And for all those wondering, YES you should go buy & play Braid if you haven't already. It's an astounding game. A 2D platformer-style game that deals with in-game undo, time travel, time distortion, and multiple realities. It's mind bending, fun, and beautiful. Watch the trailer for it here if you haven't seen it before: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqtSKkyJgFM
There is actually an official walkthrough[1] that just says... don't use walkthroughs ;)
I remember when I was originally playing the game right after it came out, and I was stumped by a puzzle and then found the "official" walkthrough and it inspired me to try my best at the game to get through it. And it really made the game way more rewarding, enjoyable, and memorable.
I think a lot of times people tend to over-exaggerate when using terms like 'masterpiece', but in this case it's warranted. The puzzles and gameplay are brilliant, and then when you discover what the story is actually about it really blows you away.
I don't mean to invoke any sort of death of the author, the story isn't about anything except what you bring to it kind of vagueness...but part of the genius of Braid is that it's intentionally unclear what the story is about.
The famous quote in the epilogue makes you think of an important historical event, but plausibly that's metaphorical and the game is about something more personal, existential. Maybe the game isn't about anything but making you reflect. Maybe it's an expression of particular events in Blow's life. Maybe all of the above.
There was an interview with Jonathan Blow several years ago in Game Informer, close to when Braid came out. Blow said he'll never explain publicly what the game meant to him so people could have their own explanations not be overshadowed by his authorial intent.
He also said he responded to people who emailed him their interpretation. At the time of the interview only one person correctly guessed Blow's own interpretation.
I can't even imagine what the real answer could be.
I agree, I've played through it twice now and don't think there's anything concrete. Even the "real" ending is just confusing. Still, it's one of the best games I've ever played, for the puzzles alone.
Braid is on the short list of games I've played where I could spend an hour bashing on a puzzle unsuccessfully, then sleep on it, then come back the next day and do it first try. That happened at least twice as I recall. I generally find that impressive.
(The game that did that to me most often was Catherine. At least five or six times. And given that I never got very good at the puzzle version (in the arcade game in the bar), probably still at least a couple more still lurking in there if I picked it up again.)
Steam has a growing and vastly improving group of games. However indie games tend to be your best bet. I have a 100+ steam games for mac and around 80 for linux. It's getting better!
From what I can see, it's not available for OS X at all. According to Wikipedia[1], it is currently available for PC and PS4 and will be released for iOS "at a later date"
I tried my best to enjoy it (Fez too) but I can't seem to get past the fact that they are platformers, which I have discovered I just flat-out do not like.
It's hard not to admire Blow. Not only does he make amazing games, but he actually powers through and finishes them. That's a talent on its own. I mean put aside his engineering and design skill-sets, actually finishing should be part of what one would have to 'learn'. At least for me.
One of my favourite talks from a developer was his talk on "Deep Work,"[0] where he talks about how he manages to keep working on projects that take a very long time to complete. He has some pretty good advice with regards to managing one's own psychology and avoiding burnout while being productive.
After Braid, Blow (rightly or wrongly) took an immense amount of criticism for his views and opinions. Even more admirable is that he shrug all that off to come thru' with another game (unlike Phil Fish who took all his criticism rather badly).
I actually paid for Fez, apart from its little gimmick and art work, it wasn't really much. Never finished it even, and I finished Assassins Creed 1 ;-)
Blow just seems genuinely good at writing games/software and creating puzzles, but even better at finishing.
Your assertion that he "stole" Fez is really not supported by the purported evidence you linked. And you totally missed the point of Fez if you think it only has the 2.5D and artwork going for it.
I as a consumer missed the point of the game by not being enticing enough for me to finish it so I could get it, apart from its special 3D and artwork, yes.
I am not saying he Stole Fez, I am saying he seems to have mistreated people who worked on it with him.
In the end, Blow is a force of nature, Fish was lucky to have someone code the engine for him, period. Look through the videos on Jai, there is some good stuff there that's not related to games in general.
Edit: Sure, it's perfectly valid to extend the meaning of "steal" to include "be inspired by" or "copy", but that does nothing but devalue its original meaning.
Yeah, agreed, he's quite the talent. I was more than a little pissed off when Indie Game: The Movie made a special effort to make him look like some kind of nutball for the audience to laugh at. I can't stress how terrible that documentary was. It played up hateful stereotypes of "pathetic geeks" and other things best found on sitcoms like The Big Bang Theory.
Blow was treated very unfairly, imo. He's actually interesting to listen to and something of a deep and critical thinker. Clearly he's someone who understands that games can be a transcendent experience like any art.
I just hope he's working on a VR game soon. I suspect the Vive is going to change everything in a couple months. I'd love to VR in the kinds of worlds he builds.
Although it's tempting, this is a game you really don't want any spoilers about (if you are ever going to play it). Vi Hart, who has been playtesting the game for months, said:
> Tips for playing The Witness: give yourself a week or two, no hints, no reviews. Sleep on it. Take breaks. It's a big game. Nothing like it.
> If you can't spend all day every day playing The Witness, give yourself months. Engage deeply with The Witness and it will stare back.
> Don't watch twitch streams or look at screenshots or read reviews. Just play it, seriously.
> ...this is a game you really don't want any spoilers about...
I couldn't possibly agree more. But, just so others don't end up making (or not making!) a blind purchase, I present a spoiler-free summary:
It's a puzzle game. I'm likely not nearly done with the game and the puzzles have ranged from trivial to really, really, rather hard. The guy who made Braid is the designer of and one of the programmers of this game. It's also rather pretty, and the art (and foley) directions [0] are solid.
From what I've seen so far, there's no reason why you couldn't control the game with two fingers, rather than a gamepad or a mouse and keyboard. Of course, it would be less pretty with one's hands in front of portions of the screen, but whatever. :)
Since the game turns out to be pretty polarizing, I would suggest reading a review or two. Most reviewers appreciate the design of the game and keep it spoiler free.
While this is technically true, I really think it gives people the wrong impression. The colored mazes are the universal UI widget but many of them are switchboards that control the environment in the game in ways typical to 3d puzzlers (turning on lights, moving platforms, aligning objects.)
Many of the puzzles are the sort of abstract logic puzzles you'd see in an IQ test or mobile game, but most of them revolve around paying close attention to your environment and seeing it in different ways. I'd love to describe a few of them, but wouldn't want to spoil the moments of euphoria from noticing them yourself.
