Talk:Braid (video game)

Mechanics

Explanation of game mechanics, anyone? I want to know why it's so acclaimed. Phyte 18:14, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Reception

The reception area does not read like an encyclopedia. f4hy (talk) 15:53, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not a regular here, but the entire gaming community seems to be up-in-arms about the price of Braid, $15, which is a bit steep for most XBLA games. Perhaps something about this could go in the Reception area? Just my two cents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.115.42.40 (talk) 01:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I had no problem what-so-ever paying 15 bucks for this game after I tried the demo. Am I not part of the gaming community? People that are upset are always more vocal than the people that aren't - but that doesn't mean there are more of them. --Magus05 ^(talk) 05:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't think it has lasting notability. If the game had sold poorly and there had been a round of articles citing the price as the reason, perhaps, but since it seems to be doing quite well, probably not notable. Doceirias (talk) 07:26, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't it also be mentioned that it was number 2 in TIMES's best game of the year list http://kotaku.com/5103968/time-take-a-stab-at-2008s-ten-best-games —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.114.172.129 (talk) 16:45, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

I've edited the reception to say that the game has received critical acclaim because IT HAS, and there's no reason why it should be changed back to "unanimously positive reviews". It has received critical acclaim (the Metacritic and GameRanking scores are just one piece of evidence), and that's what it's being changed to. It's scored higher than Limbo, and that game has apparently received universal critical acclaim, so the same goes for Braid. Please stop changing it.

Dialogue

I am documenting all the dialogue from the books in game. Would it be appropriate to add them to the page? If so, I would prefer to send them to someone who knows how to edit pages properly. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ObjectiveOne (talk • contribs) 04:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

It's great and helpful that you're doing that, but I don't think it would be allowed by Wikipedia guidelines. You may want to look into submitting it to gamefaqs.com or IGN's guides section instead. What you can do though is add important bits to the Plot section. SeanMooney (talk) 04:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Platform Questions

I am not sure this game has ever been released on Windows. The sidebar states that it is available on XBox Live Arcade and PC. On the Braid (Disambiguation) page, it also lists it as a Xbox 360/Windows title. A visit to the Braid main page does not mention anything besides getting it on XBLA, and Gamespot makes no mention of it either. I would think this should be confirmed and altered if there is no Windows version, but I am not sure enough to edit it myself. Anyone else have any clarification? - t.c. (guest, 10-23-08)

As far as I'm aware and windows versions is planned to be released real soon now. The home page has A PC version will be released in 2008; the release date has not yet been set. --Salix (talk): 22:50, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

To be more specific, Jonathan Blow said the PC version would be released a little over a month after September 5th. I guess he's running a little behind schedule. --Skrapion (talk) 11:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Official site now says that it will be released in the 1st Quarter of 2009. --Puellanivis (talk) 04:11, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

I think Nintendo SHOULD release it as a wiiware title, but apparently it cant because of size restrictions? what does that mean? could nintendo make their size restrictions larger? or something? cuz i found out about this game and it looks sweet. and i dont have an xbox 360. only a wii and ps2. and my computer is horrible, so a pc version would suck for me. Carluverdrm2004 (talk)

Your computer should run it fine. The game mechanics aren't really super intensive, or graphics intensive or anything. --Puellanivis (talk) 04:11, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Should it be noted somewhere in the article that the game will be playable within Facebook once InstantAction goes live?EvanVolm (talk) 20:32, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Ending

I've removed the Ending section on the grounds that it's WP:FANCRUFT. It really doesn't add anything to the article, and it's really just some anon IP's explanation of the ending. The interpretations of the ending of the game are based on primary sources and blog posts, neither of which are acceptable on Wikipedia. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 18:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

That maybe so, however I feel that the plot section maybe a little short and lacking. As I have not played the game and I am having a hard time finding reliable sources for information about the synopsis/ending/plot. Can you help me research this? Killemall22 (talk) 20:43, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Comments

I never got around to posting on the FAC since Raul withdrew it so quickly, and I don't have time to post a good review right now, but some openers.

• Why's the image size less than 252/256px?
• There's lots of rather stubby paragraphs lying around, which might be best fleshed out if possible or folded together. For example, the Controversy section is really more like a footnote, so perhaps that should go in Release?
• I'm going to go look for possible print sources that might be used to expand the article.
• Prose looks decent, I'll try and perform a copyedit soon-ish.

