be more upbeat when you were heading in the right direction, which would have been genius.
24/05/2009 at 07:18 geldonyetich says:
“We undermine your typical expectations that because the game hasn’t ended on your defeat, you can still win the game.”
“I see… but what’s the object of the game – what’s the point?”
“The point is that there doesn’t have to be a point.”
“… Sure, if you’re tired of trying to create a compelling object of the game, you can always spin the absence of it is a compelling point.”
“Oop! You got us.”
It was a fun trip, though. Good production all around. To a great extent, that I even found it to be a good journey is in itself a verification it was a good game. It is still a bit easier than the alternative, though.
25/08/2009 at 02:48 Schwerpunk says:
Well, I loved it. Also, it was just the right length.
I would gauge that you probably have to be in the right mood to enjoy it, though.
02/09/2009 at 09:21 Jayt says:
I do enjoy reading comments that some gamers cannot deal with a no-win situation.