You know, for a while I've been thinking about something, while the original The Stanley Parable made a statement for the players and how they interact with games, I think Ultra Deluxe is making a statement for developers and the relationship they have with their games. How some obsess over the potential profits, others over meeting fans expectations, but in both cases the author loses agency over their craft, and is as powerless as the player is trapped inside the game. How many times developers won't make what they want to make, but what the players want to play, how some franchises become prisoners of their own success... I don't know, maybe I'm reading too much into this, but I genuinely found some deep themes on Ultra Deluxe that go way beyond "sequel bad". Anyway, good analysis.
I was actually gonna say something similar, about how the original was about how the player interacts with games and poking fun and the illusion of player agency, while Ultra Deluxe is more about the developer and the games they let out into the world and how it gets out of their hands. They are no more in control than we were in the original, it's all an illusion, they may have made the game, but they have no control over how others perceive it or what they take from it. In a way, it actually highlights both the lack of control, yet paradoxically the complete control we the player/audience have over these games, or any piece of media for that matter. I think that's why the conclusion of Ultra Deluxe is to just let go of the legacy of the original.
"making a statement for developers and the relationship they have with their games." It's not coincidental that Davey Wreden's follow-up the The Stanley Parable was The Beginner's Guide, which explores these exact themes. In a way, Ultra Deluxe is also The Beginner's Guide 2.
The “quiting a game is winning it” is a very interesting concept. I feel like its the only way to win any idle game, or a very pay to win game. It opens up a lot of questions. What makes a game worthwhile to play? Why do we play games?
@@pirilon78Then that begs the question of why we seek out pure entertainment in the first place, which the Narrator explains is as a distraction from the many bad things that happen in our lives. Even if you only have the smallest, most menial conflicts in your life, entertainment is still an easy way to forget that pain, to step away from it and distract yourself. But then that entertainment comes at the risk of the meaning behind works of entertainment. It’s also why I find the friction between what makes good entertainment and what makes good art so fascinating.
@@WuhHuh that doesn't beg any question. Games are usually made to be fun, but sometimes to illicit some other emotions. All games are art, it doesn't matter how soulless, because they're all pointless. That's what makes something art
@@pirilon78 Then that brings me back to the contrast between good games and good art. Yes, they have a lot of overlap, and yes, you can have an interactive work that has both excellent gameplay and a resounding message. But there are some design choices that keep art and games from being separated. Walking simulators are, by nature, boring in terms of gameplay, but people enjoy them more for the story and themes. In that sense, it’s better appreciated as art than as a game. Meanwhile, while a game can focus on being a good game with minimal to no story or themes, it’ll remain mostly a video game, and not much else. Some specific things I’d like to point out are choices that specifically sacrifice good game feel for immersion. For example, the explosion ending ends not with a quick cutscene that summarizes its events, but a longer, two minute struggle. In a gameplay sense, this is a bad way to pace out an ending and just makes the player feel bad. However, in an art/immersion sense, it highlights just how little control the player has. Or the ending where you’re given button prompts and the Narrator tries to convince you to quit. In a gameplay sense, not only is literally just pressing buttons with nothing much happening boring, but being outright told to quit contradicts the entertainment part of games. But in an artistic sense, it once again hammers in how little choice the player has other than to quit. Sorry for rambling, it’s just that this inherent conflict between art and entertainment specifically is so captivating to me, and I don’t get many chances to talk about it.
That concept is a nice novelty at first, but it becomes meh after a while. I prefer the atmospheric/existential horror aspect of The Stanley Parable. The thing that makes a game "worthwhile" to play is entirely down to the individual (as it is mostly subjective). I think most people play games because they want to have fun. These days, most stories (whether in games, books, or whatever) have become purely about entertainment, which is unfortunate (as I find a story that has meaning and teaches important lessons to be of far more value). But the whole "illusion of choice" theme of TSP falls flat for me. It just ends up making as much sense as the pseudo-intellectual philosophy the narrator spews during the confusion ending.
(Spoilers! Duh!) I feel like the creators wanted this feeling because they wanted you to feel a sense of hopelessness, pure deep dread. Will the sequel live up to expectations? Will the fans like it? Will it be the next hit? Will the bucket suffice? Maybe adding a jump button to avoid breaking their perfect formula work? These may seem simple questions with simple answers, but they’re not to game developers… and they knew that. The game becomes so meta for developers, to the point that it just stops being funny. When you get into the skip button room, I felt fear for the narrator… because I stopped thinking of the narrator as an actor… but as the developers cry for help. What I feel the developers wanted was to obviously surpass The Stanley Parable in the new edition, but they knew that their product was so good… it would have been impossible. Hence, enter the bucket. The bucket just adds a few lines and new endings. That’s all it does, it adds nothing to the game. It’s not meant to insult, it’s meant to meet expectations for the “fans”. The people who loved the witty jokes and humor, for their endless entertainment into their plate! They just want more, and more! That’s what the narrator feared, because the narrator believed their game was perfect by having a meaning, a message! So the narrator starts blabbering about their fears until Stanley, (the player) doesn’t want to hear it and hits the skip button. Eventually, time makes it disappear. With each skip press, time takes it all away. Eventually you only see relics from a past that is now misunderstood, and the message is now worthless. It makes you really wonder, does the message really matter in the end? Let’s reflect that in life, a soulless company would probably milk it once the creators are gone. Time will pass and the game will become incompatible on newer computers, all to be forgotten while only to be seen on a few lets pIays youtube videos. I think that was the entire point the narrator (developers) made, because eventually time takes over… and wins. I think that is the point of Ultra Deluxe, to reduce meaning on something that wont matter in the future. And for that, it makes me do the opposite just like the Narrator would do. Crazy game I swear, but that’s just the way I interpreted it.
@@kilby6145 OH MY GOD READING!!!! I DON'T WANT TO READ THAT WOULD TAKE 1 MINUTE OF MY TIME I WANT TO WATCH 80 HOURS OF UA-cam VIDEO ESSAYS WITHOUT STANDING UP INSTEAD
In the words of the narrator "I'm not trying to entertain I'm trying to make a work of art" this is a meta critique of franchises and how they start out with such great stories but lose their magic due to them being strung out so long lose the magic that they had in the first place to the point where they are not a work of art but a rotted husk used to make money
I'm not sure I believe that Cheddar missed this fact. It's so obvious, it's the first thing about it. The part with the sequels should've made it crystal clear if nothing else did before that. Does he think the devs think it's a good idea to make endless soulless sequels and defile the legacy of the original? Then how would he justify the inclusion of this stuff in the game? No, I think he's more intelligent than that. I think he is being intellectually dishonest and thus foregoing his integrity in order to have something to talk about, something that will get views. For content. So he's doing exactly what he's saying the game did.
The Stanley Parable Ultra Deluxe is a game for developers more then for consumers. Trying to please the masses with sequels, the dread coming from anxiety and the insanity that comes with it. And personally, after finishing a very hard project for school, which was a follow-up to something I made at the start of the semester, this game spoke to me on a personal level. Good analysis anyway, even if we do have different opinions.
I don't see that at all. I don't think they're concerned with receiving acclaim, something which they were right not to be concerned about. They're upset at the prospect of turning their art piece into a soulless franchise with no purpose. So instead, they made their sequel a mockery of sequels and soulless entertainment. This is so blindingly obvious that I don't know how anyone could interpret it any other way. I really did not like this video, because it felt like a guy spending 36 minutes, and much more during the actual production, being willfully ignorant to a point of absurdity for the sake of coming across as cultured and "nuanced". Taken at face value, it's like he's being taken for a ride by the game. By my interpretation, he's taking himself for a ride and taking us all with him for the sake of soulless entertainment.
For me the fast foward ending is the most Ultra Deluxe felt in the spirit of the original, alternating me between laughter, reflectiveness, and a sense of unease.
So. I understood ALL that stuff about the original. But the thing I think this game communicates, at least for me, is how unfulfilling it can feel when corporations try to quantify emotion and sell it to you. But also the upsides to that. It can be a soul-crushing process to create art and then people like it for all the reasons you hate. Yes, there was hints at a larger world in the original, and then this game just says "fuck it" and puts you in outdoor areas, dev areas, out the wazoo. You're in an office building? Fuck that noise, this game can take place literally wherever I want. And it was sort of ironic because even though the WHOLE GAME is LITERALLY about it being a waste of time and being philisophically meaningless, it WASN'T that BECAUSE that was the message. And also, you can choose to enjoy the game even though it seems to want to avoid pleasing you at all costs. But to help sell the powerlessness of the narrative, it all takes place in boring depressing settings. But this game? Tries to cheer you up and puts you outside and inside and everywhere. But honestly? Life is often like that, people desperately want things to go a certain way, for a certain reason, but the world just won't let it happen that way, and there's a lot of CHOICE of trying to choose between doing things your own way and just allowing things to happen as they will. And this frustration is PRECISELY WHAT davey wreden has SAID he HAS when making games. I think you're forgetting about your FIRST PLAYTHROUGH of the first game; It was frustrating. It was a game BUILT around making you feel frustrated and powerless in order to STOP PLAYING IT, but while also providing enough surface level entertainment to keep you engaged. And one of the things I'm willing to bet bothered Wreden was that people did not enjoy it for the philisophical edge, they just enjoyed what were supposed to be the forgettable parts of the game: the filler, the jokes. So, he decided he would make a sequel that was exactly what those fans who didn't connect with the original's message want. And, ironically, in playing this game, if you WERE one of those people, even if you enjoy this game a lot for those things alone (i am one of those people) it also forces you to look at the FIRST game in that more serious light! By MAKING such a ""soulless"" sequel, it actually draws more attention toward the author's intention of the ORIGINAL! The irony, too, is you're talking about death of the author, but you care *a lot* about what you think the intended message of the first game was, when in fact it is just *your takeaway of it.* Not saying your takeaway is wrong, just that it doesn't make others' takeaway of it wrong and yours right. But, you clearly care about what the first game made you feel, and feel the sequel didn't deliver in this way, but honestly? I liked it PRECISELY BECAUSE it went in a COMPLETELY different direction. Honestly? It felt like a celebration of UNITY whereas the original felt like a celebration of Source. I personally felt it wasn't "bad on purpose and self-aware about it," it was more like they were saying, we can't make a sequel of the original because it's PERFECT, but that's SO unbelievably pretentious that I can't even. Saying your art is perfect and a sequel couldn't be good is hilarious. I for one, think a perfect sequel to The Stanley Parable already exists. It's called The Beginner's Guide. It's not even CALLED "The Stanley Parable", it's just made by the same guy. If you have no idea what I'm talking about, play it sometime. I have a feeling you will like it. But ALSO? One of the takeaways I had from the game was that settings guy WASN'T completely "right." What The Stanley Parable does is it presents you with contradictory ways of looking at life and FORCES YOU, specifically YOU, to choose. The game won't choose for you. That's WHY the ending with the credits is the narrator begging Stanley to make a choice. It's ironic, it works on so many levels. So, I didnt' hate this game the way you did, clearly. BUT, i DID your video incredibly ironic. Seriously, I recommend you go play The Beginner's Guide and watch Wreden's videos, and if by the end of it you decide you dislike what he was "trying" to say with his games? Well then, what you got out of the original Stanley Parable is ACTUALLY YOURS, and you should protect it. The irony is that if Davey Wreden had ACTUALLY "burned the legacy" of art he wanted to express, he never would have made the original Stanley Parable. OR it's sequel. OR Ultra Deluxe. Overall, this was a great video and I wish you a good day, sir.
