Review: The Witness

In which I risk looking like an asshole for not liking a thing everybody likes.

But you can't play it if you're epileptic, colorblind or tone-deaf!

[easterneagle]

The apple puzzle at 4:10 makes a lot more sense now that I know George has red-green colorblindness.

[liampendergast]

I can see why you didn't like it. This is the definition of a niche game. It's made for that audience and pretty much no one else. And If Blow wanted to make something for that specific group of people without dumbing it down for mass appeal then I can respect that.

[skippyasqueeze]

oh my god the apple it's the apple 4:12

i never played the game but I'm positive it's the apple

[ZygonCannar]

I love your content man, but it was clear that this just wasn't for you. I'm not going to say your opinion is wrong because that's silly. But let me explain

Everything you complained about is what I loved about this game. I love that it didn't hold your hand. I love that there was always an air of mystery to both the game and the mechanics. I love the point where you walk up to something new and go. "How does this work. What makes this tick?" What makes The Witness so good is how it completely masters the 'Ah ha' moment. When you're looking a puzzle and it's just you and world. It forces you to put yourself in the shoes of the puzzle. What does it expect out of you? What logically could this mean.

Those tutorial panels you say are bad because you can 'get lucky' is just a slow burn attempt to build you up to the realization of what the mechanic means. And what's brilliant about a lot of mechanics is that they have a way of evolving as you progress in the area. What was working before, and you thought was the full explaination of a mechanic suddenly evolves and forces you on your toes. To some people, this constant questioning could be frustrating like it was to you. But to me it just added to the mystery and wonder of the game.

I love how much the game tests me. I love how it's not afraid of me 'getting stuck' or not understanding something on my first look. Playing this game with no outside help has been an experience that I've never had before. In a world where every Nintendo game that isn't Mario has 20 hours of constant hand holding, I really loved how this game didn't insult me.

Things you say are 'problems' aren't problems to me. It's the reason that I keep coming back instead of just getting bored.


Also there's no way the 'average' gamer beat this in less than 30-40 hours like you did. The website you use puts full faith in people being honest about it, and it's probably the result of a lot of people lying to make themselves look smart.

[cowishHuggingson]

I remember Blow at some point characterizing The Witness as "a game about noticing things", and it sounds like he achieved that. I'll definitely be approaching it with that in mind.

[grfrjiglstan]

"the clouds don't move"
Funny you should mention that...

[scruffmutt]

Came back to the Witness after a long time. I love it for many of the reasons you don’t, but I completely agree with your point on the game’s accessibility.
People will argue all day about accessibility and games “not being for some people” — which is usually BS — but The Witness should at a bare minimum have options to help out colorblind players, or some kind of subtitle readout for the sound puzzles (which IS feasible, since the puzzles stem from sound pitch and how long the sound is held).

[DiviTon]

I normally like Super BunnyHop, but when I first watched this, it seemed very apparent that his experience was marred by his admitted inability to solve these puzzles. The puzzles can get pretty tough and based on that review, I think his frustration blinded him from judging this game more objectively. Like, I'm watching it again and there are so many erroneous, or just silly statements. For example:

1. He says the game has barely any aesthetic wrapper, which is so absurdly far from the truth. He may not have enjoyed the aesthetic, but to deny it's existence seemed petty. I can't think of a single game that's put more attention, care and subtlety into the visual design of it's environment as much as the island in the Witness.

2. He later talks about how the puzzles rules are conveyed not through words, but by symbols. He says this like it's a bad thing. Like he expects the game to pander to him. Part of what makes this game so good is that it respects the players intelligence to unravel it's mysteries and Sir Hop is over here suggesting that the game "Tell me how do dis".

3. Then he talks about how some of the tutorial puzzles for a specific mechanic can be beaten with dumb luck, which is partially true, but you won't get more than 2-3 puzzles into a mechanic on luck before you need to know how the mechanic works. He says it "punishes you later", but all you need to do is go back and look at the puzzles you just solved minutes ago and discover the solution by applying your brain.

4. When he says solving puzzles made him go "How was I supposed to know that???" I tried my hardest to think to a point where that happened. At no point, upon solving a puzzle, did I ever think "How was I supposed to know that". The game had either taught me how I was supposed to know that, or I had figured it out by observing my surroundings. I literally never once had that thought. In fact, when I had been stuck on a puzzle for a very long time and finally solved it, I usually realized what preconceived perspective I was clinging to that was preventing me from seeing the solution.

The Witness has a consistent theme of learning and discovery through open mindedness and a willingness to shift your perspective. but it sounds like Sir Hop just wanted to beat his head against a wall until the game magically progressed. I'd probably hate the game too if I viewed things so narrowly. Again, I'm normally a fan of his, but this review was very off base.

[mothersbasement]

from what you said and what you've shown it seems like you missed a large chunk of environmental puzzles that make the travel between locations a lot more palatable. Personally I think the witness is brilliant for a lot of reasons that I plan to outline in a future review, but the big one is that it's ALL about the mazes. It's still as much an adventure game as Myst, but you only ever have to worry about one kind of interaction, and there's no muddling with inventory items to get between you and actually solving the puzzles.