If I forget about this, ping me on my talk. --Der Wohltempierte Fuchs ^(talk) 02:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I haven't been able to find an image of the XBL logo larger than that (If they hide them somewhere on XBL, they hide it well). I had more fleshed out paragraphs when I submitted but someone did split them up, so combining them is find. I found one print source (through google) to help on development, but I expect the PC release to at least get something in PC Mag (it's also rather new so that may not give much). --MASEM (t) 03:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Title

Does anyone know why the game is called "Braid?" This seems like a valid thing to mention on the page, but I have not found the answer online. I know the word is in the game dialogue, but just in passing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jba138 (talk • contribs) 14:44, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

List

I added Tim to the list of fictional characters who can manipulate time, but I'm not quite sure where the ability comes from. Having played the game myself, I'm 90% sure that it does not explain it, so I just listed the source of the power as "inherent." If anyone does know the source, could he or she kindly fill it in? If the power is purely metaphorical and it should be removed, feel free to do so. Thanks. --Zazz96 (talk) 07:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Easter egg

In the following passage:

In one of the game's easter eggs, rewinding time far enough in a specific level reveals Blow's original designs for the game, and further rewinding reveals the design documents for the game.ref name="1up unravel"

User talk:71.193.37.239 keeps adding "This Easter egg has yet to be confirmed and is most likely a hoax." I have warned him on his talk page but he has continued to add it (see edit history).

Now, the original passage itself is somewhat contentious, as the easter egg in question is only mentioned in a "pro-tip" section. However, the proper forum to discuss it is here, instead of added unsourced text that contradicts it. So if you do have a source, or wish to remove the passage in its entirety, please discuss it here. Thanks. Schmloof (talk) 19:26, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

The easter egg can only be found on one page and is vague. There is no World Two that the article mentions. There are several forums that mention the tip is most likely fake. There are no other article exists that confirm it. No walk through confirms this easter egg either.

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/braid/show_msgs.php?topic_id=m-1-44812700&pid=943284

The best evidence I have is that I rewound on worlds 2-1, 2-2, 2-3, 2-4, 3-1, 3-2, 3-3, 3-4, 3-5, 3-6, 3-7, 3-8 for more than ten minutes each.

The text about the easter egg may need to be removed entirely. BBergkamp 20:00, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Message boards aren't reliable sources. And isn't World Two the first level that you play in the game? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 20:07, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Fuck it, it's not worth the hassle. Since the source does indeed seem vaguely untrustworthy, I just removed it outright. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 20:08, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

The possible levels are Tim's Room, World 2 title screen in the clouds, and any level in world two. He could also be referring to the second world you play, which would be world 3. I have rewound the game myself in all of the above mentioned levels for more than ten minutes at -8x rewind with no results. 20:11, 18 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.37.239 (talk)

Whatever. Your own empirical tests are original research and, as such, can't be used in the article. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 20:16, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Whatever. Maybe that is why I didn't cite forums or personal empirical data in the article. It is only here to add to the discussion. BBergkamp 20:29, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Latest Version is 1.015 for Windows?

I just got the game today from the Indie game sale (name your own price). The version I got is braid_full_1015.exe. Clearly the latest version is 1.015 and not 1.014, but I could not find a source for this on their website. Can someone update this and/or cite a source for it? -- Charles Stover 23:44, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Onlive

Masem, Geoff and I are all in agreement that the OnLive link doesn't belong on this article, as it's not a standardized platform to be used in the infobox. As an obvious COI, Warrenonlive really shouldn't be adding a link to it anyway. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 05:16, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Just for continuity's sake, Masem found this off-Wiki thread that's basically a call to action to push Onlive here. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 13:02, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

What a terrible, terrible shock that is to me. Geoff B (talk) 13:10, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

May I ask what your arguments are for OnLive not being a "standardized platform to be used in the infobox"? MAG1270 (talk) 06:40, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

@MAG1270. I am curious. Can you provide documentation that Braid was specifically released for use on OnLive? Can you also explain in detail how OnLive is determined to be a major console or primary operating system? Can you provide verifiable documentation to support these claims? Regardless of whether or not these questions can be answered, Wikipedia cannot be used for promotional purposes. It is clear that the inclusion of OnLive notations on Wikipedia are the result of desired promotion. As such, consensus has determined that these additions constitute spam. Regards, Cind.amuse 07:25, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

CallumMousehold (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is the latest to try it. Geoff B (talk) 21:32, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

No reference to the stars?