These are the kinds of comments I love to see under my videos. I always hope these videos will start discussions like this, or at least get people to think more about the stuff I talk about. So thanks for writing this all out, it means a lot to me. But aside from that, I'd like to build on what you said here. First, I have played The Beginner's Guide, and I consider it one of the greatest games ever made (I've also mentioned it in a couple of my other videos). But I think that's part of the reason I didn't find Ultra Deluxe as great, because the commentary on art and artistic drive put forward by The Beginner's Guide is brought down to a personal level that is incredibly relatable and human, which made for an excellent emotional core. In comparison, Ultra Deluxe leaves me more "empty" than anything else, which is exactly what I felt the need to "come to terms with." There's a disconnect between my feelings on the game on a purely emotional level and my opinions on the game artistically, because I think the game is impeccably realized artistically, probably just as much as the original. I think it managed to do exactly what it set out to do, which meant leaving me with that "empty" feeling. It's that disconnect that leads me to my conclusion that I can't say whether the game is good or not. But I'm glad others were able to get more out of Ultra Deluxe than I did, and I'm glad you found my perspective interesting.
@@CheddarEssays I wish you had made this clear in the video itself. That "I think the game is impeccably realized artistically, probably just as much as the original". The video makes it sound that you think the game failed at what it set out to do, that it was a mistake to make, when according to this comment, you're just having a philosophical discussion about whether or not that makes the game good. To me, the only reasonable interpretation of "a good game" is "a well-executed game". One that works as intended and one where its warts don't get in the way of its purpose. I think Deluxe's message is crystal clear, and unless you disagree with the discontent with soulless "content", the unhealthy application of entertainment in modern life, and the desecration of art and meaning for the sake of these ends, I don't see how you could dislike the game or feel regretfully about it in any way.
Great video! I think Ultra Deluxe's commentary on sequels also ties into the original's commentary on escapism. The Stanley Parable said that videogames are an escapist fanatasy, but they're finite; you'll eventually get through them, "quit the game" and move on. Franchises, sequels, DLC, spin-offs, merchandise, fandoms... Ultra Deluxe points out how all of this is an attempt (by greedy creators and shallow, desperate fans) to expand and lengthen the escapist fantasy beyond the limits of the game itself. I also like how Ultra Deluxe took jabs at nostalgia, how that too becomes a source of escapism. We don't want to cofnront the flaws in our favourite works, so we look at them uncritically through rose tinted glasses. Personally, this elaboration on the original game's themes was enough for me to enjoy Ultra Deluxe and not feel as alienated as you did. I do agree that only a small handful of the new endings are actually interesting and that the absurdist bucket humour is mediocre, but those endings which *were* interesting felt substantial enough to offset the filler. And, if anything, it lets me have a sense of smug superiority over the players who DID mindlessly jump onto the "new content" bandwagon, and are now quoting the game's unfunny bucket memes verbatim, oblivious or indifferent to the fact that *they're* the butt of the joke.
@@VerbDoesStuff Yes! Not only did I find the one, single, objectively correct, bestest interpretation of The Stanley Parable, I also boast the unique trait of being the only critic on the internet to use moderate, scathing hyperbole! This unorthodox quality (completely unique to me, I remind you) has sent some commenters reeling in shock at the sheer audacity! "He expressed himself bluntly? He dared criticise other people? How could he! This is unheard of"! Truly amazing, I know. Not sure how I keep doing it. I guess I'm just a natural.
@@Halucygeno It's a strange mindset to feel one's interpretation of art is valid partially because it justifies their sense of superiority over others who they deem mindless for enjoying a video game and then moving on with their lives.
@@Ted_Curtis Mate, if you're talking about my second comment, I was being sarcastic. There's no such thing as an "objectively correct" interpretation, I was playing up an overconfident character to be facetious and make a point. If you're referring to my first comment, then feel free to disagree, but I don't think it's that far fetched to imagine that the bucket jokes are a commentary on repetitive absurdist humour with no merit. A large part of modern meme culture boils down to weird or shocking absurdism, and then people take those jokes and repeat them ad nauseam, killing the one element that made them kinda funny - the surprise, the unexpected nature of it. Davey Wreden is very self-aware about these kinds of things, so I don't think it's a stretch to imagine he knew that constant permutations on one absurdist joke would get grating. At least, grating to those who enjoyed T.S.P. for its philosophical themes, and expect better from Wreden's writing. EDIT: For the record, I agree with you about my tone, I also don't like the way I worded myself in my first comment. Claiming that an entire demographic who enjoyed a joke are "the butt of the joke" and that I feel "smug superiority" over them is a really condescending attitude. A more neutral way to phrase it would be to say "the bucket jokes are a critique of mindless absurdist humour". But I don't want to edit that first comment now, as it would make the indignation in the replies seem weird and out-of-nowhere - I don't want to change the context of the conversation to make others seem unreasonable.
@@Halucygeno I admire you for not editing the original comment, it takes integrity to not scrub away the imperfections from one's arguments because someone said otherwise. As for the Stanley Parable and the bucket, I think the important thing to remember is that the Stanley Parable Ultra Deluxe, rather than being about how an audience interacts with a creators work, is how creators try to interact with the audience. A lot of the new content is presented to you, free for you to examine and play with, and pretty much signposted to you, trying to grab your attention. It's essentially a critique on the industry, as opposed to the first game which was a critique on the medium. The Bucket therefore is the ultimate gimmick, the hook that companies use to entice people to play their new game. It's like the dog in Call of Duty Ghosts, or the roster swap in every fifa game, a single mechanic that is somehow supposed to fundamentally change the gameplay experience. And in this instance, they've managed to project all of that hype and supposed market value on a bucket, one of the most mundane objects in history. The bucket itself isn't funny, but the reverence that this bucket receives from both Stanley and the Narrator, juxtaposed with the player's knowledge that its just a bucket. They don't even put anything in the bucket, it's technically worthless. You could replace it with any other mundane object and the joke would be the same. It's essentially the endpoint of every e3 presenter trying to sell you on the latest innovations in their new yearly release. It's like the Emperors New Clothes of video game gimmicks, where everyone plays along with the idea that the Bucket is this amazing, innovative, beautiful thing that changes everything. Even Stanley himself seems to care about the bucket more than his own wife. The uncaring narrator at one point falls in love with the Bucket. There are weird elder gods conspiring to steal the bucket. In some endings the reverence for the bucket is played so straight that it completely unravels the actual Stanley Parable game. I don't think there is a single person who genuinely believes that the bucket is funny, it's all about how it's presented. It's a really simple joke but the overemphasis of it only makes it more effective as a critique. It's a big middle finger to all those big wig publishers who think we gamers will game about anything if they market it enough, to the point where we'll buy a whole new version of a game for a goddamn bucket. And the best part is, the bucket probably contributes more unique content in its altered bucket endings than most yearly releases do with a new game.
Watching your video made me go back and re-watch the original Stanley Parable mod. If I'm being honest, the biggest ideas in the game are not only all present in the mod, but the experience is by far the most focused and is most deserving of the "Parable" name. However, it's probably a tough sell for a standalone game, and the gags in the 2013 version were pretty funny, despite diluting the point and tone of the original. I don't really see Ultra Deluxe as being much different, it further dilutes the point and tone, but as a means to justify the porting job to get the game onto consoles I think it was probably the best option they had.
I much prefer the mod version to the others (even though the 2013 release was my first one). I also noticed a major trend toward the game just being a roller coaster of gags. I liked the ones like the serious room (and even to some extent, the door 430 gag), but there were some moments of being a bit too silly. Then Ultra Deluxe flooded the game with gags. It also seemed to me like the subtlety in the delivery dropped with each version. I much preferred a lot of the delivery from the narrator in the mod as well (even though I know a lot of people don't like the more subdued delivery). The mod was concise (almost too much so), and conveyed its message in a more serious tone. I do like some of the endings from the 2013 edition, but the change to the games ending (the one you get after failing the baby game) in the Ultra Deluxe version just felt off. The narrator is more wacky and spells out what's happening with big bold letters. The 2013 version was already a bit on-the-nose if you're even slightly paying attention, but the new version of the ending is just dreadful. Overall, the narrator (and the tone) went from serious and sometimes sinister to being the equivalent of one big fart joke. I do agree that the game lost a lot of its focus over the versions (which is probably intentional, but it still makes for a mediocre experience).
I'm actually happy they added the bucket. It might not have been the intended goal, but I find it a good metaphor for how people can have attachments to inanimate objects. Like how people name their roombas and even assign personalities to them. Then again, I'm not a game critic and am easily pleased if a game is unique enough to keep me entertained and even have me trying to figure out connections. Like how I believe the Narrator is either part of an entire omnipotent species (the female Narrator made me think of that) or that they were previous employees. Like how employee 432 became a time keeper (and thus morphing into an omnipotent power). I dunno. Maybe I love this game because the added content fits in my sense of humour.
