Comments on: The Clone, the Cube, and the Construct: Part 2 http://www.game-ism.com/2008/04/14/the-clone-the-cube-and-the-construct-part-2/ game critique. game design. game development. game culture. Tue, 03 Jan 2012 00:51:22 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.4 By: Portal 2 and Feminism « Bakka's River http://www.game-ism.com/2008/04/14/the-clone-the-cube-and-the-construct-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-9387 Portal 2 and Feminism « Bakka's River Fri, 27 May 2011 11:11:45 +0000 http://www.game-ism.com/?p=102#comment-9387 [...] is Portal 1 commentary, but I just found these posts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and I had forgotten how much I enjoyed reading them after I played the first game. Argues that [...] [...] is Portal 1 commentary, but I just found these posts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and I had forgotten how much I enjoyed reading them after I played the first game. Argues that [...]

]]> By: Ronin Tetsuro http://www.game-ism.com/2008/04/14/the-clone-the-cube-and-the-construct-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-9328 Ronin Tetsuro Fri, 18 Mar 2011 23:16:38 +0000 http://www.game-ism.com/?p=102#comment-9328 Great theory/piece. I've been reading all of your work here, and I've had to stop myself three separate times from reinstalling Portal and dedicating the rest of me evening to it. As to your question at the end of this piece, here's something to consider: You mentioned that in "Still Alive", GlaDOS hints that her now-active backup may indeed be at Black Mesa or under Black Mesa's control. If this is true, there's a chance GlaDOS has knowledge of her backup location before you kill her Aperture Science "body". Knowing this, and taking into account what we know about Black Mesa from other Valve games, could it simply be that GlaDOS knows that in order for Chell to kill GlaDOS' next-of-kin, she will be up against more formidable adversaries than the turrets and environmental hazards at AS? If we are to follow the parental line of reasoning, then wouldn't it apply the GlaDOS is preparing her child for the challenges ahead once she's gone? Wouldn't it stand to reason that if GlaDOS is indeed alive at Black Mesa, she could have LESS control over the facility than at AS? Or that she hasn't yet gained enough control to eliminate the human factor, and as such is preparing Chell, a military grade android, with training to overcome the human variable/threat so that she can destroy the GlaDOS backups? Just thoughts provoked my the amazing analysis of this game. I'll be sad when I finish the third and final part. And I'll probably ignore things I should be doing to reinstall. Great theory/piece. I’ve been reading all of your work here, and I’ve had to stop myself three separate times from reinstalling Portal and dedicating the rest of me evening to it.

As to your question at the end of this piece, here’s something to consider:

You mentioned that in “Still Alive”, GlaDOS hints that her now-active backup may indeed be at Black Mesa or under Black Mesa’s control. If this is true, there’s a chance GlaDOS has knowledge of her backup location before you kill her Aperture Science “body”. Knowing this, and taking into account what we know about Black Mesa from other Valve games, could it simply be that GlaDOS knows that in order for Chell to kill GlaDOS’ next-of-kin, she will be up against more formidable adversaries than the turrets and environmental hazards at AS?

If we are to follow the parental line of reasoning, then wouldn’t it apply the GlaDOS is preparing her child for the challenges ahead once she’s gone? Wouldn’t it stand to reason that if GlaDOS is indeed alive at Black Mesa, she could have LESS control over the facility than at AS? Or that she hasn’t yet gained enough control to eliminate the human factor, and as such is preparing Chell, a military grade android, with training to overcome the human variable/threat so that she can destroy the GlaDOS backups?

Just thoughts provoked my the amazing analysis of this game. I’ll be sad when I finish the third and final part. And I’ll probably ignore things I should be doing to reinstall.

