![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rynlingInside is a 2.5D puzzle platformer originally released for the Xbox One in 2016. The near-future dystopian sci-fi setting contains strong elements of horror, and players should expect to experience numerous violent deaths. The game takes about four hours to finish, although a longer completionist run that involves accessing hidden areas will be rewarded with a secret ending.
You play as a ten-year-old boy, and you begin the game alone in the woods. The boy has presumably escaped from a shadowy research facility, and he’s being chased by dogs and men with guns. The boy will be killed if he’s spotted, so the player’s initial goal is to move to the right side of the screen while evading capture.
After the boy escapes from the woods, he emerges onto a farm littered with the carcasses of parasite-infested pigs. It’s here that the game introduces its central puzzle mechanic, which involves using a headset to control the mindless bodies of adult humans. When the boy makes his way out the farm and into a decaying city, it becomes clear that these mindless bodies were once marketed to the general population before the apparent collapse of human civilization.
Inside eventually finds its stride, but the puzzles at the beginning of the game have the potential to be frustrating for a first-time player. In order to progress through one of the barns on the farm, for example, the player has to backtrack to the left in order to open the barn’s back door. Opening this door allows a gaggle of chirping chicks to enter the barn.
The game has never previously asked the player to move from right to left, and there’s no indication that the chicks exist other than a faint chirping on the other side of the barn’s back door. It’s therefore not immediately apparent that these chicks are a necessary element to solving a puzzle that already has half a dozen moving parts. The game becomes much better about broadcasting puzzle solutions as it progresses, but it might be necessary to consult a walkthrough at the beginning.
The first quarter of the game also features another type of frustrating puzzle that involves crossing long distances to escape from attack dogs. If the boy dies at any point during one of these sequences, the player has to start over at the beginning, thereby losing up to six or seven minutes of progress. Repeatedly playing through one of these sequences only to fail at the end isn’t fun.
Thankfully, Inside becomes much better at managing respawn points after the boy leaves the farm. Many of the game’s later puzzles involve a combination of careful timing and brutal death, but they allow the player adequate space to stand still and assess the situation.
Tiny birds and bloodthirsty canines aside, Inside is visually striking from start to finish. The sound design is brilliant, and the audio works alongside the graphic design to create a palpable sense of danger and menace. Unlike Playdead’s earlier game Limbo (2010), which was more abstract and fantasy-themed, Inside is grittier and more focused on portraying a disturbingly realistic apocalypse.
As I played Inside, I could envision its story evolving in two ways. My first theory was that the boy is a host for the same parasite that killed the pigs on the farm; and, if he escapes into civilization, the infection will spread and the world will be doomed. My second theory was that the boy is being controlled just as he controls the mindless bodies; and, after he accomplishes his mission, he will be unplugged.
The actual endgame story developments are nothing even remotely resembling what I expected. Instead, Inside gradually transforms into a meditation on bioethics and subjectivity that’s all the more striking because of the player’s interaction with the story. I’m still not sure how to interpret the ending, but the path to get there involves one of the biggest ludonarrative surprises I’ve ever had the pleasure to encounter. I usually don’t have any patience for concerns over spoilers, but I’d recommend going into this game spoiler-free. The ending of Inside genuinely has to be experienced to be believed.
This isn’t quite a spoiler for Inside, but I was inspired to play the game again after restarting Ender Lilies, in which your player-character gradually becomes more of an eldritch horrorterror with each boss you defeat. I would say I love that particular trope, but it’s less of a “trope” than it is something that I’ve only ever seen in Ender Lilies. Inside comes close, though, and delightfully so.
You play as a ten-year-old boy, and you begin the game alone in the woods. The boy has presumably escaped from a shadowy research facility, and he’s being chased by dogs and men with guns. The boy will be killed if he’s spotted, so the player’s initial goal is to move to the right side of the screen while evading capture.
After the boy escapes from the woods, he emerges onto a farm littered with the carcasses of parasite-infested pigs. It’s here that the game introduces its central puzzle mechanic, which involves using a headset to control the mindless bodies of adult humans. When the boy makes his way out the farm and into a decaying city, it becomes clear that these mindless bodies were once marketed to the general population before the apparent collapse of human civilization.
Inside eventually finds its stride, but the puzzles at the beginning of the game have the potential to be frustrating for a first-time player. In order to progress through one of the barns on the farm, for example, the player has to backtrack to the left in order to open the barn’s back door. Opening this door allows a gaggle of chirping chicks to enter the barn.