@@chippedgoat I think it’s hilarious and does actually have a lot of interesting things to say about art, sequels, feedback, nostalgia.etc But I think the creator overestimates how much The Stanley Parable was actually trying to say It’s a comedy game at its core and absolutely nails it There’s really only a few serious endings in TSP and about the same amount in UD Museum, Countdown, Freedom?, Apartment Memory Zone, Figurines, Epilogue, New content Ultra Deluxe does not contain or even overlap with the same themes as TSP, it’s a unique creation with unique things to say. He complains that UD is only “giving to the fans” by revisiting silly jokes but revisiting the same serious ideas with nothing new to say is the exact same imo
Don't you realise YOU are just as much being satirised as those who didn't see the point of the original game? You waited eagerly for this game, hoping to be fed new self-congratulating wit and philosophy. Maybe t made you feel smarter than the average person. The point the narrator makes in the new game is that The Stanley Parable was a closed system, a monolith. That adding content to it makes no sense, because it wasn't just a vehicle for entertainment. You're the other side of the same coin as those who just play it for the funny jokes, but at least they're happy. That rant the narrator gave about how people want entertainment to be everything, never-ending, to be the collapse of ourselves, hit the nail on the head. It becomes some or perhaps many people's self-indulgence - their means of feeling superiour while in reality still just consuming, rather than accomplishing anything. What did you expect? They made a game that was witty about the topic of sequels and player expectations, rather than player choice within a game. Though both made good points about how people waste their lives on entertainment. The 5 year and 10 year abscence achievements on Steam come to mind. No matter how you try to rationalise it, you, just like everyone else, wanted more of the same. You wanted to go down that adventure line, to recapture something that can't be had again. instead of something new, you wanted to relive that moment, but you can't - and the pie is on your face. It only makes sense they made a game about it since so many can be described that way.
Personally i discovered and loved tsp as an exploration game and what if choices game and it made me love exploration And after being disappointed by the sequel i realized that this game wasn’t about that, we can’t just put liminal spaces without ideas. But still it was like a where you can’t manage to imagine the following of your dream They could’ve instead of doing a comic v2 of all the previous endings explored the lore, the escape pod ending mystery which opens for someone each times mind control facility has an entrance,Confusion ending sequel ? Out of bound areas ? (Docking door for exemple) And many more things like choices and many others unused opportunities This poorness in new true endings realisation (new button, new vent, new door) is so sad
I can't help but feel that asking "Is The Stanley Parable: Ultra Deluxe a good game?" the wrong question to ask. I don't think the developers care about that, I think they simply want you to feel something and to take away something meaningful from the experience. I'd say regardless of your personal disappointment, it is an unambiguous success for you in that regard, given that you felt compelled enough to make a video like this in response to your reaction to the game.
It's a perfectly valid question to ask. I don't care if the game is going for some quirky meta-narrative that I'm supposed to put on my pseudo-intellectual hat to enjoy. If I don't find the game to be good (or as most people probably mean: fun), then what's the point of all the nonsense philosophy. Anyone can pontificate on pointless topics.
@@boomertunes9924 Some games are trying to be and do something different, they're trying to evoke an emotion or introspection, rather than just be fun. Don't get me wrong, I love fun games too obviously, but there's room for games that aren't trying to do that. Haven't you seen a movie or read a book that went beyond simple entertainment? It's the same for games.
I understand where your coming from, but the Ultra Deluxe part is trying to give a different message from what I've interpreted. In the original game it touches upon the illusion of choice in gaming, and artist intent vs viewers interpretation. Ultra Deluxe chooses to talk about loosing the original meaning of an artwork, what makes a game so loved in the first place, and poking fun at modern video game practices. It's taking the original game and making a new narrative on top of it. The main message I got from Ultra Deluxe is the idea of trying to find out what made an artwork so special, and by trying to replicate it, completely changing the meaning of it, making it a husk of what it once was. To be honest, I was a tad disapointed, that most of the new endings were remixes of the old endings, but they changed enough to make it interesting. Ultra Deluxe is partially building off the themes of the original, but also making a different statement.
As someone who played Ultra Deluxe without having ever played the original, I can confirm that yes, it IS a good game. A great game. One of the greatest games ever. Because the original is still in there (minus the Minecraft/Portal ending), its themes are there, and are communicated clearly and in a very distinct way from the "new content". In fact the game is structured in a way that makes it possible to completely ignore the new content. So I was befuddled for large stretches of your video as to how you wouldn't be able or willing to differentiate between the two messages, which are juxtaposed, not mixed, nor garbled.
I liked the Stanley parable Ultra Deluxe I thought it was funi, but honestly didn't view it as a sequel I viewed more as a different game to the original that happened to have almost the entirety of the original game within it. Yes the ultra deluxe's message isn't as deep as the original's, but really I was never expecting it to be and perhaps that's why I enjoyed it. Honestly what I was expecting was that they would just open up some previously closed doors and make endings from that, in a way the Stanley parable Ultra Deluxe exceeded my expectations
14:45 how do you tell the difference in the mastering at this point just from listening to it? the first recording does sound warmer and the consonant sounds (particularly s, -ft) stick out a lot more and last for longer in the second, but I can't quite tell exactly what's due to a filter and what's due to a different take (since it's very clearly also a different take, to me at the moment it seems equally likely that the voice actor was just pronouncing the consonants stronger). it's an interesting point considering how the voice is deliberately muffled during the actual ending so gradually degrading his voice after making the decision is a natural choice, especially since it starts with unplugging a phone
i could ramble about the stanley parable, ultra deluxe, and what it means to me for hours. i only subscribe to channels that i want to get notifications for, so seeing a notification that you made a half hour long video about one of my favorite games and your experience with/analysis of it was pretty exciting. i cant imagine how long it takes to write these scripts and edit these videos. great stuff
Great video! I think the meta narrative in SPUD is a result of the games effectively just being a port to consoles. All of the new content is explicitly locked behind a door and the bucket. One could play through the game just as they did the original (minus the games ending). Although I feel it is a little dramatic to think the devs ruined the game’s original wit and commentary regarding choice and recursion. The new content is fan service in one of the most deliberate ways possible, for old fans to go back and see the wacky ways a bucket influenced their endings. That can be frustrating, especially with certain expectations. I didn’t even know Ultra Deluxe was coming out until like a week before it was released, so I couldn’t let my expectations sit. I fell for their trap honestly, getting lost in all the wacky new content, but it also rekindled my love for the game as well, seeing how they could contextualize the state that is the modern video game industry. I think all your points are completely valid, and this was a very high-quality video, just subbed.
I think this video really encapsulated my initial reaction to Ultra Deluxe, and has helped me to find some resolution after feeling kinda disappointed and a bit confused by the game So thank you, and great video!
Ok wow that was more shortlived than expected, ive gotten all the "endings" and honestly, i dont know what to think of this video in this case, becuse i personaly actualy have not played the original, so i cant see it from.the same perspective as the other peaple that play this game, all i know is that i enjoyed my time with ultra delux, yes, even the two houre ling bucket gag, and besides that i dont relly know what else to say, so, have a nice day i guess. P.S. when did you get the original? And did you play it invetween sometimes over the years? Becuse now im wondering if you have the achivement for going outside in the original
I actually just set the clock on my computer to get that achievement in the original. Probably not something I would do today, and I think I'll legitimately wait the 10 years for the achievement in Ultra Deluxe (assuming we're all around in 10 years)
i have been watching a few stanley parable videos and you're the first one to mention the 'museum ending'. i wholeheartedly agree. tangentially, if the male narrator is the "witness" (as in meditation, witnessing yourself), the female is the witness of the witness. or perhaps the male narrator is the mind, stanley is the body, and the female narrator is the supposed omega perspective of the mind body problem. i've been calling the original an "anti-game" (like antijoke) but people are not getting me. i think you nailed this video, i agree with both of your interpretations for the two games. i think what is shocking overall is that ultra deluxe reveals the animosity of the devs towards the player/community. if the original is a playful tap, ultra deluxe is a repeated slap. it is no longer a joke (or is too heavy handed to be one), but the mainstream masses will gorge on the lowest common denominator to its heart's content. perhaps this is what every team goes through when they have to make a sequel but dont really want to. in a way, i am glad they got to express themselves in this way. at the same time, im disappointed more people werent able to see their intent. the players have become loyal to the franchise and the devs took this opportunity to make the "worst sequel" in fear of attempting to make a good sequel and failing. i dont really see where this goes if they make subsequent sequels. just more jokes and pretending a good sequel is not possible? if you think about it, they intentionally made a broken/failed product. it is a sequel that can not even decide how it wants to be a sequel. because of the original's success as (my view) "anti-game", we are supposed to accept this as an "anti-sequel".
@@VORASTRA so you realized the plug behind the phone was an option... but not jumping off the platform or jumping on the catwalk... Yeah I am calling bullshit
The game didn't disapointed me at all. Yes, all the original endings just with a bucket gets boring, and I didn't saw them all. Just 3, enough to get the message. But I played the new content analyzing what the game was trying to say and what it was saying. And it both entretained me and made me think about the relation between the designers, the audience and the games. I felt it had something to add beyond just the surface level stuff of "cash grab sequences are bad". PS: I don't see it as a "new" game. I see it as the original game with something extra. Under this lense, I saw it as something that brough back atention to the game, making new people experience the original content.
Hey maybe I don't agree with your view of Ultra Deluxe but I really liked your view of the og game it's really verbose and well thought out you earned a 'criber
I always interpreted the menu guy’s plan for more sequels as meaningless spite. It’s still telling you to move on, but by showing constant mockery won’t get you anywhere.
Stanley Parable, both the original release and ultra deluxe, are not good games. They offer unique commentary on games, and the narrator is rather enjoyable, but your not really playing a game, it’s much more like a digital choose your own adventure type story. There’s nothing you gain by playing the Stanley Parable over watching a youtube video of all endings. Absolutely nothing. It’s not a game you play. It’s a thing you experience, think about, and hear.
You're only disappointed because you built up expectations. So the game didn't have the message you wanted it to. Get over it and enjoy it for what it is rather than being upset because it's not what you wanted it to be.
That's the thing, that _is_ the message. The game, from my pespective, is a double-down game made to make you feel how soulless it is. It's supposed to make you reflect on the core idea of soulless remasters, like the game is just a giant ending about lazy remakes. I don't consider this concept exactly well-executed, but i do understand it.