]]> By: CommanderSwede http://www.game-ism.com/2008/04/14/the-clone-the-cube-and-the-construct-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-9277 CommanderSwede Sat, 01 Jan 2011 05:22:10 +0000 http://www.game-ism.com/?p=102#comment-9277 Ok, i played through the level and have more to add. But first, GLaDOS seeming to want to kill Chell could have nothing to do with the story and really just be something that makes the game enjoyable - if she just gave you the key to her room and an rpg and said "Come get me," that wouldnt be a fun game, would it? anyway, heres a few more points to ponder: -When seemingly talking about your sanity, she hints to the fact of how she is lying and how this is all just to get you to kill her. She says "if in the event the cube does talk to you, Aperature Science urges you to disreguard its advice" and if the Companion Cube is GLaDOS, and shes up there givin' us advice...you can see where im going with this :) -also i totally agree uthanising the companion cube was a test/forshadowing of what you have to do to GLaDOS - burn her in a fire. if your willing to do it with your faithful companion cube, you can do it to a mad, homicidal robot who has a matrial attraction to you. -Also she says "it seems that the companion cube has certainly brought you good luck!" both as humour in the stock use of "good luck," now with an unfitting emotion put in it, it also shows how cheerful GLaDOS is in seeing how much of an attraction you had to a projection of herself - maybe there is a chance for a healthy mother-daughter relationship, eh?(not really but you see where im going.) -The companion cube also is a projection of GLaDOS in how it helps you along the level, as does GLaDOS, even though shes testing you and at times trying to kill you -She talks all sad in the way you have to kill the companion cube, for multiple reasons that i can see: 1) its the first thing that showed you can have even a spark of love for GLaDOS 2)Shes sad to make you have to do this, and what it ultimately means in her timeline 3) shes sorry to put this BURDEN on your heart(as evident in her talking for the cube, she doesnt want to be a burden) -Also, she says in a tone that she doesn't seem to believe herself that it was deemed the companion cube cannot feel pain, she says this to ease the burden, but also, it shows how people think that GLaDOS could not get lonely or begin to hate her job, which of course she does -Shes trying to convince you, or, moreover, herself, that this incineration is for the best, because, seeing how close you are coming to killing her, she begins to get frightened, so shes trying to convince herself that you incinerating her is for the best -Also, her comment about you incinerating more quickly then any other test subject - a rather important line you failed to go over here. Not only at this point does she realise you wont hesitate to kill her, but also she begins to worry about how your do it cruely, and she begins to fear a fiery death by the hands of the one whom she loved and saved. -Also, your notice, near the button, and i believe also on top of the incinerator, there are two more cameras - these, however, do not follow your movements, as she doesnt want to bear witness to the deed you are about to preform, or how mercilessly you may do the same to her. I also think these cameras prove that this is what the development team was going for - why randomly have non-moving cameras if this wasn't a key and emotional moment? -Finally, and this is really just food for thought, and has nothing to do with anything, but the companion cube can also be interperated as a reperesentation of Chell, merely a pawn to be incinerated at the end of the testing process. I hope someone will give this a nice read :) Ok, i played through the level and have more to add. But first, GLaDOS seeming to want to kill Chell could have nothing to do with the story and really just be something that makes the game enjoyable – if she just gave you the key to her room and an rpg and said “Come get me,” that wouldnt be a fun game, would it? anyway, heres a few more points to ponder:
-When seemingly talking about your sanity, she hints to the fact of how she is lying and how this is all just to get you to kill her. She says “if in the event the cube does talk to you, Aperature Science urges you to disreguard its advice” and if the Companion Cube is GLaDOS, and shes up there givin’ us advice…you can see where im going with this :)
-also i totally agree uthanising the companion cube was a test/forshadowing of what you have to do to GLaDOS – burn her in a fire. if your willing to do it with your faithful companion cube, you can do it to a mad, homicidal robot who has a matrial attraction to you.
-Also she says “it seems that the companion cube has certainly brought you good luck!” both as humour in the stock use of “good luck,” now with an unfitting emotion put in it, it also shows how cheerful GLaDOS is in seeing how much of an attraction you had to a projection of herself – maybe there is a chance for a healthy mother-daughter relationship, eh?(not really but you see where im going.)
-The companion cube also is a projection of GLaDOS in how it helps you along the level, as does GLaDOS, even though shes testing you and at times trying to kill you
-She talks all sad in the way you have to kill the companion cube, for multiple reasons that i can see:
1) its the first thing that showed you can have even a spark of love for GLaDOS
2)Shes sad to make you have to do this, and what it ultimately means in her timeline
3) shes sorry to put this BURDEN on your heart(as evident in her talking for the cube, she doesnt want to be a burden)
-Also, she says in a tone that she doesn’t seem to believe herself that it was deemed the companion cube cannot feel pain, she says this to ease the burden, but also, it shows how people think that GLaDOS could not get lonely or begin to hate her job, which of course she does
-Shes trying to convince you, or, moreover, herself, that this incineration is for the best, because, seeing how close you are coming to killing her, she begins to get frightened, so shes trying to convince herself that you incinerating her is for the best
-Also, her comment about you incinerating more quickly then any other test subject – a rather important line you failed to go over here. Not only at this point does she realise you wont hesitate to kill her, but also she begins to worry about how your do it cruely, and she begins to fear a fiery death by the hands of the one whom she loved and saved.
-Also, your notice, near the button, and i believe also on top of the incinerator, there are two more cameras – these, however, do not follow your movements, as she doesnt want to bear witness to the deed you are about to preform, or how mercilessly you may do the same to her. I also think these cameras prove that this is what the development team was going for – why randomly have non-moving cameras if this wasn’t a key and emotional moment?
-Finally, and this is really just food for thought, and has nothing to do with anything, but the companion cube can also be interperated as a reperesentation of Chell, merely a pawn to be incinerated at the end of the testing process.
I hope someone will give this a nice read :)