The game has never previously asked the player to move from right to left, and there’s no indication that the chicks exist other than a faint chirping on the other side of the barn’s back door. It’s therefore not immediately apparent that these chicks are a necessary element to solving a puzzle that already has half a dozen moving parts. The game becomes much better about broadcasting puzzle solutions as it progresses, but it might be necessary to consult a walkthrough at the beginning.
The first quarter of the game also features another type of frustrating puzzle that involves crossing long distances to escape from attack dogs. If the boy dies at any point during one of these sequences, the player has to start over at the beginning, thereby losing up to six or seven minutes of progress. Repeatedly playing through one of these sequences only to fail at the end isn’t fun.
Thankfully, Inside becomes much better at managing respawn points after the boy leaves the farm. Many of the game’s later puzzles involve a combination of careful timing and brutal death, but they allow the player adequate space to stand still and assess the situation.
Tiny birds and bloodthirsty canines aside, Inside is visually striking from start to finish. The sound design is brilliant, and the audio works alongside the graphic design to create a palpable sense of danger and menace. Unlike Playdead’s earlier game Limbo (2010), which was more abstract and fantasy-themed, Inside is grittier and more focused on portraying a disturbingly realistic apocalypse.
As I played Inside, I could envision its story evolving in two ways. My first theory was that the boy is a host for the same parasite that killed the pigs on the farm; and, if he escapes into civilization, the infection will spread and the world will be doomed. My second theory was that the boy is being controlled just as he controls the mindless bodies; and, after he accomplishes his mission, he will be unplugged.
The actual endgame story developments are nothing even remotely resembling what I expected. Instead, Inside gradually transforms into a meditation on bioethics and subjectivity that’s all the more striking because of the player’s interaction with the story. I’m still not sure how to interpret the ending, but the path to get there involves one of the biggest ludonarrative surprises I’ve ever had the pleasure to encounter. I usually don’t have any patience for concerns over spoilers, but I’d recommend going into this game spoiler-free. The ending of Inside genuinely has to be experienced to be believed.
This isn’t quite a spoiler for Inside, but I was inspired to play the game again after restarting Ender Lilies, in which your player-character gradually becomes more of an eldritch horrorterror with each boss you defeat. I would say I love that particular trope, but it’s less of a “trope” than it is something that I’ve only ever seen in Ender Lilies. Inside comes close, though, and delightfully so.
no subject
Date: 2024-03-15 03:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2024-03-15 03:49 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2024-03-16 04:25 pm (UTC)Fair warning that Ender Lilies is difficult (maybe twice as hard as Hollow Knight) but fair. It's worth it, though. The art is distinctive and phenomenally gorgeous, and just being able to see more of the world is a strong incentive to keep going. It's also a very sweet game, despite its grim tone. If you pick it up, I hope you enjoy it!
no subject
Date: 2024-03-27 07:02 am (UTC)I still need to finish Hollow Knight. I'm so bad at that game. I think I died in Fog Canyon and I haven't worked up the courage to go back.
I was able to grab Ender Lilies during the Steam spring sale! I'm excited to play it, but I'll also probably be terrible at it, haha.
no subject
Date: 2024-03-27 01:30 pm (UTC)Based on this explanation of the lore...
https://www.reddit.com/r/TwoBestFriendsPlay/comments/4w6svn/an_explaination_of_insides_lore_background_and/
...the Blob has been controlling the boy the whole time. So why would the Blob want to shut down the transmitters that extend its range, thereby denying access to the external bodies that could help it escape?
To me, it feels like we don't know enough about what the Blob wants for the secret ending to make sense as a commentary on the story. If the Blob simply wants to escape, the secret ending is counterintuitive. "Escape" might mean "freedom from controlling the mindslaves," or it might even mean death, but we just don't have enough information to make a clear judgment.
Maybe I'm missing something, but I also get the feeling that this game is more interested in asking questions than providing answers. Mostly I just enjoyed rolling around and causing trouble.
no subject
Date: 2024-03-28 03:34 am (UTC)To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if the developers meant for the secret ending to confirm the blob is controlling the boy, but didn't think much about it beyond that. Sometimes I wonder if maybe we put more thought into these things than the actual writers do.
"I also get the feeling that this game is more interested in asking questions than providing answers."
Yes, exactly! I also get that feeling. Personally, I think the answer to a lot of the questions is "because it looks cool."
It's so much fun to control the blob, right? Smashing through the glass and walls is so satisfying. And I love the way it moves, how the limbs work together, it's so good. In my opinion, there are not nearly enough games that let you control weird, grotesque creatures, and it's a real shame.