It's unfortunate that the game starts with some of the more abstract ones, because the real joy lies elsewhere in the game, but I would say that if you don't enjoy an abstract intellectual challenge you probably won't enjoy it.
I'm a few hours in and have already had so many moments of pure euphoria. It is a full sensory game. It uses my whole brain. Aesthetically, intellectually, even spiritually.
A quote in one of the audio logs is so exquisite that I just have to share.
One nature perfect and pervading circulates in all natures
One reality, all comprehensive, contains within itself all realities
The one Moon reflects itself wherever there is a sheet of water
And all the moons in the waters are embraced within the one moon
The Dharma body [the Absolute] of all Buddhas enters into my own being
And my own being is found in union with theirs
The Inner Light is beyond praise and blame
Like space it knows no boundaries
Yet it is even here, within us, ever retaining its serenity and fullness
It is only when you hunt for it that you lose it
You cannot take hold of it, but equally you cannot get rid of it
And while you can do neither, it goes on its own way
You remain silent and it speaks, you speak and it is dumb
The great gate of charity is wide open, with no obstacles before it.
As someone who is colorblind, I've been happy to see many games come out with options to enable filters for one or more types of colorblindness. It's disappointing that such a feature isn't present in this game.
Send him the info. Despite the success he's still an indie dev, and maybe didn't have the resources at the outset, or just didn't get to it or know about it. but maybe it could be in an update.
> “We definitely thought about colorblindness but ultimately there was not much we could do in terms of the individual puzzles,” the game’s lead developer, Jonathan Blow, told me today.
It's been a decision by the devs. Still, it would be nice if they updated the puzzles for those who are colorblind.
Sadly, having played through the puzzles that involve color, it's not superficial at all. The puzzles are fundamentally about how colors work and combine. There isn't an obvious way to make a colorblind friendly version...
Some of my absolute favorite memories are playing Myst as a kid with my family. We'd huddle around the computer, take notes, kibitz about where to explore, be amazed at the visuals (those gondola-style rides were breathtaking at the time!). Riven might have been the high point of the series for us with the feeling of exploration it had being so great and involving.
I wish modern exploration/puzzle adventures in the Myst vein were made to be more easily navigated by my parents, who just can't handle FPS-style controls, quick action, jumping puzzles, etc. So I can't have them try Braid or Fez or most other modern games despite having some great puzzles. Machinarium worked great, Her Story was good but quite different, but other than that we'll probably never get to share that same Myst-style experience again. At least Cyan is working on a Myst-esque game again, Obduction.
I'm just waiting for the inevitable Myst game in VR. It's pretty much the perfect medium for it, since it solves the locomotion problem by just removing locomotion and replacing it with a set of discrete locations to stand at.
The only downside is that it would be a very solo experience and certainly couldn't be enjoyed as a family.
>The bulk of the game feels like taking an IQ test.
This is from a negative (but helpful) review of this game and it echoes exactly how I felt about playing Braid. His games feel like they're constructed so everyone will admire the genius of the creator for thinking up these kinds of interesting puzzles. And if the player ends up enjoying the game while they're admiring its creator, well that's an added benefit I guess.
I've tried hard to like Braid despite it being a platform game (Flashback (1992) is the only game in that genre that I've enjoyed so far).
It's gorgeous, clever and polished, yet it felt pretentious to the point where it would distract from the beauty of the game.
And I didn't know anything about the creator of the game before trying, so that couldn't have been personal bias (not implying that would have been the case otherwise).
I agree. I tried to play Braid many times but just couldn't get myself to play for more than a bit and switch to another game. Interesting enough, Flashback is probably one of the games I use as a reference for platform games so maybe that has something to do with it.
For anyone that hasn't played Flashback, give it a go. The graphics while low res now, still look very much alive and nice to look at even on modern monitors.
I find it interesting that you felt it was pretentious. What made it feel that way to you? I ask, because I never felt like that. I felt curiosity about what the Real Plot was about, I felt challenged (and frustrated) by the puzzles, and really enjoyed the art and music style.
It felt like each mechanic was introduced once I'd mastered the previous ones, and other puzzles made it worthwhile to replay things once I had already passed a level. To me, it felt like it did for Time what Portal did for space -- made me think about interactions in a new way. It didn't feel like it was trying to impress me, or wow me with the creator's brilliance (other than "this was made by one guy??") so much as make a game that made me think differently.
I think its similarity to Portal is something I hadn't thought of before now, but that explains a lot about why I liked it.
I was rather struck by this game. The puzzles are indeed clever and was immediately enamoured with the combinatoric spaces and visual appeal. Perhaps it is my experience with Go as a "conversation with hands," that drew me in to The Witness as a "conversation with the designer."
I hope Jonathan feels very lucky to have made this game. It is great and I find myself envious and over-joyed that he has had the time, privilege, and skill to build it (and many thanks to the team behind it as well).
JBlow is featured in the documentary Indie Game[0][1] which follows the trials and tribulations of development and launch of two indie games Super Meat Boy and Fez.
It's surprising how similar the whole experience is to launching a startup!
Indie Game: The Movie is one of the best documentaries I've ever seen. The cinematography is amazing, and they tell a great story about each of the dev teams they follow. Definitely worth a watch.
I feel like it's hard to launch a game as an MVP. You can try it out, but actually selling it without having all the aspects of the game (sound, graphics, performance, etc) might be hard.
It seems that this is the purpose that Steam's Early Access program fulfills. Players know well that the game is unfinished, but there is still enough there to explore. Users even pay for this early access and then they provide valuable feedback to the developers. Sounds like an MVP to me!
That movie is really unfair to him. It more or less mocks him and paints him as this out of touch primadonna instead of focusing on his work. I feel it was very unfair to him and dramatized for the audience at his expense.
Although I have a backlog of unplayed games which could last me for an eternity or two, I will probably buy the game regardless at full price now, instead of waiting for the inevitable sale a few months down the line.
While Jonathan's opinions can be a bit divisive, he is obviously a passionate programmer and gamer, and he financed the game from the sales of Braid, without kickstarter shenanigans.
(And of course the game appeals to me regardless as an old-school adventure games lover).
It looks great and I would definitely be playing it this weekend, but Windows-only is a nonstarter. I'm rather surprised to see an indie title like this not support OS X.
It is interesting that the game's rating is very positive but no one recommends it if I read the reviews. It seems that this game is not like Myst but a sterile puzzle collection without a story. Did I miss something?