]]> By: CommanderSwede http://www.game-ism.com/2008/04/14/the-clone-the-cube-and-the-construct-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-9276 CommanderSwede Sat, 01 Jan 2011 04:55:12 +0000 http://www.game-ism.com/?p=102#comment-9276 yea and i feel the companion cube is an embodiment of GlaDOS, which she also uses to hint us that shes lying when she says to disreguard the companion cube's advice. also, i swear if you die and reload at the part where shes saying that the companion cube cannot speak, she talks over to herself, the othervoice saying "can speak" after the first says "the companion cube" yea and i feel the companion cube is an embodiment of GlaDOS, which she also uses to hint us that shes lying when she says to disreguard the companion cube’s advice. also, i swear if you die and reload at the part where shes saying that the companion cube cannot speak, she talks over to herself, the othervoice saying “can speak” after the first says “the companion cube”

]]> By: CommanderSwede http://www.game-ism.com/2008/04/14/the-clone-the-cube-and-the-construct-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-9275 CommanderSwede Sat, 01 Jan 2011 04:40:09 +0000 http://www.game-ism.com/?p=102#comment-9275 I find it simply amazing how all this can be packed into a game that gives the first impression "whats the point of this?" to most players oh, and carsen: No. I find it simply amazing how all this can be packed into a game that gives the first impression “whats the point of this?” to most players
oh, and carsen: No.

]]> By: Carsen http://www.game-ism.com/2008/04/14/the-clone-the-cube-and-the-construct-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-9256 Carsen Mon, 04 Oct 2010 01:19:35 +0000 http://www.game-ism.com/?p=102#comment-9256 What if it was in GLaDOs' programming that made her kill herself What if it was in GLaDOs’ programming that made her kill herself

]]> By: Jessica http://www.game-ism.com/2008/04/14/the-clone-the-cube-and-the-construct-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-9114 Jessica Sun, 11 Apr 2010 23:26:39 +0000 http://www.game-ism.com/?p=102#comment-9114 I finished playing Portal again a few minutes ago to listen to the commentary. I like how your blog entry makes me think. :D As I played the game, I felt that GLaDOS continues testing (despite how Aperture Science employees are no longer around to monitor and fix things) because that's what she was made for. She has no "OFF " button, and nothing to do in her spare time, so she continues doing what she was created for, her purpose in life: experimenting the test subjects. Afterall, her curiousity core was made so that she'd want to test things. I don't think she has an ulterior motive for this, such as wanting to die. I'd also like to mention something that people said in the previous comments: Obviously I wouldn't know this from proper experiance, but I'm preeeetty sure that burning to death is NOT a quick and painless way to die. In fact, I'm pretty sure it's right up there on the list of "one of the most painful ways to die", as you most likely feel your flesh and muscles burn off until you are reduced to nothing. I'm also very certain that Aperture Science was crazy enough to think of that as a way to get rid of their science experiments after evaluating their preformance. Despite the morality core put in GLaDOS, I'm sure she thought it as normal enough too. As normal as the Reverse-Heimlich Project and the Take-A-Wish Project, which caused many deaths. I finished playing Portal again a few minutes ago to listen to the commentary. I like how your blog entry makes me think. :D

As I played the game, I felt that GLaDOS continues testing (despite how Aperture Science employees are no longer around to monitor and fix things) because that’s what she was made for. She has no “OFF ” button, and nothing to do in her spare time, so she continues doing what she was created for, her purpose in life: experimenting the test subjects. Afterall, her curiousity core was made so that she’d want to test things. I don’t think she has an ulterior motive for this, such as wanting to die.

I’d also like to mention something that people said in the previous comments: Obviously I wouldn’t know this from proper experiance, but I’m preeeetty sure that burning to death is NOT a quick and painless way to die. In fact, I’m pretty sure it’s right up there on the list of “one of the most painful ways to die”, as you most likely feel your flesh and muscles burn off until you are reduced to nothing.