And while I'm usually loath to say that a reviewer is flat-out wrong about a game, you're definitely wrong about how the witness teaches players by having them solve puzzles. The "tutorial" sections in each area are designed to engage your critical thinking faculties, increasing in complexity from things you basically can't fail (so that random guessing will get you to the right answer) to things you can't possibly solve without understanding how they work. And the previous puzzles aid in that understanding - leading you to question "okay, why did this work when this didn't?" The tree puzzle you were struggling with is a perfect example of this - the solultion is RIGHT THERE, on screen, directly to your left, and for some reason you can't be bothered to just look away and think for a second.The game shouldn't be faulted for your own unwillingness to step back and look at things around you - to take a breather and try to figure shit out for yourself. It's designed perfectly for its intended audience - people who like solving puzzles that are both immensely challenging and entirely possible to intuit without a guide.

The game doesn't just demand that you stare at puzzles trying to solve them in sequence - it demands that you take a step back and think for a bit - consider the space around you and how it relates to the puzzles. and the footage on this review makes it seem like you were unwilling to do even that. This is like someone coming down on super mario bros because they find reflex tests exhausting, and then saying that "the rest of the world around the pits and enemies is just window dressing on what are basically just elaborate QTEs. This could just as easily be a simon machine and nothing would be lost."

I apologize if this comes off as me just coming down on someone for not liking something I like a lot. I'm fine with someone not liking the witness - it's not a game for everyone, and frankly it would be pretty awful if it tried to be. my concern is that you're representing it inaccurately, and possibly scaring off players who would otherwise really enjoy it. The only salient point I found in this review was "it's not for me."

[fugnuggets]

I felt the same way. The puzzles felt so arbitrary and pointless it made me wonder why should I even bother finishing the game.
There's not even any context to these puzzles. Its just "here some panels, now solve them!" rinse and repeat for 16 hours. I was better off just doing exam paper questions from my university course :/

[VindicatorMusic]

well that's just like... your opinion man.

[silverharloe]

I don't understand comments that claim he spent the whole video shitting on the game, when what he said was "it's not for me, but I can see why other people would like it." That is completely NOT the same as "it sucked and it's bad."

[CubesAndPortals]

You know what? I think this is a fair review. The Witness was absolutely phenomenal for me, but that's because I love puzzles. The game was just a pretty wrapper for some neat puzzling. If the puzzles are a barricade to what you want, and not the actual thing you want, then you won't like The Witness. If you want to be made to feel smart, instead of wanting to put your smarts to the test, you probably won't like The Witness. If you have a problem with admitting you might be wrong about how you think a certain puzzle element works, or if you can't handle walking away from a puzzle you don't feel equipped to solve and coming back later, you will not enjoy The Witness. It seems to be a very niche game, and it only makes sense that people who don't enjoy puzzles enough to pay forty bucks for a pretty puzzle book just won't like it.

If you like puzzles though, The Witness is fucking fantastic all the way through and definitely 100% worth your $40.

[dougbrit]

I couldn't agree more. I just don't understand what the appeal is to solving flat mazes to unlock the beautiful lush environment. Surely there must be a way to use these environments to solve puzzles so the art isn't just another onlooker to a flat confusing game.

[NaZtRdAmUs]

"Solve my maze" Lex Luthor...

[MrOzzification]

"Its a sheet of math homework" - SBH

You're either going to delight in toiling away at obtuse problems and find the exercise a reward in itself or you're not. That is pretty much this game

[scrustle]

Some of your criticisms seem to stem from the game being simply too hard. Not that I'm saying there's anything wrong with that.

But a lot of your other criticisms do highlight things that have made me apprehensive to buy this myself. It's good to hear that perspective some someone who has actually played the game, as it seems almost everyone else has showered it with nothing but praise, yet I've not seen anything about this game that makes it seem worthy of that. I mean, not that it's not well or cleverly designed, but rather it just doesn't look interesting or fun.

And that's a disappointment to me. I really wanted to love this game. I'm a huge fan of Braid, and have been anticipating this one ever since it was first announced, albeit cautiously. Seems my worries were not unfounded. Maybe I'll pick it up when it gets a lot cheaper, but not any time soon.

[poshima]

I’ve always struggled with puzzles my whole life and felt stupid because of it. But for some reason The Witness came naturally to me. It’s my proudest platinum and I often debate deleting my save and doing it all over again. Something about this game boosted my confidence in my intelligence and self esteem, I’ll always love it for that

[Xijjix]

Gotta disagree on the tutorial puzzles being poorly designed. In fact, they do the opposite of what George says. They very clearly explain the rules for all the different little symbols. They purposefully give you ones you can brute force, and then one you can't. You have to go back through the ones you unintentionally solved until you figure out the rule. Because you have to learn the rule, you teach it to yourself in a way that sticks in the memory. Calling that "bad design" is not accurate. Wanting more explanation is fine, but what is in the game is not bad design

[matman]

Well, that's disappointing. I thought that the game was going to pull out some cool twist after the first hour or so of repetitive puzzles, kinda like Portal, but after hearing that it really is just a collection of increasingly challenging maze puzzles with no reason, strong narrative or original mechanics, I know this game really isn't for me.