I think the default sorting for Steam reviews is by how helpful a review was.
Looking through some of the positive and negative reviews, it seems like the positive reviews are fairly short and don't say much about the game, while the negative reviews are longer and the reviewers do mention what they thought did and didn't work about the game, so the longer reviews that have a negative opinion end up being the most helpful. Just telling someone you liked something isn't going to cut it for everyone.
I can only guess that everyone who wanted to write a more in-depth positive review was just so keen to get back to playing the game that they cut their review short ;)
The proportion of votes for negative vs positive reviews seem way off. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some vote brigading going on for whatever reason. Either that or people mindlessly vote for the longest review.
Nah, it couldn't at ALL be that people simply did not find it to be all that brilliant. It simply must be either a conspiracy or the masses are idiots.
If you don't like something, you are much more likely to vent than when you like it. Besides, it's a new release, so those who like it are still busy playing it.
I think posting a review of a game after playing it for 1 hour is awkward. But what is more awkward is upvoting reviews of other people that played it for 1 hour.
The hype machine around this is strange - tons of superficially positive reviews but without a whole lot of passion behind them.
Does anyone else smell something off about the response to the game so far? Have people convinced themselves that this is a great game before they started enjoying it?
It's just very difficult to explain what is so good about the game without spoiling the heck out of it, and since a big part of the experience is discovery, people that really like the game will hate do not want to spoil it for new players.
I play puzzle hunts, and have played a whole lot of puzzle based games over the years. I do not like Braid that much. However, I think The Witness is, gameplay wise, better than Portal, Talos Principle, Myst, 7th Guest or anything from the Professor Layton series. The puzzles get to be very hard, but they never felt unfair.
If anything, the negative reviews come from how the very beginning of the game starts too slowly, making sure you understand a little piece of the game, when, in practice, there's a whole lot more to it. The tutorial area is simple and generic, on purpose. Right afterwards, you get to an area that is just confusing, with puzzles you really shouldn't even attempt. Go anywhere else though, and the real game opens up, and it's wonderful.
> Have people convinced themselves that this is a great game before they started enjoying it?
Quite possibly. While it is an excellent game, the hype train has been rolling for so long that by this point it can't be seen as anything less than excellent.
See also the review cycle around the similarly hyped and long-awaited "That Dragon, Cancer".
I don't know what you are seeing, I'm passionate about it. There are really only one or two puzzle games of this caliber every year, if that, and for me this is the best one in many years. The superficial similarity of the puzzle design to some popular iphone games, combined with a higher price than indie games typically have, seems to be putting people off.
It's also a very simple game. There isn't a lot someone who likes it can say about it without spoiling anything. There are puzzles. They are good. The island is also a puzzle. It is fun to solve puzzles. Yeah, I can't really go on that way for very long, can I.
I think that is normal - Jon Blow has a big online presence, lots of fans due to Braid...
I upvote edw519 before I finish reading his comments all the time...
Wow, back in the day I loved Atlantis the lost tales [0], this definitely has that feel. I would have bought it already if I had more than just Linux at my disposal...
With the Steambox/machine now in production I thought the divide windows/Linux was shrinking rapidly. I'm not at all a gamer though.
I absolutely love the game, but for the sake of discussion, I have to admit that I'm slightly disappointed by the puzzle-paneliness of it all. I didn't read many spoilers over the 8 years of its development, but Jonathan Blow always made a point to emphasize the epiphany-based nature of the game. I took this to mean that as you gain knowledge from the panels, you slowly begin to understand how to use them to engage in more interesting ways with the world. Instead, the opposite is true: the world simply provides different kinds of masks to solve the puzzles with. In other words, the panels are still the beating heart of the game, while the world is mostly static.
To me, this goes against what I like most in games. I find that one of the primary advantages of this interactive medium is the ability to solve puzzles by intuition. Braid was particularly good at this: instead of having to stand in front of a challenge and reason it out in your mind, you could dive right in and play around with the mechanics until your mind took on the solution all on its own. Over time, you acquired a feeling of natural mastery over these new elements. The Witness does not feel like this; more often than not, you have to logic out the puzzles in your head or on paper, and it never feels as good as using the game world to interactively solve a problem.
(Yes, I'm aware of the obelisk puzzles, but it seems they still follow more or less the same formula. But I haven't gotten very far in that direction, so we'll see.)
The game also makes me think about the problem of hidden knowledge in open-world games. Most metroidvania-style games gate the player with keys or abilities, but a few are starting to add paths that are closed solely based on the player's knowledge. One of the first games I remember doing this is Super Metroid: the wall jump and high jump allowed you to get to a lot more places, but they were nearly impossible to discover without the bird helpers. Fez did this with its Tetris language. La-Mulana did it with its obscure inscriptions. And The Witness does it with the ruleset of its various puzzles -- more completely than any other game before it. Still, I wonder if there's a better way to stash away that kind of knowledge. The puzzle panels are a bit too abstract for my tastes. I'd love to see a game where the hidden knowledge you find is entirely ability-based, but not obscure like in Super Metroid.
Again, The Witness is a masterpiece and one of the few games I'd gladly call art. It would be worth $40 just for the opportunity walk around the incredibly beautiful world. Just some food for game design thought! :)
Oh yeah, how could I forget Toki Tori? I really love the concept behind that one, except I wish the game was entirely contiguous and didn't rely on a map screen. (Also, Toki Tori 1 was a fantastic straight-up puzzle game.)
I can kind of see where you're coming from. I think it might be because the puzzles don't seem to produce much if any overall progress and there's no real indicator of the bigger picture you're trying to achieve (though in some ways you may argue this is also one of its strengths).
Look at a title like Talos Principle for example, which while not a like for like comparison has a quite clear sense of an overarching story and progression.
Interesting that you mention Super Metroid - I have some of my strongest and fondest memories with the things you mentioned, the wall jumps, blowing up the glass with the Power Bomb, etc. Things that felt surprising, not like deus ex machina, but which felt like genuine discoveries that made sense.
I think the Witness has these, but at a much smaller level. Discovering the rules for a particular puzzle gives that huge rush for me, but I haven't seen it translate to the game as a whole.
I was going to buy this game until I read the steam reviews. If you're considering this purchase I highly recommend reading the top-rated helpful reviews. They changed my mind, they might change yours.
TLDR for the reviews - Only buy this if you like puzzles for individual puzzle's sake, not as means to unlocking a larger story.
