Inside made me retroactively hate Limbo

[Malidictus]

Disclaimer: I'm not saying Limbo is a bad game, just that after playing inside, I found myself really resentful of my subsequent replay of Limbo. It has nothing to do with the story or the atmosphere, so much as pure gameplay design. Let me explain...

When it first came out, I played Limbo and enjoyed it quite a bit, though quite a number of puzzles frustrated the hell out of me. I didn't get Inside when it came out because people overhyped the HELL out of it, turning me off completely, but I did snag it on discount a few days ago. I replayed Limbo as a primer, Finished Inside to 100% and then went back to grab all the secrets in Limbo I'd missed. And BOY was that final playthrough PAINFUL, especially the "secret level." It hadn't really clicked with me just how much Limbo is trying to be a "superhard platformer" until I had to go through miles upon miles of pitch darkness dodging things I couldn't see, needing to make perfect jumps with very little information.

The simple fact of the matter is that Limbo is trying to be challenging by means of being deliberately cheap, in ways that Inside simply never does. Limbo will deliberately frustrate you with death traps you simply can't avoid on a first playthrough. OK, there's a crusher on the ceiling with a big button underneath. Let's jump over the button so I don't... Oh, it's the sand around the "button" that triggers is. OK, dead, but jump on the button next time. Oh, another crusher. So jump on the button and... OK, so on THIS one the button triggers it and the sand doesn't. OK, well there was no way I could have guessed that. I pull a switch, water starts rising, I die. Should have set up the box! I do a complex puzzle, bull a switch, fall on electrified rails and die. Should have pulled the cart first! There are a lot of puzzles where you have to die a few times just to figure out what's going on - the game's intentionally messing with you. Which is fine from thematic standpoint - you're a small child in a world full of lingering danger around every corner. But then there's that achievement for finishing the entire game while only dying 5 times...

...which wouldn't be so bad if JUST knowing the puzzles was enough to go through them perfectly, but the game also relies very, very heavily on pinpoint-precise timing. Not towards the start, no - people who only played the demo usually don't know what I'm talking about. But it definitely does towards the end once gravity-reversing comes into play, or the rotating scenery, or all the various buzzsaws, or the brain leeches. The HOTLE sign is probably my least favourite. To make the jump across the lethal H, I have to jump while the neon is still lit almost to the millisecond. Jump too early and the neon kills me before it turns off. Jump too late and I don't have enough time to make it to the O. And I have no means of really judging when to jump. The only way I figured to approach it was to just keep jumping, dying and adjusting my timing from run to run. And it's not just that. There's the swinging chain over the electrified rail or the swinging ladder on wheels over the elevating electrified rail, or that jump over a large buzzsaw which requires stacking two boxes on top of each other and climbing them and the list goes on. The very last puzzle requires timing that I'm simply not capable of getting on the first try.

Inside, on the other hand, feels a lot more fair on both accounts. Yes, it's an easier game, but I'd argue that's the result of tighter game design eliminating needless frustration. There are almost no places in that game that fast reflexes and split-second timing is required. There are quite a few where it FEELS like you made it out by the skin of your teeth, but those are calculated to give that illusion. If you set them up correctly and don't make serious mistakes, you'll get away every time. Most of the dog chases are like that. The closest to this is probably the Bridge, especially the section with a rotating plate near a climbable ladder. Thing is, though, that you have a lever to stop it with. Want the plate to protect you in the exact spot on the ladder? Stop it there, wait for the air pulse and start it moving again. The two are synced, so it'll be in position on the next cycle. Other than one instance where you have to swing on a rope through a closing door and maybe the rolling containers that chase you down an incline, the puzzles don't come down to timing to any significant degree, but rather to figuring them out.

And when it comes to figuring stuff out, I don't think there was a single instance in Inside where I died to something I didn't think could kill me. Yes, there are a few instances where you can get killed if you don't do something first, like the first appearance of the searchlights that you have to open a gate before triggering, but it's simple enough to go back and turn them back once you get to the door. The dog chases are also pretty well telegraphed, as well. The game makes it pretty clear that you CANNOT outrun dogs in a straight race, but you can out-climb them and out-swim them. So when you're being chased by a dog and see a massive long stretch of ground in front of you, maybe don't try to outrun them. Because you already know that that's not going to work. When the "murmaids" are introduced, it's pretty clear that you don't want them near you. I didn't need one bursting through the bubble of my sub to figure that out - the initial jump scare and their behaviour were clues enough.

To my eyes, Limo is trying to be (or at least pay lip service to) one of those ultra-hard action platformers which infested the XBLA at the time. The cheap deaths, the precise timing, the "I will break you!" attitude feels more like caving to peer pressure, and it comes at the expense of immersion, at least in my case. Dying to an unexpected threat is scary the first time. Dying to a completely expected threat dozens of times is just frustrating. Inside, by contrast, isn't trying to be challenging at all. It has more in common with the "Walking Simulators" of today, albeit with a lot more compelling actual gameplay. Turns out that you don't need your games to be ball-bustingly challenging in order for them to tell a story through moody atmosphere and artistic design. To me, it's a bit like the difference between Portal and Portal 2. The former is trying to be a difficult game with a lot of precise actions and timing, while the latter typically takes on a much more sedate tone and lets players problem-solve on their own time.

I don't regret the time I spent with Limbo (outside that last run), but I see no more reason to go back to it. I can do with less frustration in my life.

[Llapop-InTop]

Lovely post, and I agree heavily. Inside's art direction as well as 3D level design makes it a far more heavenly experience than Limbo ever did. No shade on Limbo, in terms of general enjoyment and challenge, it provided, but in terms of replay ability? Hell no. The 2D art is charming in the beginning but a nuisance by the end, and the dark and grim lighting is also no help. (I 100% relate to the HOTEL and last puzzle of the game)

Inside on the other hand, has some stunning level designs, easy and intriguing puzzles, and even the "timing" puzzles are great (The blasting puzzle is SO GOOD!!). The story in both games are most definitely not expanded to great lengths, but I feel Inside gave more crumbs for us to feel immerse in its world. (achievements are a lot more fun to get too).

Sorry for this long ass comment, I just like Inside a lot. Funnily, I'm replaying Inside after 4 years and having more fun than expected.