Рет қаралды 2,306,174
My attempt at "explaining" this ending:
The Narrator of The Stanley Parable never assumes that a third party is the one controlling Stanley. He believes that Stanley is the main character, unaware that Stanley's motivations and choices stem from the player controlling him, not Stanley himself. However, this is the only ending where the Narrator seems convinced that Stanley is controlled by a third-party player. Upon discovering this, he presents the player with a sort of instructional video, urging them to choose "correctly" and make responsible decisions. But if you think about it, doing "correct" choices and doing what is "expected of you" goes against the idea of liberating yourself from industrialist work-places--like sheep in a herd--which is the main message of this game (and the ending that the narrator is trying to lead Stanley towards) in the first place. It's precisely why the story seems to "fall apart" immediately. The player cannot make "correct" choices, as it would negate the essence of choice itself. Despite this, the Narrator still blames the player. After this, the Player is mysteriously teleported to a working story. It's not clear exactly what this is meant to signify, perhaps the Narrator tries to "restart" the story in an attempt to make it work. After getting to the Boss's office, The Player is asked to use a voice-recorder that is impossible to use (even with a mic enabled, lol. originally there's a pin-code). The Narrator blames the Player for trying to ruin his story on purpose, not realizing it's impossible to progress it. Finally, you get teleported above Stanley. No longer in control of him. You can derive many meanings from this, but the one that's most plausible is your association with Stanley, you, The Player, "controlling" him, has been removed. So now you stand above Stanley as he is left independent, appearing to stand completely still. Stanley is not able to take control of himself. He's not The player. He cannot decide to walk around, choose the door on his left, so he just stands there completely devoid of any sort of free will.
This message of The Stanley Parable, (aside from some of the quirky comedy) is quite simple. it's a candid deconstruction of work and modernization. A critique of humanity's trajectory within industrialism, how we seem to be reduced to peas in a pod, obediently executing commands and pushing buttons without meaningful engagement, and how we're expected to live like this, happily, for decades. The PowerPoint presentation in the meeting room makes this apparent. The ethos of the game undoubtedly underscores these societal critiques. you can ideologically disagree with it, of course, but I do believe this game has consistently implied this specific message.
The original ending, one that you're all probably familiar with, is Stanley "freeing himself", stepping outside after finally achieving freedom. But that ending is only achieved if you do everything the Narrator tells you. You're not actually doing anything out of your own volition, you are literally pressing buttons when you're told to just like Stanley. However, in this ending you actually do achieve freedom, you free yourself from Stanley. (it can be argued that the original ending is Stanley achieving freedom, this one is The Player achieving freedom). In all of my time playing this game and obsessing over it, this is the ending that's emotionally affected me the most. The idea of freeing yourself, understanding what motivates you to make the choices you make, or who controls you; these are the ideas that are presented in The Stanley Parable, and I think this is the ending where it's truly perfectly communicated.
It should be noted that unlike other endings, the credits actually roll up.