-SPOILERS-
Today’s Variety Friday is an in-depth look at some of the design choices in portal 2 (and 1) and how it executes them. No, this isn’t a review for Portal 2, John is supposed to be working on that, so give him the crap, and he will probably give you some excuse such as “PSN is Down”, but anyway. I’m going to try to keep this as spoiler free as possible, but if you don’t want anything spoiled and haven’t played single player, you’ve been warned.
Main Character
One thing Valve has really excelled on with the creation of Chell is making her a character that does not speak and doesn’t have any past we know of. But, what does happen is that Chell is defined by her actions, it’s what she does which defines who she is, as much as we know anyway. This is a commonly used strategy as far as main characters go, especially in older games, in the days of the N64 and GameCube (Examples being Metroid, and Legend of Zelda).
But Valve goes deeper by not only showing her interactions in games with the test chambers and items but also with the supporting characters. Specifically between Portal 1 and 2 with Glados. Portal 1 gave us no back-story, it started out in a test chamber and you started testing as it seemed the only viable option. You weren’t even told the main characters name in the original Portal; it started you off with nothing but a purpose. This one “defining purpose” is sometimes all that is needed in a game. But then in a twist (which also created one of the most well known memes of all time) as Glados attempts to murder you, you must escape and it turns into a fight for your life as you try to escape the Aperture Science Laboratories.
Though, the interesting part comes with Portal 2, how Chell is first reunited with Glados and then goes right back to testing. But, is later forced to work with her while still only having the main purpose of survival. There are two major things to get from this. First, to show how all that is needed in (some) games is a simple goal or purpose, you don’t need to have complex back stories and long cutsceens to show this. Second, it shows the transition of friend to enemy and some of the hardships of doing this, all through action and the dialog of Glados.
Also, they didn’t make the mistake of actually giving more character to Chell; they kept it as it was in Portal 1. Too many times are franchises hurt because a character which was defined by action was characterized and given dialog, a back story, and etc. They stuck to the roots of Portal and I believe that this paid off.
Supporting Characters
Portal has some of the best supporting characters of all time, how? By not having a lot of supporting characters. It is very easy for games, in general, to have too many supporting characters so that you can’t focus on them all or they really get in the way of the story. In general there are 2 main methods to go about not having this problem. There is the Mass Effect strategy of giving you the option of which characters to socialize with and learn about, allowing you to care about all, none, or that one special character. Or Portal’s approach of having a very small amount of supporting characters, locked in conflict throughout the game.
The two supporting characters being Wheatley and Glados (yes there is Cave Johnson and the Turrets but they don’t play near big a role). Both of these characters are generally talkative, which, besides being comical, helps with interaction and atmosphere. One thing I notice though is that Chell is almost the middle man (woman?) between Wheatley and Glados’s conflict. This just helps build upon the mystery behind Chell, as it is almost as if she isn’t the main character at all! It almost seems that Glados and Wheatley take care of the story, while Chell, the interaction. It is actually an ingenious idea, having one character which you play as in the game and provides the interaction, while 2 others which provide the conflict and drive.
Gameplay
The final thing I am going to touch on is the gameplay and Portal’s unique puzzle elements. One thing that first struck me as odd is how some people didn’t think of Portal as a puzzle game. I believe why this is, is because for one, Portal isn’t really presented as a puzzle game, or, well, a traditional puzzle game. It follows a story and doesn’t try to make people feel stupid. The balancing of challenges is really what makes people not think of it as a puzzle game, because the game doesn’t make you feel like a complete idiot when playing, it is that perfect balance of not too easy, not too hard.
Now I don’t need to explain how the mechanics of the game are interesting and unique. What I do want to briefly point out is how they flow. Throughout Portal 2 you learn on a curve with more “weapons being added to your arsenal” as you play along such as the gels. I really must give Valve credit for one, having the guts to make a sequel to portal, and two, executing it near perfectly, adding enough while the core concepts are still there, and not taking anything away. Well played Valve.
Sunday, January 1, 2012 at 10:27AM 
