Don’t Open The Briefcase
![]()
As a winter draught of new releases freezes our consoles, we’re all turning to the stuff we missed last year to keep our blog-hoppers full. For example, two writers revisited Braid last week: the inimitable L. B. Jeffries thoughtfully analyzed its writing, while over at Gamers With Jobs, Julian Murdoch quoted Borges and Nabokov by way of explaining that Jonathan Blow was neither, and argued that because he didn’t “get” it, there’s probably nothing to “get.” E.g.:
By the end of my Braid experience, I felt like Blow had specifically constructed something that would generate emails and forum posts begging him to please tell us “what it all means.” … It takes what could have been a convincing “games-as-art” showpiece and instead turns it into a pompous, self-absorbed and too-clever-by-half attempt to create conversation about the artist and his process, rather than the work itself. Jonathan Blow sits demon-like on my shoulder, shouting, “This means something!” and I can’t help but keep asking, “Who cares?” instead of “What?”
Never mind that Blow has said exactly the opposite.
Here’s the problem. Blow told us that Braid has a point. He won’t spell out, in Prima Guide detail, what. But it is clear - from his comments, and just from the care and rigor that went into the construction of each technique, each world, and each section of text - that there’s something in here to poke at.
That was a mistake. Because if Blow had said it’s a silly game about a guy jumping through time, with a few symbols that hey, maybe mean something? Maybe not? We would smile and slobber.
Take Gravity Bone.