I played Portal, released by Valve in 2007, on my computer.
Like many other puzzle games, the puzzles in Portal are integrated into the game in such a way that they advance the narrative and teach players about the world. Portal’s puzzles are portrayed as tests for the player, who is a test subject for Aperture Science Enrichment Center, and are therefore the central element of the game itself. The first few tests are designed to show you how the portals, buttons, and exit work, after which you start having to combine things together in new and interesting ways. The commentary from your AI host at this point is relatively benign, mostly just renaming normal items new technical sounding names, and giving you not-so-helpful warnings about the various things that could kill you in each level. However, these are the only interactions you have, other than with the silent weighted cubes, and the sound of your portal gun.
As new mechanics are introduced, they change the way that you move, think, and exist in each level. For example, you start by only being able to pick up objects and place them on buttons, which limits your movement to going where the buttons allow you. Once you acquire the first portal gun, your options widen, but your end point is still determined by where the level’s orange portal is. You can always get back to it, but it won’t ever allow you access into a new room. At the point where you have control over both portal positions, you now have almost unlimited options as to where to go, so they create a wall type that you cannot place portals on. This limits your movement once again, and you have a new challenge of figuring out how to get around into areas that are non-portalable. Each change makes you process the information in the level in a new way. If one portal is fixed at a spot, how many other places can you go by putting the portal in a different position? If you can no longer place a portal directly across from you, how can you get yourself high enough to be able to jump across?
Unfortunately for me, the puzzles also control the advancement of the narrative. When you solve a level you get a bit more lore and explanation, or at least commentary from the AI narrator. However, I got stuck on level 14 and was unable to finish the narrative. This was a rather frustrating experience, as I felt that with all the information I had garnered from previous levels, there was one way for me to solve this one. In setting these levels up as tests, the game offers no opportunity for giving players hints or help when they get stuck. It’s possible that if I had spent an hour running around the one part of the map I can currently access, there would be a voice prompt of some sort, but it seems unlikely. Narratively, it makes sense that your AI observer wouldn’t offer help, but as a player it will (with enough time stewing in frustration) lead me to seek a walkthrough in order to progress through and finish the story.
The sparse environment in each level makes it pretty easy for a player to see what options they have in the game, and guide them in that way, with some commentary and flavor from the AI’s comments. Up until where I got stuck, the game seemed pretty intuitive and well explained with minimal actual tutorial. Some levels required a bit of patience or finagling, but that’s something that’s expected of a puzzle game.
