I really liked it and felt a lot of the same complicit-type emotions you did. And I briefly thought about stopping when he revealed (even though I suspected as much) that what I was playing was his sharing of these games a second time, even when Coda told him not to (as that is a way to end a game that Wreden has explored in the past). But curiosity got the better of me and I had to keep on to see would go.
Also because of the internet I live in, there is not a single weird game that I don’t wonder, “Will this be the gateway to Frog Fractions 2?”
As far as I’ve been able to dig up, IPv6 is Frog Fractions 2. Or, at least, part of the ARG.
It sounds very much as if Coda is a fictional character. There’s a long tradition of attributing literature to writers who only exist in their own narrative.
What’s in a name?
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/coda#English
Coda totally says ‘nyah nyah nyah, you couldn’t be more wrong, please donate money to miasm.’
Coda is totally fictional. Superb article though, makes me want to both play it and not play it. Know what i mean? I enjoyed stanley parable a lot so i think i will, anything that mixes things up from all the shooty-shooty fighty-fighty is to be applauded. 
you, games.
It’s a good thing I stopped reading this article before I got past the fifth paragraph. You give away much of the nuance of the game before you even mention “SPOILERS”. I am glad I played this game and feels it elevate the medium closer to art. I cannot stress enough, however, that you gave much of the spirit of the game away in your review before you mentioned “SPOILERS”.
He probably is fictional, but he seems more than a bit inspired by the real-life Ian Bogost, who like Wrenden himself, likes to make games that make people think about the tropes that games use.
So it appears Davey Wrenden, while not wanting to talk about the game for the time being, did confirm that Coda was based on a real person (it’s in the first 5 minutes of that), who was the person in the credits listed as “R”.
Well damn. If that’s true, then Wreden is basically the creepiest developer ever. I do find it interesting that the podcasters so distrust Wreden now that they don’t trust Wreden’s assertion that he actually fucked “Coda” over. I’ve heard of unreliable narrators, but unreliable authors/devs?
To paraphrase some of my own tweets:
I cannot possibly believe that Wreden could be introspective enough to make this, and actually share Coda’s work having been asked not to. But, given that Coda is a real person, I’m thinking maybe it was like, a dramatic recreation, where these aren’t the actual games, but this Coda/Wreden relationship did happen, a similar sort of misreading occurred, and he did overstep.
I’m kind of hesitant to look into this, after playing the first version of “The Stanley Parable”, which had some entertaining moments, but ended up feeling like a pretentious half hour video essay on why the creator thought I was an idiot for playing it in the first place.
I enjoy the unusual/different but I’m thinking ‘Why?’ I see little in the way of entertainment or enlightenment to be had by ‘playing’.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