Very interesting retrospective of the first game!!! Ill finish watch the ultra deluxe analysis when ive finally watched a play through haha. Loved your videos on undertale and fez and cant wait to finish watching (๑´▽｀๑ )
Oh! It left you in a gray place. That's very on brand to be honest. The choice of how you view it can be taken with so many ways that ultimately it leaves you with no choice. That's cool.
Hey I've been thinking a lot about this video and it made me realize something. You know how in the broom closet there's a mistake in the subtitles? It reads "the irony and insightful comedy of this game is not lost on them" when the Narrator clearly says "insightful commentary". I think they wanted to record those lines again replacing commentary with comedy! But then changed their minds, maybe realizing it would make this change in the game's direction too obvious, but the subtitles kept the script change. It makes so much sense. TSP original is a "commentary" game, and TSP:UD is a "comedy" game. I think that change in perspective (press G to change your perspective) really helps accepting what Ultra Deluxe is. A cool game that will make will laugh, and maybe not think much about it. And honestly it succeeds, it got plenty of laughs out of me, and it still does. I think that is what the Skip Button ending is supposed to be. A transition point, that will take you from the depth of The Stanley Parable, into the humour of The Stanley Parable 2.
What an excellent video! You´ve truly captured the spirit of The Stanley Parable while simultaneously delivering some fascinating information. This deserves a million views! Best UA-camr on UA-cam.
I know I'm easy, but I'm subscribing just for the Pathologic 2 mention Great video in general! I never played SP or SPUD but I watched playthroughs of both and I was also pretty disappointed by SPUD, so thanks for putting my thoughts into words!
Ok i just have two things to say (for now), one is that i have not yet wtached the video as i dont wnat spoilers, but two is that... It is sutch and i mean SUTCH a funny cionsidense, i got the stanley parable: ultra delux JUST HALF AN HOURE BEFORE THIS VIDEO CAME OUT, idk if you find that funny, but i do, so im still playing trugh the game getting too see evrything, so il be back to see youre video on it but for now, ima laugh at some philosophical moments in writeing
While I don't feel as disappointed by the final product, I definitely agree with the flatness of the new content. The fact nothing feels organic. It's all "new content for the stanley parable", ironically, nothing that genuinely blends into the original. Your pointing out of how the falling-off-the-map-in-mind-control-room "ending" just comments on it being a bug from the original game made it obvious to me, just how unnatural and unfitting all the rounded edges and patches of content that was "missed" in the original doesn't blend into the game as well. It's a shame the game is drenched in this irony towards itself. A more genuine expansion that doesn't take itself as the punchline would've been a real treat.
Eh, I found it pretty profound actually¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Also that isn't what "death of the author" means, the essay that created the term was responding to the practice common in literary analysis at the time of basically psychoanalysing the author through their work. It's not saying that who the creator of a work is and what their intention was is entirely irrelevant for analysis.
I think it means a lot when the original content was still amazing that the new stuff always feels like it’s missing something. But I feel like that’s intentional
I bought the Ultra Deluxe version to enjoy the game on my PS4 (since i rarely play games on PC) and was really enjoying the original stuff from the original game. Then went through the new stuff from Ultra Deluxe and found myself both invested and bored at what it does. It critiques what time and nostalgia does to franchises and developers, trying to keep the attention from it's fans and consumers at all costs for the longest time possible which ends with the erosion and eventual death of the franchise and the dev's artistic drive *BUT* it partly expresses this point by being the very thing it critiques. Most of the bucket endings are just rewrites with little changes. However, some of the new endings aren't as shallow as most of the bucket endings and they really make enough of an impact for me that it kinda makes up for the majority of bucket endings. How you feel about Ultra Deluxe depends on how it's message and how it's contrasted with it's mere ironic existance (and execution) affects you personaly. This includes the feeling you had to the initial game and it's messages.
Ultra Deluxe introduces a Story format that makes you have once only some endings, in this story you learn what happened to Stanley after the New Content Experience on the Memory Zone, then if you heard the Narrator comments while pushing THAT button, you see that he's desperately clinging to the legacy while looping in his thoughts, the New New Content and Sequel are just playing in Narrator's brain while he's stuck with freezed in time Stanley on THAT room, he adds worthless humor, memes and comedy because that's what we apparently want, to be entertained as it's just a game, the bucket is just the shitpost we wanted as their fans, the narrator was so obssessed with making the game funny to please the fans in his mind that apparently corrupted the game. (Thus making a contact between Stanley in it's mind and the outside Stanley when it regains conscience in the epilogue) But everything was worth it for the narrator in the end, as he accepts that he created that Stanley because he felt lonely (because THAT button incident situation that's still happening outside) and he would retire that mind Stanley for once. Then Employee 432 or The Setting Guy person which became one with the fabric of space-time itself comes and says those words at the end. The point of choice on videogames that the original had was nice, you could press Escape and press Quit to make your only choice not designed by devs. But the point of the sequel, beside criticize the cash-grabby videogame franchises is basically, that's not a possible sequel, that's just a fanservice game without any soul or effort put into it. And the game comes with terms on itself too, that people will enter again to the game after the epilogue, they know the player will try entering again the game after all it happened. Even with the echoes of the now gone Narrator you'll play the game again. The counter at the side after the epilogue isn't just an insult just to spite the Narrator, it's an insult to the players too. But again, it's Employee 432 role to Keep the Wheel Turning, and the game spiralling on itself for eternity. I like to think of this game as the bad side of the original one, like that sentence: 'If you like me by my good sides only, go away, but if you like me too by my bad sides, stay.' The game is good at being bad and bastardize the original game, but... that's the whole point since it critizes the 'modern game industry'. The line was so low from other bland or paywalled games, they had to lowered to the point of no return to their game. (They like meme fanservice? Then all the game will be fanservice! They don't think the game isn't a game without collectables? Let's add that shit up then! New Endings? Not that much? Well, then the new content will happen in another way!) The game is good at being itself, but the players which consider buy every trash-or-bland game from a franchise just because fanservice are the bad. At least in this instance. I don't blame here, in fact I could consider myself to blame for that here (I have a few franchises I'm invested emotionally). But it's not bad by itself, the thing I could say it's bad is how exploitable those players are, and how companies sees us as cow-making-money machines because of that fanservice attention we have on those games. But well, eventually all games go bland and repetitive. I think one of the more knowleadgeable cases would be the Mario 2D games. Same worlds, same enemies (except one new), one new item. Same bland routine. Imagine the year where they announced two Mario 2D games (3DS and WiiU) and both of them were similar in almost everything. There a reason why they run franchises to the mud, it gets money, and after that, they forget of all past games, don't release some of those games over a window of 5 to 10 years, make a return to those games, being the same bland trash as always. (Could add too all those shooters which are almost identical to another and every year they make them worse) It's the modern games industry loop, and we can't do anything to change it. (Except stop buying games altogether everyone, but it's a guilty pleasure from everyone to play videogames, so I won't suggest that.)
If the game is a complete disappointment, then it’s a disappointment delivered in the most cleverly written way possible. Or at least that’s my takeaway at least.
I think viewing spud as a Sequel is the wrong out look. Sure in the game they end up changing the name to The Stanley Parable 2 ,(3,4,ect) but when you buy it off the shelf its called The Stanley Parable: Ultra Deluxe. Its not really a new game but just The Original with add content, the same as any Deluxe or Game of the Year edition of the game. As to why they released it as why they didn't just make it dlc for the original i can think of 2 reasons. 1. they wanted to release it on consoles as well as computers, and to do this they remade the whole game in unity, Really no point in making the additional content in the source engine just to add to the Older game at that point. 2. Ironically in a sense it could have been to "preserve the legacy of the original". Adding the content to The Stanley Parable Classic would have made it seem likes these additions are now the definitive version. Now the original can stand untainted as the milestone in gaming history it was , while the Ultra deluxe can provide a bit of extra content for those who wanted it. Honestly when the timekeeper says to let The Stanley Parable isn't scared I have to wonder a bit. Did creator ever intent to make a big meta textual statement on the nature of games or did they just want to play around with the idea of "what if you could defy the narrative of the story"? What if we are responsible for putting the games message on this philosophical pedestal that it was meant to occupy? meanwhile the creators might really have just wanted to make some jokes about a bucket. For what its worth i liked the game, and i while i found the meta narrative interesting , I guess i do fall in to the camp of "hey cool there is Minecraft".
great video cheddar! A lot of the same thoughts went through my head when I played the game, and I may as well drop my two cents in here 29:59 when I played the game, I had a similar thought, the line of thought of, Is this game bad because it tarnishes the original and fails to be a good follow up, or genius because it is a tacky sequel, making commentary on tacky sequels, my thought was, even if ironic, the devs still made a tacky sequel. You can make a pile of shit, say that you made a pile of shit, and make jokes about it, and say its ironic, but at the end of the day, you still made a pile of shit, ironic or not.
You know, for a while I've been thinking about something, while the original The Stanley Parable made a statement for the players and how they interact with games, I think Ultra Deluxe is making a statement for developers and the relationship they have with their games.
How some obsess over the potential profits, others over meeting fans expectations, but in both cases the author loses agency over their craft, and is as powerless as the player is trapped inside the game.
How many times developers won't make what they want to make, but what the players want to play, how some franchises become prisoners of their own success...
I don't know, maybe I'm reading too much into this, but I genuinely found some deep themes on Ultra Deluxe that go way beyond "sequel bad".
Anyway, good analysis.
I was actually gonna say something similar, about how the original was about how the player interacts with games and poking fun and the illusion of player agency, while Ultra Deluxe is more about the developer and the games they let out into the world and how it gets out of their hands. They are no more in control than we were in the original, it's all an illusion, they may have made the game, but they have no control over how others perceive it or what they take from it. In a way, it actually highlights both the lack of control, yet paradoxically the complete control we the player/audience have over these games, or any piece of media for that matter. I think that's why the conclusion of Ultra Deluxe is to just let go of the legacy of the original.
That. That's it exactly. Basically, "You can never please everyone all the time so do what you want."
"making a statement for developers and the relationship they have with their games." It's not coincidental that Davey Wreden's follow-up the The Stanley Parable was The Beginner's Guide, which explores these exact themes. In a way, Ultra Deluxe is also The Beginner's Guide 2.