Hrm, I appreciate your point. Personally I like reading comments that challenge hype, but if second hand hearsay carries no weight for you, or you find it offensive in some way, please ignore my original comment and accept my apologies for wasting your time.
Nice to have an indie developer exposed by HN. Sad to see there are no other cases.
Blow had its relevance due to XBOX but many indies have been out there before on PC, so it sounds unfair when you think in the whole scene
I'd hesitate to call Jon Blow an indie dev anymore, expect in the "not a AAA studio" sense. With the success of Braid and including in Indie Games the movies, he is probably one of the most well recognized game developers. The Witness has a massive budget, multiple developers, and high-end voice actors.
Jon Blow's probably the most famous indie developer, next to notch. Maybe more-so, among game developers. He was at the first indie game jam in 2002, I think he may have written for Game Developer magazine during the nineties, but not sure about that. I keep thinking the nineties were only a decade a away :/
Oh goodie, he's moving complaints and unfavourable opinions to "Dumb Internet Questions". I recommend reading the reviews, especially the longer ones, before buying.
Windows and PS4 huh? As the exclusive owner of Macs and an Xbox One, that's little irritating. I'd at least imagine a Windows to Xbox One port to be reasonable.
They have a timed exclusivity agreement with Sony, hence PS4 first.
"It will be released on the PC and the PlayStation 4 on January 26, 2016. The game will come to iOS some months after that, and other platforms a bit later." (http://the-witness.net/news/about/)
Fingers crossed for a Linux port at some point! For Blow's last game (Braid) I think the Linux port was done by a third party.
Or maybe it's time to get a copy of Windows and set up a VM with GPU passthrough...
Blow made a comment a few years ago along the lines that even if there wasn't a console exclusivity agreement, they didn't have the resources to launch on multiple consoles simultaneously.
Well, I was about to add it to my Steam wish list until I read this. My only non-work computer is a Mac, so I guess I won't be playing it until it's released there.
Congratulations to Jonathan Blow on finishing his game — I was afraid that he would never be done. I look forward to playing it, and I hope it sells well.
For entirely selfish reasons, I'm now really hoping this release means he now has some breathing room to spend more time on developing his programming language, Jai.
This game is the perfect tool for testing your problem solving skills. It puts you in a new framework and tests your cognition.
Portal, The Talos Principle, all have the same goal.
I wonder if people could become excellent problem solver by playing these games instead of honing the skills in the mathematics, physics or similar frameworks.
You may begin to realize that you are doing maths without realizing it. Thinking mathematically is quite natural for a curious, motivated person. It's writing down these thoughts which people find difficult. It's not easy for us to be precise!
It could augment your skills in mathematics. Most people are much better than they think they are or are given credit for.
I gave my niece the game, Set, over the holidays. She was able to beat adult players after a few rounds. Similar experiences with http://dragonbox.com as well.
Mathematics is a framework for problem solving which requires problem solving skills and knowledge of mathematics.
I believe anyone using a piece of paper and writing down their thinking is doing problem solving on problems that are presented in the game. Yes, it is probably equivalent to some algorithms present in computer science but they are (if not familiar) discovering everything by themselves.
The game provides the framework for problem solving, so instead of having knowledge of math/algorithms, you build that knowledge yourself and improve your problem solving skills as you go.
The way math is commonly taught seems to be knowledge oriented - which leaves a lot of people completely stuck when it comes to problem solving.
That's why I'm interested if you could, playing these games, improve your general problem solving skills, so that only thing you have to do, when you start with a different framework, is to get the knowledge - but your thinking previously trained without it and it should work now when you're familiar with the framework.
At least that is what I would expect form a general problem solver that got one's skills by solving problems in maths, or physics. I would assume that they could solve problems in other areas if they knew the terminology, if they acquired knowledge.
Believe what you will but a rose by any other name...
Maths is problem solving, recognizing patterns, and the ability to express those ideas and solutions. The language is rather difficult to learn but most people can do the former intuitively without being told they're doing maths.
Without giving away the game there are beautiful mathematical concepts built into it. You may not realize that as you encounter new puzzles and constraints you are internalizing a vocabulary for the patterns you start to recognize. Once you start writing down this language you will appear to be doing what people recognize as maths. However I find myself content with simply having the conversation... for now.
It is certainly tempting to start formulating a proper solution to some of the puzzles and write programs to test out my theories.
Regardless of what you want to call it I think you can certainly hone your "problem solving" skills in this game.
There’s been a lot of coverage about the puzzles and ingenuity of the gameplay, but equal attention should be given to the amazing artistic style of the game.
That's been really big for Oculus games from what I can tell. It has the added benefit of being faster to render, allowing for a GTX970 (the minimum spec card for oculus) to be able to drive games at the required speed. Lucky's Tale[1] is a good example of this.
This game is indeed great! Push the envelope forward for puzzle games and games in general. The game feels pretty heavy with potential like there are layers I am not even seeing yet and I am 10 hours in!
He's still doing live coding sessions on Twitch. Nothing has been released yet. Despite that there is already at least one comprehensive Jai language tutorial that I've seen and also syntax highlighting rules for at least one editor.
My daughter is going to be about 4, and she loves puzzles. I was thinking about picking this up for the apple tv to play along with her. Is it conceptually too difficult for children?
I have two questions that the steam page didn't answer; Can I play this in VR, and if not, why not? Jonathan Blow is a master artisan - I can't wait to try this game.
You kind of can with a hack, but it's not a comfortable experience. The game was not really developed with VR in mind, though the team experimented with VR support.
I don't know what the game is like, but I've said the premise sounds exactly like Myst. Even the video supports that. Here's a brief from the linked page:
You wake up, alone, on a strange island full of puzzles that will challenge and surprise you.
You don't remember who you are, and you don't remember how you got here, but there's one thing you can do: explore the island in hope of discovering clues, regaining your memory, and somehow finding your way home.
The Witness is a single-player game in an open world with dozens of locations to explore and over 500 puzzles. This game respects you as an intelligent player and it treats your time as precious. There's no filler; each of those puzzles brings its own new idea into the mix. So, this is a game full of ideas.
Difference in the premise being instead of your amnesia and finding about you, there's a book and you're finding about island's characters.
It's one of those games that manages to push buttons in your brain you never knew you had, and make you feel like a genius when something finally clicks.
And it does all this without ever needing to explain anything.