I’m also very certain that Aperture Science was crazy enough to think of that as a way to get rid of their science experiments after evaluating their preformance. Despite the morality core put in GLaDOS, I’m sure she thought it as normal enough too. As normal as the Reverse-Heimlich Project and the Take-A-Wish Project, which caused many deaths.

]]> By: ZSchrink http://www.game-ism.com/2008/04/14/the-clone-the-cube-and-the-construct-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-9069 ZSchrink Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:25:24 +0000 http://www.game-ism.com/?p=102#comment-9069 As to the second comment by Kost:"" OR “it would rather die in a fire than become a burden to you.” means that the devs dont want you to carry it around with you for the rest of the game.."" If that were true, couldn't the developers just solve it like they do in ALL the other puzzles, by using the screen that destroys anything and everything before the elevator? They put in killing the cube for a reason... I had more thoughts, but I have since forgot them, if I remember them, I'll post back! XD As to the second comment by Kost:”" OR “it would rather die in a fire than become a burden to you.” means that the devs dont want you to carry it around with you for the rest of the game..”"

If that were true, couldn’t the developers just solve it like they do in ALL the other puzzles, by using the screen that destroys anything and everything before the elevator? They put in killing the cube for a reason…

I had more thoughts, but I have since forgot them, if I remember them, I’ll post back! XD

]]> By: TheUnkow http://www.game-ism.com/2008/04/14/the-clone-the-cube-and-the-construct-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-9059 TheUnkow Fri, 15 Jan 2010 19:16:19 +0000 http://www.game-ism.com/?p=102#comment-9059 The fact GLaDOS says you destroyed the companion cube in the fastest time than any subject on record may just be a way to encourage you destroying stuff from the company. Makes you think you are more emotionless than the other test subjets even if you aren't, you get distracted by the pleasure of having the best time. Another manipulative tool of GLaDOS. The fact GLaDOS says you destroyed the companion cube in the fastest time than any subject on record may just be a way to encourage you destroying stuff from the company.

Makes you think you are more emotionless than the other test subjets even if you aren’t, you get distracted by the pleasure of having the best time.

Another manipulative tool of GLaDOS.

]]> By: ada http://www.game-ism.com/2008/04/14/the-clone-the-cube-and-the-construct-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-9023 ada Wed, 06 Jan 2010 19:25:34 +0000 http://www.game-ism.com/?p=102#comment-9023 I agree with the love proxy Idea. And yes it does teach mechanics for the game, but I prefer to find meaning in things. Even if the creators didn't intend for the game to be taken beyond face value, it is human nature to find meaning in the things we hold dear and in the things we loath. Game are more then little discs to take up our time, they have developed into stories with plots that exceed the common quality of movies that are produced today. So perhaps the game, and GLaDOS are nothing more than another little story about getting from point A to point B. I would rather think of GLaDOS as a character, as in a book, and take her and the game to a higher level. I love all of your insights, and have been playing over and over. I am a writer and to me, this game is a masterpiece. Look at all of these people that agree and disagree! To get such a reaction and then to call the game nothing more then "a game" is a slap in the face to all of those who created it. Perhaps they didn't want it to be more than it is, I would be more excited if that where the case. All of this is a testament to the power of human insight and our impulse to find more then tip of the ice burg. I hope another Portal will be made. "IN BASE FOUR I'M FINE!" I agree with the love proxy Idea. And yes it does teach mechanics for the game, but I prefer to find meaning in things. Even if the creators didn’t intend for the game to be taken beyond face value, it is human nature to find meaning in the things we hold dear and in the things we loath. Game are more then little discs to take up our time, they have developed into stories with plots that exceed the common quality of movies that are produced today. So perhaps the game, and GLaDOS are nothing more than another little story about getting from point A to point B. I would rather think of GLaDOS as a character, as in a book, and take her and the game to a higher level. I love all of your insights, and have been playing over and over. I am a writer and to me, this game is a masterpiece. Look at all of these people that agree and disagree! To get such a reaction and then to call the game nothing more then “a game” is a slap in the face to all of those who created it. Perhaps they didn’t want it to be more than it is, I would be more excited if that where the case. All of this is a testament to the power of human insight and our impulse to find more then tip of the ice burg.
I hope another Portal will be made.
“IN BASE FOUR I’M FINE!”

]]>