The “quiting a game is winning it” is a very interesting concept. I feel like its the only way to win any idle game, or a very pay to win game. It opens up a lot of questions. What makes a game worthwhile to play? Why do we play games?
For entertainment lmao
@@pirilon78Then that begs the question of why we seek out pure entertainment in the first place, which the Narrator explains is as a distraction from the many bad things that happen in our lives. Even if you only have the smallest, most menial conflicts in your life, entertainment is still an easy way to forget that pain, to step away from it and distract yourself. But then that entertainment comes at the risk of the meaning behind works of entertainment. It’s also why I find the friction between what makes good entertainment and what makes good art so fascinating.
@@WuhHuh that doesn't beg any question. Games are usually made to be fun, but sometimes to illicit some other emotions. All games are art, it doesn't matter how soulless, because they're all pointless. That's what makes something art
@@pirilon78 Then that brings me back to the contrast between good games and good art. Yes, they have a lot of overlap, and yes, you can have an interactive work that has both excellent gameplay and a resounding message. But there are some design choices that keep art and games from being separated. Walking simulators are, by nature, boring in terms of gameplay, but people enjoy them more for the story and themes. In that sense, it’s better appreciated as art than as a game. Meanwhile, while a game can focus on being a good game with minimal to no story or themes, it’ll remain mostly a video game, and not much else.
Some specific things I’d like to point out are choices that specifically sacrifice good game feel for immersion. For example, the explosion ending ends not with a quick cutscene that summarizes its events, but a longer, two minute struggle. In a gameplay sense, this is a bad way to pace out an ending and just makes the player feel bad. However, in an art/immersion sense, it highlights just how little control the player has. Or the ending where you’re given button prompts and the Narrator tries to convince you to quit. In a gameplay sense, not only is literally just pressing buttons with nothing much happening boring, but being outright told to quit contradicts the entertainment part of games. But in an artistic sense, it once again hammers in how little choice the player has other than to quit.
Sorry for rambling, it’s just that this inherent conflict between art and entertainment specifically is so captivating to me, and I don’t get many chances to talk about it.
That concept is a nice novelty at first, but it becomes meh after a while. I prefer the atmospheric/existential horror aspect of The Stanley Parable. The thing that makes a game "worthwhile" to play is entirely down to the individual (as it is mostly subjective). I think most people play games because they want to have fun. These days, most stories (whether in games, books, or whatever) have become purely about entertainment, which is unfortunate (as I find a story that has meaning and teaches important lessons to be of far more value). But the whole "illusion of choice" theme of TSP falls flat for me. It just ends up making as much sense as the pseudo-intellectual philosophy the narrator spews during the confusion ending.
(Spoilers! Duh!)
I feel like the creators wanted this feeling because they wanted you to feel a sense of hopelessness, pure deep dread. Will the sequel live up to expectations? Will the fans like it? Will it be the next hit? Will the bucket suffice? Maybe adding a jump button to avoid breaking their perfect formula work? These may seem simple questions with simple answers, but they’re not to game developers… and they knew that.
The game becomes so meta for developers, to the point that it just stops being funny. When you get into the skip button room, I felt fear for the narrator… because I stopped thinking of the narrator as an actor… but as the developers cry for help. What I feel the developers wanted was to obviously surpass The Stanley Parable in the new edition, but they knew that their product was so good… it would have been impossible.
Hence, enter the bucket. The bucket just adds a few lines and new endings. That’s all it does, it adds nothing to the game. It’s not meant to insult, it’s meant to meet expectations for the “fans”. The people who loved the witty jokes and humor, for their endless entertainment into their plate! They just want more, and more!
That’s what the narrator feared, because the narrator believed their game was perfect by having a meaning, a message! So the narrator starts blabbering about their fears until Stanley, (the player) doesn’t want to hear it and hits the skip button. Eventually, time makes it disappear. With each skip press, time takes it all away. Eventually you only see relics from a past that is now misunderstood, and the message is now worthless.
It makes you really wonder, does the message really matter in the end? Let’s reflect that in life, a soulless company would probably milk it once the creators are gone. Time will pass and the game will become incompatible on newer computers, all to be forgotten while only to be seen on a few lets pIays youtube videos. I think that was the entire point the narrator (developers) made, because eventually time takes over… and wins.
I think that is the point of Ultra Deluxe, to reduce meaning on something that wont matter in the future. And for that, it makes me do the opposite just like the Narrator would do.
Crazy game I swear, but that’s just the way I interpreted it.
I don't want to read all of that, can you make me a shorter onr
That was pretty deep. The Narrator's mentions on how he felt like a failure hit me a lot as well.
@@kilby6145 OH MY GOD READING!!!! I DON'T WANT TO READ THAT WOULD TAKE 1 MINUTE OF MY TIME I WANT TO WATCH 80 HOURS OF UA-cam VIDEO ESSAYS WITHOUT STANDING UP INSTEAD
@@VerbDoesStuff true, you know me so well
@@VerbDoesStuff You're not even the same user. Why are you so upset about this?
In the words of the narrator "I'm not trying to entertain I'm trying to make a work of art" this is a meta critique of franchises and how they start out with such great stories but lose their magic due to them being strung out so long lose the magic that they had in the first place to the point where they are not a work of art but a rotted husk used to make money
I'm not sure I believe that Cheddar missed this fact. It's so obvious, it's the first thing about it. The part with the sequels should've made it crystal clear if nothing else did before that. Does he think the devs think it's a good idea to make endless soulless sequels and defile the legacy of the original? Then how would he justify the inclusion of this stuff in the game? No, I think he's more intelligent than that. I think he is being intellectually dishonest and thus foregoing his integrity in order to have something to talk about, something that will get views. For content. So he's doing exactly what he's saying the game did.
The Stanley Parable Ultra Deluxe is a game for developers more then for consumers. Trying to please the masses with sequels, the dread coming from anxiety and the insanity that comes with it. And personally, after finishing a very hard project for school, which was a follow-up to something I made at the start of the semester, this game spoke to me on a personal level.
Good analysis anyway, even if we do have different opinions.
I don't see that at all. I don't think they're concerned with receiving acclaim, something which they were right not to be concerned about. They're upset at the prospect of turning their art piece into a soulless franchise with no purpose. So instead, they made their sequel a mockery of sequels and soulless entertainment. This is so blindingly obvious that I don't know how anyone could interpret it any other way. I really did not like this video, because it felt like a guy spending 36 minutes, and much more during the actual production, being willfully ignorant to a point of absurdity for the sake of coming across as cultured and "nuanced". Taken at face value, it's like he's being taken for a ride by the game. By my interpretation, he's taking himself for a ride and taking us all with him for the sake of soulless entertainment.
For me the fast foward ending is the most Ultra Deluxe felt in the spirit of the original, alternating me between laughter, reflectiveness, and a sense of unease.
Yes, this ending and maybe the epilogue were « canon » to the og game
So. I understood ALL that stuff about the original. But the thing I think this game communicates, at least for me, is how unfulfilling it can feel when corporations try to quantify emotion and sell it to you. But also the upsides to that. It can be a soul-crushing process to create art and then people like it for all the reasons you hate. Yes, there was hints at a larger world in the original, and then this game just says "fuck it" and puts you in outdoor areas, dev areas, out the wazoo. You're in an office building? Fuck that noise, this game can take place literally wherever I want. And it was sort of ironic because even though the WHOLE GAME is LITERALLY about it being a waste of time and being philisophically meaningless, it WASN'T that BECAUSE that was the message. And also, you can choose to enjoy the game even though it seems to want to avoid pleasing you at all costs. But to help sell the powerlessness of the narrative, it all takes place in boring depressing settings. But this game? Tries to cheer you up and puts you outside and inside and everywhere.
But honestly? Life is often like that, people desperately want things to go a certain way, for a certain reason, but the world just won't let it happen that way, and there's a lot of CHOICE of trying to choose between doing things your own way and just allowing things to happen as they will. And this frustration is PRECISELY WHAT davey wreden has SAID he HAS when making games.
I think you're forgetting about your FIRST PLAYTHROUGH of the first game; It was frustrating. It was a game BUILT around making you feel frustrated and powerless in order to STOP PLAYING IT, but while also providing enough surface level entertainment to keep you engaged. And one of the things I'm willing to bet bothered Wreden was that people did not enjoy it for the philisophical edge, they just enjoyed what were supposed to be the forgettable parts of the game: the filler, the jokes. So, he decided he would make a sequel that was exactly what those fans who didn't connect with the original's message want. And, ironically, in playing this game, if you WERE one of those people, even if you enjoy this game a lot for those things alone (i am one of those people) it also forces you to look at the FIRST game in that more serious light! By MAKING such a ""soulless"" sequel, it actually draws more attention toward the author's intention of the ORIGINAL!
The irony, too, is you're talking about death of the author, but you care *a lot* about what you think the intended message of the first game was, when in fact it is just *your takeaway of it.* Not saying your takeaway is wrong, just that it doesn't make others' takeaway of it wrong and yours right. But, you clearly care about what the first game made you feel, and feel the sequel didn't deliver in this way, but honestly? I liked it PRECISELY BECAUSE it went in a COMPLETELY different direction. Honestly? It felt like a celebration of UNITY whereas the original felt like a celebration of Source. I personally felt it wasn't "bad on purpose and self-aware about it," it was more like they were saying, we can't make a sequel of the original because it's PERFECT, but that's SO unbelievably pretentious that I can't even. Saying your art is perfect and a sequel couldn't be good is hilarious.
I for one, think a perfect sequel to The Stanley Parable already exists. It's called The Beginner's Guide. It's not even CALLED "The Stanley Parable", it's just made by the same guy. If you have no idea what I'm talking about, play it sometime. I have a feeling you will like it.
But ALSO? One of the takeaways I had from the game was that settings guy WASN'T completely "right." What The Stanley Parable does is it presents you with contradictory ways of looking at life and FORCES YOU, specifically YOU, to choose. The game won't choose for you. That's WHY the ending with the credits is the narrator begging Stanley to make a choice. It's ironic, it works on so many levels.
So, I didnt' hate this game the way you did, clearly. BUT, i DID your video incredibly ironic. Seriously, I recommend you go play The Beginner's Guide and watch Wreden's videos, and if by the end of it you decide you dislike what he was "trying" to say with his games? Well then, what you got out of the original Stanley Parable is ACTUALLY YOURS, and you should protect it. The irony is that if Davey Wreden had ACTUALLY "burned the legacy" of art he wanted to express, he never would have made the original Stanley Parable. OR it's sequel. OR Ultra Deluxe.