Jonathan Blow's enigma variations. A meandering meditation on the means by which humans gain knowledge and understanding of the world, by standing on the shoulders of a hacking minigame.
>makes you feel like a genius
Blow said having a game make you feel like a genius is a disease, looks like he completely fails to understand his audience again!
I've solved ~300 puzzles (out of 600) but am able to trigger the ending, so I am finished but not 100% completed yet.
I haven't found ANY puzzles where I feel like you're guessing at the solution. Every puzzle I've solved has had well defined rules. I don't want to give too much away, but broadly speaking there are two types of puzzles: Those that rely on the symbols, where whats on the screen in front of you is all thats required and those that...don't.
The first category, you slowly build up your understanding of the various rules as you progress, and they all play by the same rules. The second category though, the real puzzle is to figure out what you're missing, generally by observation.
But once you learn the difference between the puzzles that you can take a face value, and the puzzles where you should look around, it feels much more fair.
The only time I felt truly frustrated was the few puzzles that introduce audio as a mechanic. I think deaf players will be unable to 100% this game because of a handful of puzzles, and theres no indication that the piece of the puzzle you're missing is sound.
> I think deaf players will be unable to 100% this game because of a handful of puzzles, and theres no indication that the piece of the puzzle you're missing is sound.
This is the first time I've seen this mentioned, so thank you. I've been thinking about buying a PS4 just for this game, so that's a major bummer. I hope there's a patch in the future for some kind of visual indicator or subtitle to make it a bit easier.
To elaborate on what was said in other replies to this comment. Jonathan Blow has said previously that he got around some of the puzzles being fiendishly hard by not requiring all of them to be completed to get to the end of the game. He didn't want somebody to get stuck on one puzzle and then not be able to see the rest of the game over it, so you should be able to complete the vast majority of the game including the ending just fine without those audio based puzzles.
I've read that, but it's still a bit of a shoddy response to people who want to get 100% or get the rewards for completing non-critical subsections.
Imagine if you paid for a book and there were appendices about characters or something extra, but written in a language you didn't know. It would kind of suck.
Edit: As a side note, these comments seem to be the internet equivalent of:
A: =~#$())##~
B: Sorry, what was that? I couldn't hear you.
A: Nevermind, it's not important.
Which I think most people would agree is incredibly rude and dismissive.
>Imagine if you paid for a book and there were appendices about characters or something extra, but written in a language you didn't know.
If you don't already know about it, you may want to check out the book Finnegan's Wake :)
Joking aside, I think you're right that there should be some kind of notice somewhere, in-game or out (even on the Steam page) that indicates that some parts of the game are difficult or inaccessible for players with a degree of hearing loss.
Even better might be to have an option in the game that turns on an additional visual cue that could augment whatever the original audio cue was. Actually designing it to make sense in the same way would of course be difficult, but I don't doubt that there are enough players that would appreciate that option.
Subtitles for those 8 or 10 puzzles would render them trivial; the subtitles would literally need to be the solution to the puzzle written out for you. You'll still enjoy the game even if you skip the little jungle area; the game is structured so that you only have to do about 75% of the "areas" of the island. I know of three puzzles elsewhere that you'd have to skip as well, all of them optional.
I think you'll still be able to enjoy the game.
On the other hand, there are audio logs scattered about which you might prefer to be able to hear. They don't tell a story though; it's more of an examination of things Jonathan Blow feels are important. I think that's a cool part of the game, even though I suspect that I disagree with him entirely.
The elephant in the room is obviously that there's no accommodation for the blind at all.
Just to clarify a bit, from memory I saw 13 puzzles that relied on sound, there are 600 puzzles in the game, you only need to beat about 250-300 (Could be less) of them to start the end game part.
So you can definitely finish the game without sound, but if you're a perfectionist aiming for 100% you'll need to resort to outside help, which does suck.
The puzzles don't even have a visual cue to let you know audio is important, so if you're not expecting it these puzzles just seem unsolvable.
This and no colour blind support are probably the two biggest criticisms I have of the game.
I would write him a mail, might just be that it wasn't a conscious choice but he really didn't think about this.
I must admit that I also sometimes fail to remember making the software I create accessible to deaf or blind persons. It's never because I don't want to, it's just that there's often nobody on the team that has this particular problem and so it is forgotten.
I've encountered one audio-based puzzle so far, and if I was listening to music, this would have been frustrating.
Though, I have to admit, I like giving this game my full attention. I don't mind the lack of music as the environmental audio fits so well in the "whole picture" of the game.
No, I'd actually say it's designed to avoid issues of that nature. In my opinion, while the game derives some (actually rather minimal) inspiration from Myst and Riven, its puzzles are much more structured and logical.
This does come at the cost of their not being quite as wholly integrated into the environment as some of Riven's puzzles, for instance, but it also means a lot of the arbitrariness and guessing is gone.
(There are environmental connections with the puzzles, just to be clear. The game is simply a lot more careful and conservative with them.)
I think you may be making the mistake of viewing these puzzles as purely mathematical instead of also psychological. Mathematically its true, of course, that any number can come next in an arbitrary sequence. But its not true that each of the possible interrelations between those numbers is equally likely to be selected by human puzzle designer (*especially a good puzzle designer who is attempting to make the puzzle fun, challenging, but not impossible). Of course, that doesn't mean there is no such thing as a bad puzzle...
1)Puzzles about getting a solution that follows a set of rules, which can be deduced, and are reused from puzzle to puzzle. The game just checks that the rules are followed, so there is more than one valid solution sometimes. The different solutions might even have different effects.
2)Environmental puzzles, where the right solution is indicated by the environment. Without giving too much away, imagine that there's a line near the puzzle, matching the puzzle's grid, and the solution is just to trace that same line in the puzzle.
So there's never an arbitrary rule that you can't figure out. That said, a part that is difficult for some people is that they make assumptions about what the rules of the puzzles are, and the assumptions might be incomplete, or outright wrong. There's typically simple puzzles that are trying to teach you the rules. Part of the game's progression is to find those tutorial puzzles.
What's wrong with sequence A096774 (numbers with 9*10^n+7 prime)? Why is sequence A000027 (numbers starting at 1 increasing by 1 each time) better? Because it comes earlier in the encyclopedia of sequences?
A000027 almost certainly has a lower Kolmogorov complexity. Nothing wrong with the other sequence, per se... the maxim "When you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras" appiles.
