...The Beginners Guide. Open Spoilers after the first post.

…I never actually played Davey’s Wreden first game The Stanley Parable. But I did sort of experience it while watching a huge amount of “Lets Play” videos on youtube, and I found it to be a brilliant, brain-bending example of what video games can be.

So when I heard that Wreden had released a new game, “The Beginners Guide” I decided that I had to experience this unspoiled.

And I’m glad I did. It is a very short game: a very personal game, a very non-traditional game, and not everyone will like it. But its a game that I can’t stop thinking about. I just needed to read some other peoples thoughts on the game, so if you’ve played it, please share your experiences. After this post there will be open spoilers, so if you haven’t played it then best to steer clear.

I purchased the Stanley Parable and loved it so much that I also bought some gift copies and sent them to friends. I haven’t heard of this until your post, so thank you! I plan on purchasing this as soon as I can.

I just finished it. It crashed a few times on Mac OS X but it was cheap (US$9.99) and available on the Mac. It was quite interesting. I have thought about Groundhog Day type scenarios in the past and the space ship level made me remember how those scenarios can get a bit annoying.
I’ve also played the Stanley Parable and it was ok.
Episode 36 - 20/10/2015
I heard about the game 2 days ago on Australia’s “Good Game” - both reviewers gave it 5/5 stars!

That twist in the end. I have to wonder if it’s a bit autobiographical. I heard the guy didn’t handle his indie developer fame very well.

…my guess (and that of most critics) is that Coda is Davey’s creative side. This blog post by Davey written just after the success of The Stanley Parable gives a few hints and insights into Davey’s thoughts.


Of course, maybe Davey just likes creating these sorts of games. :slight_smile:

I played it a few weeks ago. What twist?

Oldish thread, but I just played it. I actually find trying to read “Coda = Davey” or even “Coda = anyone” into it is missing the point.

The entire thing is a critique of the very nature of critique. Especially intentionalist critique. The idea that you can know someone through their work, and that knowing facts about someone can help you understand their work. Because we all come at things with our own biases we read into things, and how we interpret someone’s work says more about our own biases than their own life.

This is especially true in the modern era where everyone is a reviewer to some degree, and there’s no end to the people assuming things about an artist because they played their game, or watched their film, or read their book.

In this way, it’s almost comical when people try to put Davies’ creative side in the role of Coda, because it’s making the exact same mistake the character of Davies made with Coda in the narrative.