Overall, this was a great video and I wish you a good day, sir.
These are the kinds of comments I love to see under my videos. I always hope these videos will start discussions like this, or at least get people to think more about the stuff I talk about. So thanks for writing this all out, it means a lot to me.
But aside from that, I'd like to build on what you said here. First, I have played The Beginner's Guide, and I consider it one of the greatest games ever made (I've also mentioned it in a couple of my other videos). But I think that's part of the reason I didn't find Ultra Deluxe as great, because the commentary on art and artistic drive put forward by The Beginner's Guide is brought down to a personal level that is incredibly relatable and human, which made for an excellent emotional core. In comparison, Ultra Deluxe leaves me more "empty" than anything else, which is exactly what I felt the need to "come to terms with." There's a disconnect between my feelings on the game on a purely emotional level and my opinions on the game artistically, because I think the game is impeccably realized artistically, probably just as much as the original. I think it managed to do exactly what it set out to do, which meant leaving me with that "empty" feeling. It's that disconnect that leads me to my conclusion that I can't say whether the game is good or not. But I'm glad others were able to get more out of Ultra Deluxe than I did, and I'm glad you found my perspective interesting.
@@CheddarEssays I wish you had made this clear in the video itself. That "I think the game is impeccably realized artistically, probably just as much as the original". The video makes it sound that you think the game failed at what it set out to do, that it was a mistake to make, when according to this comment, you're just having a philosophical discussion about whether or not that makes the game good. To me, the only reasonable interpretation of "a good game" is "a well-executed game". One that works as intended and one where its warts don't get in the way of its purpose. I think Deluxe's message is crystal clear, and unless you disagree with the discontent with soulless "content", the unhealthy application of entertainment in modern life, and the desecration of art and meaning for the sake of these ends, I don't see how you could dislike the game or feel regretfully about it in any way.
Also, best sentence: “being a soulless cashgrab ironically”
Great video! I think Ultra Deluxe's commentary on sequels also ties into the original's commentary on escapism. The Stanley Parable said that videogames are an escapist fanatasy, but they're finite; you'll eventually get through them, "quit the game" and move on. Franchises, sequels, DLC, spin-offs, merchandise, fandoms... Ultra Deluxe points out how all of this is an attempt (by greedy creators and shallow, desperate fans) to expand and lengthen the escapist fantasy beyond the limits of the game itself. I also like how Ultra Deluxe took jabs at nostalgia, how that too becomes a source of escapism. We don't want to cofnront the flaws in our favourite works, so we look at them uncritically through rose tinted glasses.
Personally, this elaboration on the original game's themes was enough for me to enjoy Ultra Deluxe and not feel as alienated as you did. I do agree that only a small handful of the new endings are actually interesting and that the absurdist bucket humour is mediocre, but those endings which *were* interesting felt substantial enough to offset the filler.
And, if anything, it lets me have a sense of smug superiority over the players who DID mindlessly jump onto the "new content" bandwagon, and are now quoting the game's unfunny bucket memes verbatim, oblivious or indifferent to the fact that *they're* the butt of the joke.
Oh yes, you're so much better than those filthy heathens. You get the narrator stamp of approval. You interpreted the art correctly. Good job Stanley!
@@VerbDoesStuff Yes! Not only did I find the one, single, objectively correct, bestest interpretation of The Stanley Parable, I also boast the unique trait of being the only critic on the internet to use moderate, scathing hyperbole! This unorthodox quality (completely unique to me, I remind you) has sent some commenters reeling in shock at the sheer audacity! "He expressed himself bluntly? He dared criticise other people? How could he! This is unheard of"! Truly amazing, I know. Not sure how I keep doing it. I guess I'm just a natural.
@@Halucygeno It's a strange mindset to feel one's interpretation of art is valid partially because it justifies their sense of superiority over others who they deem mindless for enjoying a video game and then moving on with their lives.
@@Ted_Curtis Mate, if you're talking about my second comment, I was being sarcastic. There's no such thing as an "objectively correct" interpretation, I was playing up an overconfident character to be facetious and make a point. If you're referring to my first comment, then feel free to disagree, but I don't think it's that far fetched to imagine that the bucket jokes are a commentary on repetitive absurdist humour with no merit. A large part of modern meme culture boils down to weird or shocking absurdism, and then people take those jokes and repeat them ad nauseam, killing the one element that made them kinda funny - the surprise, the unexpected nature of it. Davey Wreden is very self-aware about these kinds of things, so I don't think it's a stretch to imagine he knew that constant permutations on one absurdist joke would get grating. At least, grating to those who enjoyed T.S.P. for its philosophical themes, and expect better from Wreden's writing.
EDIT: For the record, I agree with you about my tone, I also don't like the way I worded myself in my first comment. Claiming that an entire demographic who enjoyed a joke are "the butt of the joke" and that I feel "smug superiority" over them is a really condescending attitude. A more neutral way to phrase it would be to say "the bucket jokes are a critique of mindless absurdist humour". But I don't want to edit that first comment now, as it would make the indignation in the replies seem weird and out-of-nowhere - I don't want to change the context of the conversation to make others seem unreasonable.
@@Halucygeno I admire you for not editing the original comment, it takes integrity to not scrub away the imperfections from one's arguments because someone said otherwise.
As for the Stanley Parable and the bucket, I think the important thing to remember is that the Stanley Parable Ultra Deluxe, rather than being about how an audience interacts with a creators work, is how creators try to interact with the audience. A lot of the new content is presented to you, free for you to examine and play with, and pretty much signposted to you, trying to grab your attention. It's essentially a critique on the industry, as opposed to the first game which was a critique on the medium.
The Bucket therefore is the ultimate gimmick, the hook that companies use to entice people to play their new game. It's like the dog in Call of Duty Ghosts, or the roster swap in every fifa game, a single mechanic that is somehow supposed to fundamentally change the gameplay experience. And in this instance, they've managed to project all of that hype and supposed market value on a bucket, one of the most mundane objects in history.
The bucket itself isn't funny, but the reverence that this bucket receives from both Stanley and the Narrator, juxtaposed with the player's knowledge that its just a bucket. They don't even put anything in the bucket, it's technically worthless. You could replace it with any other mundane object and the joke would be the same.
It's essentially the endpoint of every e3 presenter trying to sell you on the latest innovations in their new yearly release. It's like the Emperors New Clothes of video game gimmicks, where everyone plays along with the idea that the Bucket is this amazing, innovative, beautiful thing that changes everything. Even Stanley himself seems to care about the bucket more than his own wife. The uncaring narrator at one point falls in love with the Bucket. There are weird elder gods conspiring to steal the bucket. In some endings the reverence for the bucket is played so straight that it completely unravels the actual Stanley Parable game.
I don't think there is a single person who genuinely believes that the bucket is funny, it's all about how it's presented. It's a really simple joke but the overemphasis of it only makes it more effective as a critique. It's a big middle finger to all those big wig publishers who think we gamers will game about anything if they market it enough, to the point where we'll buy a whole new version of a game for a goddamn bucket. And the best part is, the bucket probably contributes more unique content in its altered bucket endings than most yearly releases do with a new game.
Watching your video made me go back and re-watch the original Stanley Parable mod. If I'm being honest, the biggest ideas in the game are not only all present in the mod, but the experience is by far the most focused and is most deserving of the "Parable" name. However, it's probably a tough sell for a standalone game, and the gags in the 2013 version were pretty funny, despite diluting the point and tone of the original.
I don't really see Ultra Deluxe as being much different, it further dilutes the point and tone, but as a means to justify the porting job to get the game onto consoles I think it was probably the best option they had.
I much prefer the mod version to the others (even though the 2013 release was my first one). I also noticed a major trend toward the game just being a roller coaster of gags. I liked the ones like the serious room (and even to some extent, the door 430 gag), but there were some moments of being a bit too silly. Then Ultra Deluxe flooded the game with gags. It also seemed to me like the subtlety in the delivery dropped with each version. I much preferred a lot of the delivery from the narrator in the mod as well (even though I know a lot of people don't like the more subdued delivery). The mod was concise (almost too much so), and conveyed its message in a more serious tone. I do like some of the endings from the 2013 edition, but the change to the games ending (the one you get after failing the baby game) in the Ultra Deluxe version just felt off. The narrator is more wacky and spells out what's happening with big bold letters. The 2013 version was already a bit on-the-nose if you're even slightly paying attention, but the new version of the ending is just dreadful.
Overall, the narrator (and the tone) went from serious and sometimes sinister to being the equivalent of one big fart joke. I do agree that the game lost a lot of its focus over the versions (which is probably intentional, but it still makes for a mediocre experience).
I'm actually happy they added the bucket. It might not have been the intended goal, but I find it a good metaphor for how people can have attachments to inanimate objects. Like how people name their roombas and even assign personalities to them.
Then again, I'm not a game critic and am easily pleased if a game is unique enough to keep me entertained and even have me trying to figure out connections. Like how I believe the Narrator is either part of an entire omnipotent species (the female Narrator made me think of that) or that they were previous employees. Like how employee 432 became a time keeper (and thus morphing into an omnipotent power).
I dunno. Maybe I love this game because the added content fits in my sense of humour.
i simply cant agree with a "death of the author" interpretation of the stanely parable specifically personally
Really interesting and well made video! Hurt to listen at parts because of how much I love Ultra Deluxe though lol
what do you like so much about it?
@@chippedgoat
I think it’s hilarious and does actually have a lot of interesting things to say about art, sequels, feedback, nostalgia.etc
But I think the creator overestimates how much The Stanley Parable was actually trying to say
It’s a comedy game at its core and absolutely nails it
There’s really only a few serious endings in TSP and about the same amount in UD
Museum, Countdown, Freedom?, Apartment
Memory Zone, Figurines, Epilogue, New content
Ultra Deluxe does not contain or even overlap with the same themes as TSP, it’s a unique creation with unique things to say.
He complains that UD is only “giving to the fans” by revisiting silly jokes but revisiting the same serious ideas with nothing new to say is the exact same imo
if a video is well made but completely inaccurate, then it's not well made.