By which I mean, I think it's a common misconception amongst those that argue this is a common misconception that the knowledge which they possess and view as straightforward, natural and obvious, is neither straightforward, natural, or obvious.
Common sense is really just another phrase for popular bias...
I like this idea: the OEIS-complexity of a sequence (= how early it comes in the encyclopedia). But yes, what I thought of was what the other commenter wrote: given some primitive operations, how long a program can generate the sequence?
Pretty much this. It isn't a very good game. It's padded to kingdom come, there is a lack of motivation to keep going and no music kills any atmosphere it might potentially create.
Nothing rude meant by this (honestly), but if the experience of discovering the island, finding and completing the puzzles itself isn't motivating enough then perhaps it's just not the game for you?
I understand your point about filler, but the puzzles are the game, and if you're enjoying them then it probably doesn't come across as filler, just more to get stuck in with (though I do wonder whether so many slight variations on a theme are required in certain areas).
Hyped it may be, but that doesn't mean that you absolutely have to enjoy it at all costs. There are other games, and other developers :)
I like the potential of the game, but sadly it did not meet my expectations.
I saw it as a Myst-style game, where you have puzzles, but you also have a lot of interactive environment around you to explore.
Here, I was getting taken it by a lot of beautiful scenarios in the distance, only to realise that there is nothing to do there, but solve more panels.
It simply feels like this beautiful island is going to waste, being a little more than a hiding place for the panels.
I've played about four hours so far and I'm captivated by it.
Slowly as you explore the the island and solve puzzles they become more and more intrinsically linked to the context you find the puzzles in - soon the puzzles demand that you become aware of the environment around you and look at things in new and surprising ways.
for myself i was never really expecting a deeply interactive landscape; i was slightly worried that the puzzles were just silly little doodads like a curio you picked up and soon forgot about, but as i've moved through the game solving them i've marveled at their cleverness and how they have encourage me to think.
perhaps the island is too static, but then again, back in the day so was Myst. the movement and interactions it encourages are up here taps head.
I'm feeling like you haven't played very far into the game. :-) And neither have I! The puzzles are definitely mostly panel-based, but the environment becomes very important to solving them.
I think The Witness is quite clever, so far. It's interesting how much diversity and playfulness can come from just these simple little grid-and-line puzzles.
two hours or so into it so far, so I don't have an overview of the whole game.
The puzzles so far have rarely asked for more than 10 seconds to find a solution.
Navigating the island does feel like an artificial overgame at the moment. Some of the puzzles have caused changes in the 3D world but in very small ways.
I guess that things are going to get more complex soon though.
The game suffers from the fact that its first hour or two can be solved without looking at the island at all, but there are MANY puzzles that aren't really about the panel: The panel is just where you enter the answer that you got from everything around it.
A couple of good, early examples (although they don't really show the game's real environmental power), are the temple in the desert, the temple in the woods, and the 'pink forest': All solvable without any information from a different part of the game, and absolutely not solvable by just staring at the panel itself: Entire series of 20+ puzzles have the EXACT SAME PANEL, just placed in a different location.
And panel solutions affect the environment. There are elevators operated by panels. a boat operated by panels. bridges built by solving panels that have more than one solution, in ways that match what you want to do physically in the game.
It's just a big pity that the beginning of the game shows so very little of that.
There's the environmental puzzles, where you need to find the right perspective, the right spot, or line up the environment in a specific way, so that you can solve them.
Hint: Look for large circles in the environment, and start dragging a line.
I don't think so, but obviously you know your 3yo better than I do.
The only thing that I could even imagine coming close are some marble statues of men and women that appear throughout the island. They aren't all that creepy but an imaginative child see them that way.
I've been doing this with my almost 4yo, and he's enjoying it. Not really getting the puzzles, but enjoying the environment and being allowed to steer the character.
One of the things I did not like is the sometimes incredibly obfuscated association of symbols with mechanics. For example, the panels with sun symbols. [Spoilers] It didn't take me incredibly long to figure out that they needed to be grouped in twos, but it did take me longer to figure out than to solve the first ~8 introductory panels. And the worst part, how is a star in any way connected with grouping by twos????
When a new rule is introduced, the early panels can be easily solved by trial and error. However, it's a mistake to continue until you can articulate the rule. That means experimenting with a panel even if you accidentally get the correct answer on the first try.
I do not mind new panels introducing concepts; what I mind is the symbols not always being clearly connected with the mechanic they introduce.
For example, the black and white symbols that needed to be separated were intuitive.
While I sort of agree, I must say that part of the fun of the game (and much of the challenge) is learning the 'language' of each puzzle. In the case of the little orange suns, it was like learning from scratch, one letter at a time.
First panel: "Okay, I can't go between them."
Second panel: "Oh, I can, but have to end up on one side... which amounts to having them in the same section. How is that different?"
Third panel: "There were 4, and the only path that worked divided them? What the hell?"
Fourth panel: "Oh with six I have to make them into groups of two - so maybe I have to divide them equally?"
Fifth panel: "Aha, no, it's groups of two!"
And now that's part of your vocabulary; you discovered it organically, not by bringing in some outside knowledge like symbols from off the island. Notice there aren't any numbers or letters? Like, anywhere? That's part of it...
True, I should have mentioned that and have added. Pretty much everything is spoilery in threads about the game, though. What I described is fairly early and basic, though, not some big revelation. Go try the game if you haven't!
Well, it's a puzzle game. So I might argue that not being intuitive is kind of the point.
And to that point, maybe one reason I've found so many recent major game titles boring recently is that there is no puzzle to them. They're just activities. Go here. Shoot that. Collect that. It's nice to actually be stumped. And not just frustrated by my lack of hand-eye coordination.
Hmm, a non-intuitive puzzle isn't really a puzzle anymore, is it?
Q: I have three oranges and one grapefruit. I have to get all of them through a door that's been glued shut. There is no way to open the door. How do I get the fruit through?
A: Blend them and use the tube lying next to the door and pour them through the keyhole.
That's a non-intuitive puzzle. You can't intuit that there's a keyhole, a tube and a blender accessible. With creativity it's solvable, but then again, with creativity you also could argue you could use the hole saw nearby and cut a hole in the door and deposit the fruit on the other side. At this point you're just making things up.
Please please please do NOT PUT SPOILERS INTO THE SECOND COMMENT IN THE THREAD. That's incredibly rude. At the very least, if you're going to do something like that, rot13 it, because people like me will see the spoiler before they read the word "[Spoilers]".