I've been reading up on the 8 stars thing from some videos and other blogs, and how you can actually touch the princess, causing her to "explode" in a similar fashion to a nuclear bomb. Why is this not mentioned anywhere in the article? Ctrlaltdecimate (talk) 19:26, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps this could be used as a source to expand on the nuclear bomb references. --uKER (talk) 15:24, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Cracked's not a reliable source, and no other RS has talked about this aspect. We can't include it since it is not a well-document aspect. --MASEM (t) 04:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

How about a recording of someone actually doing it? [1] see 29:25. Speed Demos Archive is reputable and extensively verifies all submissions. It makes sense after all. If you grab her at that point in time then the whole game becomes a paradox. --||bass (talk) 22:20, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately, WP:V doesn't allow visual media for assurance (there's enough OR involved with interpretation). That said, I've not looked for any new sources since May 2011 about these, so... --MASEM (t) 22:40, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I found this but I need to look at that site for RS-ness...--MASEM (t) 22:47, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Author's challenge to Wikipedia

The interpretation of the plot presented on this page, that the game's ending reveals Tim to be the villain, has a significant strike against it. It was first posted on Wikipedia, without citation, on 9 August 2008 [2]. On the same day, Jonathon Blow, the author of Braid, requested that this content be removed [3] partly because it was "a major spoiler" - and, more significantly, because it was wrong.

The same interpretation was then published by Xbox Magazine on 12 August 2008, enabling it to be cited and blessed onto Wikipedia in spite of having been described as wrong. Since the same interpretation was replaced on Wikipedia on 10 August 2008, there is even the possibility the Xbox Magazine editor read it from Wikipedia himself, creating a self-sustaining citation loop.

I tried to post this evidence into the article, but User:Masem and User:HelloAnnyong both reverted it on the grounds that it is "OP" to use interactions of articles with Wikipedia's history as a citation for statements posted on Wikipedia. While I understand the idea that "it's too meta", not being able to do this may hamstring important processes in keeping Wikipedia's content accurate as Wikipedia itself becomes more important as a means of dissemination. Also, only "material that can be challenged" is subject to WP:NOR; surely the presence of an entry in Wikipedia's own history database implying that particular information existed on Wikpedia at that time cannot be challenged, as if it could, it would imply that Wikipedia's own database lacked integrity, and thus that all information on the entire site would be unverifiable as the delivery and storage mechanism for the information could not be trusted. Hyphz (talk) 22:01, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Actually, let's look at the problem revision of August 8, 2008: [4]. Note what it says: "After you collect all of the puzzle pieces, you play through the final level, during which it becomes apparent that the "monster" is actually a knight in shining armor, saving the princess from your obsessive clutches." The immediate next revision [5] completely removes this. I absolutely that assigning the label "monster" to the knight is absolutely wrong given everything else that J. Blow has said about the game, so he was right then. Note that it says little about Tim being the villain.

Now, let's consider the OXM article used as the cite, that is dated Aug 12, 2008. It never calls the knight the monster. The version of the article on Aug 13, 2008 [6] has left the plot summary vague and interpreted to multiple endings. So there's definitely no circular citations between OXM and Wikipedia.

Basically, it's a non-issue. While we don't hide spoilers, Blow's statement of being incorrect was right, and it was fixed (By removal); since then, we've gotten sources that state one likely intent that Blow hasn't confirmed in any form (but certainly hasn't said it was wrong). Remember, he was pointing out that calling the knight as the "monster" was wrong, which is true. So that's a non-issue.