@@polocatfan your point being?
Don't you realise YOU are just as much being satirised as those who didn't see the point of the original game? You waited eagerly for this game, hoping to be fed new self-congratulating wit and philosophy. Maybe t made you feel smarter than the average person. The point the narrator makes in the new game is that The Stanley Parable was a closed system, a monolith. That adding content to it makes no sense, because it wasn't just a vehicle for entertainment. You're the other side of the same coin as those who just play it for the funny jokes, but at least they're happy. That rant the narrator gave about how people want entertainment to be everything, never-ending, to be the collapse of ourselves, hit the nail on the head. It becomes some or perhaps many people's self-indulgence - their means of feeling superiour while in reality still just consuming, rather than accomplishing anything. What did you expect? They made a game that was witty about the topic of sequels and player expectations, rather than player choice within a game. Though both made good points about how people waste their lives on entertainment. The 5 year and 10 year abscence achievements on Steam come to mind. No matter how you try to rationalise it, you, just like everyone else, wanted more of the same. You wanted to go down that adventure line, to recapture something that can't be had again. instead of something new, you wanted to relive that moment, but you can't - and the pie is on your face. It only makes sense they made a game about it since so many can be described that way.
Personally i discovered and loved tsp as an exploration game and what if choices game and it made me love exploration
And after being disappointed by the sequel i realized that this game wasn’t about that, we can’t just put liminal spaces without ideas.
But still it was like a where you can’t manage to imagine the following of your dream
They could’ve instead of doing a comic v2 of all the previous endings explored the lore, the escape pod ending mystery which opens for someone each times mind control facility has an entrance,Confusion ending sequel ? Out of bound areas ? (Docking door for exemple)
And many more things like choices and many others unused opportunities
This poorness in new true endings realisation (new button, new vent, new door) is so sad
20:00 How dare you insult my precious bucket!!
Idk bro
I can't help but feel that asking "Is The Stanley Parable: Ultra Deluxe a good game?" the wrong question to ask. I don't think the developers care about that, I think they simply want you to feel something and to take away something meaningful from the experience. I'd say regardless of your personal disappointment, it is an unambiguous success for you in that regard, given that you felt compelled enough to make a video like this in response to your reaction to the game.
It's a perfectly valid question to ask. I don't care if the game is going for some quirky meta-narrative that I'm supposed to put on my pseudo-intellectual hat to enjoy. If I don't find the game to be good (or as most people probably mean: fun), then what's the point of all the nonsense philosophy. Anyone can pontificate on pointless topics.
@@boomertunes9924 Some games are trying to be and do something different, they're trying to evoke an emotion or introspection, rather than just be fun. Don't get me wrong, I love fun games too obviously, but there's room for games that aren't trying to do that. Haven't you seen a movie or read a book that went beyond simple entertainment? It's the same for games.
I understand where your coming from, but the Ultra Deluxe part is trying to give a different message from what I've interpreted. In the original game it touches upon the illusion of choice in gaming, and artist intent vs viewers interpretation. Ultra Deluxe chooses to talk about loosing the original meaning of an artwork, what makes a game so loved in the first place, and poking fun at modern video game practices. It's taking the original game and making a new narrative on top of it. The main message I got from Ultra Deluxe is the idea of trying to find out what made an artwork so special, and by trying to replicate it, completely changing the meaning of it, making it a husk of what it once was. To be honest, I was a tad disapointed, that most of the new endings were remixes of the old endings, but they changed enough to make it interesting. Ultra Deluxe is partially building off the themes of the original, but also making a different statement.
As someone who played Ultra Deluxe without having ever played the original, I can confirm that yes, it IS a good game. A great game. One of the greatest games ever. Because the original is still in there (minus the Minecraft/Portal ending), its themes are there, and are communicated clearly and in a very distinct way from the "new content". In fact the game is structured in a way that makes it possible to completely ignore the new content. So I was befuddled for large stretches of your video as to how you wouldn't be able or willing to differentiate between the two messages, which are juxtaposed, not mixed, nor garbled.
Yeah exactly. It's not a bad game, just not a good remaster.
Wait
Anybody else completely forget that a “load game” option ever existed
I liked the Stanley parable Ultra Deluxe I thought it was funi, but honestly didn't view it as a sequel I viewed more as a different game to the original that happened to have almost the entirety of the original game within it. Yes the ultra deluxe's message isn't as deep as the original's, but really I was never expecting it to be and perhaps that's why I enjoyed it. Honestly what I was expecting was that they would just open up some previously closed doors and make endings from that, in a way the Stanley parable Ultra Deluxe exceeded my expectations
14:45 how do you tell the difference in the mastering at this point just from listening to it? the first recording does sound warmer and the consonant sounds (particularly s, -ft) stick out a lot more and last for longer in the second, but I can't quite tell exactly what's due to a filter and what's due to a different take (since it's very clearly also a different take, to me at the moment it seems equally likely that the voice actor was just pronouncing the consonants stronger). it's an interesting point considering how the voice is deliberately muffled during the actual ending so gradually degrading his voice after making the decision is a natural choice, especially since it starts with unplugging a phone
i could ramble about the stanley parable, ultra deluxe, and what it means to me for hours. i only subscribe to channels that i want to get notifications for, so seeing a notification that you made a half hour long video about one of my favorite games and your experience with/analysis of it was pretty exciting. i cant imagine how long it takes to write these scripts and edit these videos. great stuff
But how concisely could you describe your perception of these things?
Great video! I think the meta narrative in SPUD is a result of the games effectively just being a port to consoles. All of the new content is explicitly locked behind a door and the bucket. One could play through the game just as they did the original (minus the games ending). Although I feel it is a little dramatic to think the devs ruined the game’s original wit and commentary regarding choice and recursion. The new content is fan service in one of the most deliberate ways possible, for old fans to go back and see the wacky ways a bucket influenced their endings. That can be frustrating, especially with certain expectations. I didn’t even know Ultra Deluxe was coming out until like a week before it was released, so I couldn’t let my expectations sit. I fell for their trap honestly, getting lost in all the wacky new content, but it also rekindled my love for the game as well, seeing how they could contextualize the state that is the modern video game industry. I think all your points are completely valid, and this was a very high-quality video, just subbed.
Not ALL, just the vast majority.
There are at least 2 new endings you can get before you even set foot in the "New Content" door.
I think this video really encapsulated my initial reaction to Ultra Deluxe, and has helped me to find some resolution after feeling kinda disappointed and a bit confused by the game
So thank you, and great video!
Ok wow that was more shortlived than expected, ive gotten all the "endings" and honestly, i dont know what to think of this video in this case, becuse i personaly actualy have not played the original, so i cant see it from.the same perspective as the other peaple that play this game, all i know is that i enjoyed my time with ultra delux, yes, even the two houre ling bucket gag, and besides that i dont relly know what else to say, so, have a nice day i guess.
P.S. when did you get the original? And did you play it invetween sometimes over the years? Becuse now im wondering if you have the achivement for going outside in the original
I actually just set the clock on my computer to get that achievement in the original. Probably not something I would do today, and I think I'll legitimately wait the 10 years for the achievement in Ultra Deluxe (assuming we're all around in 10 years)
I'm glad that I'm not the only one who thinks this way
This feels like he's in character
i have been watching a few stanley parable videos and you're the first one to mention the 'museum ending'. i wholeheartedly agree. tangentially, if the male narrator is the "witness" (as in meditation, witnessing yourself), the female is the witness of the witness. or perhaps the male narrator is the mind, stanley is the body, and the female narrator is the supposed omega perspective of the mind body problem.
i've been calling the original an "anti-game" (like antijoke) but people are not getting me. i think you nailed this video, i agree with both of your interpretations for the two games. i think what is shocking overall is that ultra deluxe reveals the animosity of the devs towards the player/community. if the original is a playful tap, ultra deluxe is a repeated slap. it is no longer a joke (or is too heavy handed to be one), but the mainstream masses will gorge on the lowest common denominator to its heart's content. perhaps this is what every team goes through when they have to make a sequel but dont really want to.
in a way, i am glad they got to express themselves in this way. at the same time, im disappointed more people werent able to see their intent. the players have become loyal to the franchise and the devs took this opportunity to make the "worst sequel" in fear of attempting to make a good sequel and failing. i dont really see where this goes if they make subsequent sequels. just more jokes and pretending a good sequel is not possible? if you think about it, they intentionally made a broken/failed product. it is a sequel that can not even decide how it wants to be a sequel. because of the original's success as (my view) "anti-game", we are supposed to accept this as an "anti-sequel".
13:42 this was actually my FIRST ending back in my first playthrough
seriously? I don't believe it
@@chippedgoat i just tried to go against narrator's will, just didn't jump from the cart, didn't think it was an option.
@@VORASTRA so you realized the plug behind the phone was an option... but not jumping off the platform or jumping on the catwalk... Yeah I am calling bullshit
@@chippedgoat yeah, I realized that after walking around the phone for half a minute. Don't see anything unusual in this.
@@VORASTRA but why would you think to click the plug for the phone?
This is probably the best review of Ultra Deluxe anybody could make.
i dont think so this video essay : ua-cam.com/video/2CKFlwc04WQ/v-deo.html is better i would say
The game didn't disapointed me at all.
Yes, all the original endings just with a bucket gets boring, and I didn't saw them all. Just 3, enough to get the message. But I played the new content analyzing what the game was trying to say and what it was saying. And it both entretained me and made me think about the relation between the designers, the audience and the games. I felt it had something to add beyond just the surface level stuff of "cash grab sequences are bad".
PS: I don't see it as a "new" game. I see it as the original game with something extra. Under this lense, I saw it as something that brough back atention to the game, making new people experience the original content.
Hey maybe I don't agree with your view of Ultra Deluxe but I really liked your view of the og game it's really verbose and well thought out you earned a 'criber
I always interpreted the menu guy’s plan for more sequels as meaningless spite. It’s still telling you to move on, but by showing constant mockery won’t get you anywhere.
Stanley Parable, both the original release and ultra deluxe, are not good games. They offer unique commentary on games, and the narrator is rather enjoyable, but your not really playing a game, it’s much more like a digital choose your own adventure type story. There’s nothing you gain by playing the Stanley Parable over watching a youtube video of all endings. Absolutely nothing. It’s not a game you play. It’s a thing you experience, think about, and hear.