We are discussing a puzzle games. Part of that will be discussing puzzles. Maybe don't read comment threads talking about things you don't want any more information about.
There's a ton of ways to discuss The Witness without spoiling the game. The entire point of the game is to solve the puzzles, spoiling the puzzles is incredibly counterproductive. What's more, if you're actually genuinely stuck and want someone to give you hints, Hacker News is not the appropriate venue for that.
Comments like this will get your account banned from HN. Please (re-)read the site guidelines, and post civilly and substantively from now on, or not at all.
Is that the guy who was unable to install Ubuntu properly, so he declared that supporting Linux versions of his game is not worth the effort? Color me disinterested. "No Tux, no bucks."
I'm 100% sure Jonathan Blow can install Ubuntu. He is writing his own programming language. For a game like that, it just isn't economically feasible to develop for Linux. Especially since the engine was written from scratch.
He spent more or less all of the profits on his previous release on this new game. From the videos I've watched about the dev, he is somewhat of a perfectionist. It would likely rankle him to release a subpar experience on a given platform, which given the economic incentives, it would likely be.
I had a quick look at the trailer and it looked to me like it could have been built with Unity or Unreal Engine... wondering why own engine, given the effort to then port the game to other platforms?
This level of polish would be somewhat herculean to pull off in unity, and was not even close to possible when the game's development was started 8 or so years ago.
Unreal maybe, but it also wasn't as viable a choice 8 years ago.
The trailer is intentionally vague to avoid spoilers. I thought the same thing playing through the game for the first hour or so until I got to a puzzle that made me realize why they built their own engine.
MINOR SPOILERS: Some of the later puzzle mechanics rely on playing with lighting and perspective in a way that seems to me would be difficult to implement in a stock engine.
ah, interesting, will have to buy to see what all the chatter is about :)
I seem to be downvoted to death - the comments weren't meant in a disrespectful way - just wondered why the gargantuan effort with a DIY engine. The game itself looks really interesting.
> ...just wondered why the gargantuan effort with a DIY engine.
Given that Jonathan Blow is in charge of the project, it's almost certainly because existing engines were inadequate for the task.
From what I can tell, Rust is the most ambitious Unity project out there. The Witness is substantially more technically ambitious than Rust. Additionally -from what I read on the Rust devblogs-, the Rust guys spend a large amount of time working around Unity's limitations, missing features, and parts of Unity that are just buggy. (Granted, the buggy stuff generally eventually gets fixed, but until it gets fixed (if it ever does), you have to work around it.)
Actually, I think Frontiers (http://explore-frontiers.com/) might be even more ambitious Unity-using game, but the developer working on it is in over his head. Still, what he's done so far is amazing already.
FYI - I have only used Linux as my main laptop for the past 15 years. But he's right. I had really hoped that Steam Linux would be based on Android or something and build that friendly layer.. I'm still not sure why they went with Debian.
Some of it might have to do with familiarity. Working in * nix, you tend to combine tools to do stuff, whereas with Windows or OSX everything is normally only a few clicks away. I think it's probably a bit of a barrier for using * nix coming from something else. I'm personally used to it though, and it's a lot more productive for me than Windows. That's not to say there are a lot of tools that unfortunately just don't exist yet.
Do you have any experience in trying to make and sell games? Have you ever been compensated for a self-developed game project?
You appear to be completely unaware of the economics of game development. That coupled with the arrogant tone of your comments really makes you sound foolish.
They are foo because his arguments regarding toolchains, driver stability, distro "stability" are not troublesome in 2016 is it was some years ago. This is a technical discussion, not a discussion of selling.
Yes, I am arrogant by the way, I learned not to be afraid of standing tall with my own point of view.
> This is a technical discussion, not a discussion of selling.
Incorrect. The context is one of an indie developer trying to bring a product to market. This is similar to being a one-man startup (before hiring / contracting more staff). It is absolutely essential to make good decisions about scoping the project, marketing the project, and selling the project.
It is very common for technically-minded people to get into a pattern of addressing technical objections point-by-point, without realising that the technical objections are not the problem per-se, but just a symptom of a more important concern or problem.
If the goal is Linux advocacy, then nit-picking the tech objections isn't really that effective, unless you want to leave a rebuttal for future searchers. What would be more effective would be to try to understand why Linux was not right for this developer, on this project, at that time.
> Yes, I am arrogant by the way, I learned not to be afraid of standing tall with my own point of view.
Standing up for your beliefs is not the same as arrogance. Not realizing this is a sign of arrogance, and arrogance is not a good thing. It makes it harder to develop an accurate model of the world, and thereby makes it harder take effective actions.
EDIT> Part of the hostile reaction you're getting is because of the way you dismissed Jon Blow for not being able to install Linux. This is one of the best game developers out there. It's like calling some Nobel Laureate stupid because she decided not to use some particular niche app that you care about.
This is going to be one of the most popular games of 2016, and is releasing for Windows and PS4. Compared to those platforms, do you think that the time it would take to get a Linux version up and running would be cost-effective?
There are some Linux sales figures kicking around [1] and they generally show that the Linux share is under 3%.
Of course, the cost/benefit ratio has to be evaluated by the developer, and I don't want to force anyone into anything. I'm just aware that plenty other developers have no problems making their games available on the OS I am running. And since their games are more than enough to fill whatever free time I have for computer games, I won't be missing this one.
I wouldn't know, I do not research every game developer and their financial standing. But considering the games on my list range from small indie stuff to big AAA stuff, I'd say it's a cross-section of both.
Yeah, it's easy to grow from nothing as the saying goes ;)
Depending on region and target audience, Macs show up between 1.5% and 3.5% of total player base in tracking (see Steam and Unity hardware surveys, and I also see those numbers in our own games), and these have been the same for 10 years. For comparison, Linux is between 0.5% and 1.0%. Most Macs are laptops with Intel GPU which are simply too weak for most current games. The Mac OpenGL drivers have a legendary reputation for being crap since they are controlled by Apple, not the GPU makers (although, native Intel GL drivers are not much better). Sometimes the reason is simply that the additional required customers support for Mac costs money and thus the development effort can't be justified.
I'm a daily Mac user and like it pretty much, but for games I also have a proper PC, attached to the TV. Most games I play there would run at most with 5fps on my MacBookPro.
Sadly it is true, MAC GPU's are often the same hardware used in laptops. Also, Apple sprinkle a special kind of awfulness onto their drivers.