Now, further, Wikipedia has a policy that we generally don't talk about ourselves outside articles on WP. We certainly can't cite the history logs of WP as a legit source. The fact that whatever was on there was fixed within the day makes this an ado over nothing. --MASEM (t) 22:32, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok. I've raised the question about citing WP logs on the Reliable Sources page, though. I know it might not be reasonable to cite them out of the blue, but on this case they're necessary for the context of the other cited source (Blow's blog entry) because it refers back to them. Hyphz (talk) 23:50, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Even still, the point that Blow brought up was removed within the day. It is a trivial point to worry about, and what's currently on the page is in no way affected by it. --MASEM (t) 00:43, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Indie Game

The "Development" section should mention Indie Game: The Movie. Axl ¤ [Talk] 23:52, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Prometheus

Time and Decision is similar to game mechanics of Prometheus, UT3 mod. May be someone will consider it is worth mentioning. OverQuantum (talk) 22:57, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Braid (video game). Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.gamedaily.com/games/braid/xbox-360/game-reviews/review/7542/2092/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:47, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Plot

"Others have likened Braid to punk rock, designed (as explicitly stated by Blow) specifically as a statement against the status quo of the industry" Im not seeing in the articles listed as citations anywhere that he states this. There are quotes from a Gamasutra contributor that say this but from my reading not Blow. Can someone else look into this and tell me if this should be changed or maybe explain why Im wrong, or give another citation?Gamekeeper7 (talk) 15:46, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

I see the statement appears 1:1 in this book (pg. 283) by Casper Harteveld. It is not, however, stated that it was what Blow said, but that it was his intention. I believe you are good to go to clean that part up. Lordtobi (✉) 15:58, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Braid (video game). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081220031516/http://www.gamepolitics.com:80/2007/01/07/developer-pulls-out-of-festival-competition-in-protest-over-super-columbine-decision to http://gamepolitics.com/2007/01/07/developer-pulls-out-of-festival-competition-in-protest-over-super-columbine-decision/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://venturebeat.com/2012/04/14/fez-20000-units-sold-on-first-day/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081223093239/http://www.gamespot.com:80/best-of/special-achievement/index.html?page=9 to http://www.gamespot.com/best-of/special-achievement/index.html?page=9
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081223093052/http://www.gamespot.com:80/best-of/special-achievement/index.html?page=14 to http://www.gamespot.com/best-of/special-achievement/index.html?page=14

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:48, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Braid (video game). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://gamepolitics.com/2007/01/07/developer-pulls-out-of-festival-competition-in-protest-over-super-columbine-decision/
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.next-gen.biz/reviews/review-braid
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080808030200/http://xboxlive.ign.com/articles/896/896371p1.html to http://xboxlive.ign.com/articles/896/896371p1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100704164434/http://reviews.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/1548/Braid/p1 to http://reviews.teamxbox.com/xbox-360/1548/Braid/p1/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://venturebeat.com/2012/04/14/fez-20000-units-sold-on-first-day/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090415164704/http://atomicgamer.com/article.php?id=770 to http://www.atomicgamer.com/article.php?id=770&page=1
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gamespot.com/best-of/special-achievement/index.html?page=9
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gamespot.com/best-of/special-achievement/index.html?page=14
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100918065519/http://xboxlive.ign.com/articles/112/1120887p1.html to http://xboxlive.ign.com/articles/112/1120887p1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:02, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Braid (video game). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081229093925/http://play.tm/review/20503/braid/ to http://play.tm/review/20503/braid/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121012091047/http://www.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId=8837234&publicUserId=4551247 to http://www.1up.com/do/blogEntry?bId=8837234&publicUserId=4551247
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100316214832/http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2007/08/08/a-higher-standard-game-designer-jonathan-blow-challenges-super-marios-gold-coins-unethical-mmo-design-and-everything-else-you-may-hold-dear-about-video-games/ to http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2007/08/08/a-higher-standard-game-designer-jonathan-blow-challenges-super-marios-gold-coins-unethical-mmo-design-and-everything-else-you-may-hold-dear-about-video-games/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:27, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Thoughts on promoting importance from Mid to High in WikiProject Video games

I just noticed that this article's importance rating in WikiProject Video games is listed as Mid. This seems at odd with the criteria, which for High says: "Series and games that have been shown to have a lasting impact on a genre, culture or the industry itself."

Braid is well-known as a landmark of independent game development, and as this article notes, "Braid is considered the definitive title that launched wide interest in independently developed video games starting around 2008 and onward" — surely this satisfies the criteria above.

Unless there are any objections, I plan to promote the importance of this article within the project to High soon. Neuroxic (talk) 00:16, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

As there were no objections, I promoted the article's importance within the Video games WikiProject to high. Neuroxic (talk) 10:45, 14 June 2023 (UTC)