Hidden gem channel on UA-cam
I'll pay you 20 bucks to say the opening intro lines to a Law and Order episode. Your voice is sick :P
Great video.
Man I can't wait to watch this video as a fan of Stanley Parable :) probably tomorrow !
You're only disappointed because you built up expectations. So the game didn't have the message you wanted it to. Get over it and enjoy it for what it is rather than being upset because it's not what you wanted it to be.
That's the thing, that _is_ the message. The game, from my pespective, is a double-down game made to make you feel how soulless it is. It's supposed to make you reflect on the core idea of soulless remasters, like the game is just a giant ending about lazy remakes. I don't consider this concept exactly well-executed, but i do understand it.
Very interesting retrospective of the first game!!! Ill finish watch the ultra deluxe analysis when ive finally watched a play through haha. Loved your videos on undertale and fez and cant wait to finish watching (๑´▽｀๑ )
in my opinion, it's not a good game, but it doesn't have to be, whichi is why i think it's a brilliant game.
Oh! It left you in a gray place. That's very on brand to be honest. The choice of how you view it can be taken with so many ways that ultimately it leaves you with no choice. That's cool.
Hey I've been thinking a lot about this video and it made me realize something. You know how in the broom closet there's a mistake in the subtitles? It reads "the irony and insightful comedy of this game is not lost on them" when the Narrator clearly says "insightful commentary". I think they wanted to record those lines again replacing commentary with comedy! But then changed their minds, maybe realizing it would make this change in the game's direction too obvious, but the subtitles kept the script change. It makes so much sense. TSP original is a "commentary" game, and TSP:UD is a "comedy" game. I think that change in perspective (press G to change your perspective) really helps accepting what Ultra Deluxe is. A cool game that will make will laugh, and maybe not think much about it. And honestly it succeeds, it got plenty of laughs out of me, and it still does. I think that is what the Skip Button ending is supposed to be. A transition point, that will take you from the depth of The Stanley Parable, into the humour of The Stanley Parable 2.
What an excellent video! You´ve truly captured the spirit of The Stanley Parable while simultaneously delivering some fascinating information. This deserves a million views! Best UA-camr on UA-cam.
THANK YOU FOR THIS VIDEO
I know I'm easy, but I'm subscribing just for the Pathologic 2 mention
Great video in general! I never played SP or SPUD but I watched playthroughs of both and I was also pretty disappointed by SPUD, so thanks for putting my thoughts into words!
Thanks for the fantastic video!! what an essay
Ok i just have two things to say (for now), one is that i have not yet wtached the video as i dont wnat spoilers, but two is that... It is sutch and i mean SUTCH a funny cionsidense, i got the stanley parable: ultra delux JUST HALF AN HOURE BEFORE THIS VIDEO CAME OUT, idk if you find that funny, but i do, so im still playing trugh the game getting too see evrything, so il be back to see youre video on it but for now, ima laugh at some philosophical moments in writeing
While I don't feel as disappointed by the final product, I definitely agree with the flatness of the new content. The fact nothing feels organic. It's all "new content for the stanley parable", ironically, nothing that genuinely blends into the original.
Your pointing out of how the falling-off-the-map-in-mind-control-room "ending" just comments on it being a bug from the original game made it obvious to me, just how unnatural and unfitting all the rounded edges and patches of content that was "missed" in the original doesn't blend into the game as well.
It's a shame the game is drenched in this irony towards itself. A more genuine expansion that doesn't take itself as the punchline would've been a real treat.
Eh, I found it pretty profound actually¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Also that isn't what "death of the author" means, the essay that created the term was responding to the practice common in literary analysis at the time of basically psychoanalysing the author through their work. It's not saying that who the creator of a work is and what their intention was is entirely irrelevant for analysis.
Ah, hello Cupcake9
Cookie9 lol
but yeah
Your videos are masterpieces bro. Nice nice good pacing proper grammar I hope you keep up the good work.
I think it means a lot when the original content was still amazing that the new stuff always feels like it’s missing something. But I feel like that’s intentional
Amazing video you’re underrated
I bought the Ultra Deluxe version to enjoy the game on my PS4 (since i rarely play games on PC) and was really enjoying the original stuff from the original game.
Then went through the new stuff from Ultra Deluxe and found myself both invested and bored at what it does. It critiques what time and nostalgia does to franchises and developers, trying to keep the attention from it's fans and consumers at all costs for the longest time possible which ends with the erosion and eventual death of the franchise and the dev's artistic drive *BUT* it partly expresses this point by being the very thing it critiques. Most of the bucket endings are just rewrites with little changes.
However, some of the new endings aren't as shallow as most of the bucket endings and they really make enough of an impact for me that it kinda makes up for the majority of bucket endings.
How you feel about Ultra Deluxe depends on how it's message and how it's contrasted with it's mere ironic existance (and execution) affects you personaly. This includes the feeling you had to the initial game and it's messages.
Ultra Deluxe introduces a Story format that makes you have once only some endings, in this story you learn what happened to Stanley after the New Content Experience on the Memory Zone, then if you heard the Narrator comments while pushing THAT button, you see that he's desperately clinging to the legacy while looping in his thoughts, the New New Content and Sequel are just playing in Narrator's brain while he's stuck with freezed in time Stanley on THAT room, he adds worthless humor, memes and comedy because that's what we apparently want, to be entertained as it's just a game, the bucket is just the shitpost we wanted as their fans, the narrator was so obssessed with making the game funny to please the fans in his mind that apparently corrupted the game. (Thus making a contact between Stanley in it's mind and the outside Stanley when it regains conscience in the epilogue) But everything was worth it for the narrator in the end, as he accepts that he created that Stanley because he felt lonely (because THAT button incident situation that's still happening outside) and he would retire that mind Stanley for once.
Then Employee 432 or The Setting Guy person which became one with the fabric of space-time itself comes and says those words at the end.
The point of choice on videogames that the original had was nice, you could press Escape and press Quit to make your only choice not designed by devs. But the point of the sequel, beside criticize the cash-grabby videogame franchises is basically, that's not a possible sequel, that's just a fanservice game without any soul or effort put into it.
And the game comes with terms on itself too, that people will enter again to the game after the epilogue, they know the player will try entering again the game after all it happened. Even with the echoes of the now gone Narrator you'll play the game again. The counter at the side after the epilogue isn't just an insult just to spite the Narrator, it's an insult to the players too. But again, it's Employee 432 role to Keep the Wheel Turning, and the game spiralling on itself for eternity.
I like to think of this game as the bad side of the original one, like that sentence: 'If you like me by my good sides only, go away, but if you like me too by my bad sides, stay.'
The game is good at being bad and bastardize the original game, but... that's the whole point since it critizes the 'modern game industry'. The line was so low from other bland or paywalled games, they had to lowered to the point of no return to their game. (They like meme fanservice? Then all the game will be fanservice! They don't think the game isn't a game without collectables? Let's add that shit up then! New Endings? Not that much? Well, then the new content will happen in another way!)
The game is good at being itself, but the players which consider buy every trash-or-bland game from a franchise just because fanservice are the bad. At least in this instance. I don't blame here, in fact I could consider myself to blame for that here (I have a few franchises I'm invested emotionally). But it's not bad by itself, the thing I could say it's bad is how exploitable those players are, and how companies sees us as cow-making-money machines because of that fanservice attention we have on those games.
But well, eventually all games go bland and repetitive. I think one of the more knowleadgeable cases would be the Mario 2D games. Same worlds, same enemies (except one new), one new item. Same bland routine. Imagine the year where they announced two Mario 2D games (3DS and WiiU) and both of them were similar in almost everything. There a reason why they run franchises to the mud, it gets money, and after that, they forget of all past games, don't release some of those games over a window of 5 to 10 years, make a return to those games, being the same bland trash as always. (Could add too all those shooters which are almost identical to another and every year they make them worse)
It's the modern games industry loop, and we can't do anything to change it.
(Except stop buying games altogether everyone, but it's a guilty pleasure from everyone to play videogames, so I won't suggest that.)
Hmm yes a critique on players and developers:the game
this video really Stanley´d my parable.
Amazing vid
Take Away my Bucket.
#zen
Great video
If the game is a complete disappointment, then it’s a disappointment delivered in the most cleverly written way possible.
Or at least that’s my takeaway at least.
170 like and 644 sub
First
I think viewing spud as a Sequel is the wrong out look. Sure in the game they end up changing the name to The Stanley Parable 2 ,(3,4,ect) but when you buy it off the shelf its called The Stanley Parable: Ultra Deluxe. Its not really a new game but just The Original with add content, the same as any Deluxe or Game of the Year edition of the game. As to why they released it as why they didn't just make it dlc for the original i can think of 2 reasons.
1. they wanted to release it on consoles as well as computers, and to do this they remade the whole game in unity, Really no point in making the additional content in the source engine just to add to the Older game at that point.
2. Ironically in a sense it could have been to "preserve the legacy of the original". Adding the content to The Stanley Parable Classic would have made it seem likes these additions are now the definitive version. Now the original can stand untainted as the milestone in gaming history it was , while the Ultra deluxe can provide a bit of extra content for those who wanted it.
Honestly when the timekeeper says to let The Stanley Parable isn't scared I have to wonder a bit. Did creator ever intent to make a big meta textual statement on the nature of games or did they just want to play around with the idea of "what if you could defy the narrative of the story"?
What if we are responsible for putting the games message on this philosophical pedestal that it was meant to occupy? meanwhile the creators might really have just wanted to make some jokes about a bucket. For what its worth i liked the game, and i while i found the meta narrative interesting , I guess i do fall in to the camp of "hey cool there is Minecraft".
great video cheddar! A lot of the same thoughts went through my head when I played the game, and I may as well drop my two cents in here
29:59 when I played the game, I had a similar thought, the line of thought of, Is this game bad because it tarnishes the original and fails to be a good follow up, or genius because it is a tacky sequel, making commentary on tacky sequels, my thought was, even if ironic, the devs still made a tacky sequel. You can make a pile of shit, say that you made a pile of shit, and make jokes about it, and say its ironic, but at the end of the day, you still made a pile of shit, ironic or not.
First... like! Yay
Never gonna be first tho
@@gabedillin2472 :(
this game is so stupid and so boring, please get this off my recommended