I tested this with Quake III (a game from 1999!). My 2011 iMac could not render the game at 120fps, it managed somewhere between 50 and 70. I bootcamp into Windows, and I get a rock solid 120fps.
They certainly are. Look at the current top 10 for Steam; there are exactly two games, Fallout and GTA, that require anything more than the world's crappiest computer to play. I have no clue about the games not represented on Steam (basically Battlefield and the Star Wars edition of Battlefield), but I bet they follow the same pattern.
The Witness has has a peak of less than 5,000 players at one time so far.
The top two games (and basically the only active "pro" games at the moment), which together have about one million players playing at any given time are both carefully tuned to run on toasters according to Valve's hardware survey.
I like Valve's current micro transaction model. You can buy cosmetic items, but that's it. I can't speak for DOTA2, but in CS:GO they don't impact the game negatively like they did with TF2. Trading from free drops also allows kids and poor people to participate in the economy, which allows them to make more money for Valve than begging mom to buy a $60 game would.
> Is that the guy who was unable to install Ubuntu properly...
Frankly, Ubuntu 15.04 and 15.whatever_the_last_release_was have been really, really, really bad. I say this as a gamer, Linux power user, and sysadmin who's been using various flavors of Linux for ~fifteen years and who's quite happy managing his Gentoo Linux boxes, but really happy when he finds a largely-hands-off distro, because that means he can recommend a distro to his friends.
What's more, if you are using Ubuntu 15.latest, Steam doesn't work out of the box. It won't start. You get no error messages or anything. You have to move a bundled copy of -IIRC- glibc out of the way before Steam will work. Reports on the interwebs indicate that the moved file comes back when the Steam client updates itself, so this isn't a permanent fix!
Maybe Valve can't be arsed to target anything other than SteamOS, but it's not a good sign when the company that's -arguably- doing the most good for Linux gaming out of anyone out there doesn't ship a client that works on the latest version of one of the more (if not the most) popular Linux distros.
I'mma have to make a note to go back and remind myself about how dynamic linking and .so versioning works on Linux. I had thought that the tools to make this shit work correctly were widespread and relatively easy to use, but the state of Linux gaming leads me to question my memory. :/
> I'm going to wait for Linux version to buy...that way will incentivize devs to make Linux versions.
I'm not sure that's going to incentivize anyone, especially if they're making plenty of money on the platforms they chose to release on.
Spending your money on existing Linux games in the same genre (and encouraging your Linux friends to as well) is more likely to incentivize devs. At least they can see that a Linux port sells, and they can find sales stats to assess whether the market for a particular genre is large enough to be worth the investment.
Spending money on existing Linux games in the same genre will incentivize devs. By waiting for them to release Linux port, I will then be spending money on the then-existing Linux game. Therefore what I said initially is valid.
Your initial point is not valid. All you said was that you're going to wait -- there was no mention of spending on games in the same genre.
Inaction (i.e. waiting only) is not easily measured by game developers without spending money or doing additional work on market research or surveys. Waiting by itself incentivizes nothing.
You're going to have to wait a long time ... the problem is would you develop something on a OS that represents 0.5% of your market ? it often doesn't make sense financially. Things may get better, ironically, since MS seems to be invested in porting its tools and frameworks to Linux, so popular game engines and SDKs might finally be available on the platform.
Er, no it won't. If everyone who shared your opinion could convince 100-1000 other people to do the same, then maybe it would work.
Fundamentally, though, some kinds of customer aren't worth the trouble. I'm not going to sell Lamborghinis to people who don't really care about flashy cars. So, why would I expect to sell AAA polished games to people who won't install a gamer OS, out of principle?
My point being ... I want to sell games to people who gotta have my games. If "ew, I hate Windows" will stop them from buying a game, then they're probably going to be a pain in the ass, as customers. I'm not going to be able to make them happy.
Some very cursory research suggests that the sales numbers on computer games tend to be about 93% Windows, 5% Mac, and 2% Linux.
I'll let you pull your own estimate out of the air for how much extra development time/money supporting a decent cross-section of popular Linux distributions will take. Oh, and don't forget to add in time for testing it, too.
This may change if Valve can make the Steam Box happen, but right now it sure doesn't sound like a sound business decision to bother looking for those last few extra bucks from Tux. Honestly I'm surprised anyone releases anything for Linux or for Macs now that I look at the numbers; I suspect we have the rise of cross-platform general-purpose game engines (which this game doesn't rely on) to thank for that.
That is a pity. We had to wait a few years for Braid to come out on Linux, but now that it's here it works well. Presumably the graphics requirements for The Witness are a lot higher. I'll keep an eye out for The Witness to make it to my desktop.
Sounds like people are shifting the blame for JB's frustration with linux onto hardware vendors for not providing drivers ... that's not really going to be acceptable to a perfectionist like JB.
"Oh here's my game on linux, please address any questions or problems to those shitty hardware vendors"
No, he's just going to release it on a platform where he can guarantee compatibility and functionality with minimum effort on his part.
"On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity."
An open world puzzle game seems exactly like the kind of thing that might gratify one's intellectual curiosity. Plus it does make a nice change from reading the latest thing about React ;)
I've gotta be honest. I have no idea who Jonathan Blow is. I checked the Steam Store page and it seems .. to be not my thing.
That said, I recently found, bought and played 'Pony Island' (if you don't know what that is: Do NOT watch videos. Think '6th Sense' - you'll ruin the game). That wouldn't have caught my eye based on random videos/screenshots either and it's right now my 'best game ever'.
Can someone explain why 'The Witness' is interesting? Why would it trend here? What's the relation between HN and Jonathan or this game?
> I checked the Steam Store page and it seems .. to be not my thing. ... Can someone explain why 'The Witness' is interesting?
If it's truly not your thing, then you won't understand why it's interesting. If it is your thing, then it's very, very, very interesting.
ROT13'd probably-spoiler-free-but-maybe-contains-tiny-spoilers overview of what makes the game good follows:
Gur Jvgarff vf n chmmyr tnzr. Gur chmmyrf enatr va qvssvphygl sebz gevivny gb irel engure uneq. Vg vf fvzvyne va fcvevg gb Zlfg, ohg abg ng nyy gur fnzr nf Zlfg. Gur neg naq fbhaq vf tbetrbhf. Gur tnzr'f cnpvat vf ernyyl tbbq.
