As a programmer, I want to know what people think of this. It's definitely got an artistic take on gaming on requires a certain amount of imagination to read in to the themes and messages, but I also want to know about what people thought of the mechanics. How long did it take you to figure out? Did it evoke any feelings or emotions?

Basically, simple is easy to make, and this is simple. If something like this can actually have an impact, it makes my job easier in the long run. =P

It was just to simple for me to evoke any feelings from it.

I see whats going on with the mechanics, its kind of clever i guess, but a long way from me getting an emotional response.

I do believe simple is better, but at this stage of the game (gaming today) ,  It has to be a bit more engaging mechanically and visually.

Though I understand this game depends on a basic visual style to achieve open interpretation.

Which throws up another issue. Must games be vague to allow gamers open interpretation? It seems to be at face value a critical part of much Art. (Abstract Paintings)

Being vague was certainly part of the reason Braid was considered an "arty" game.

It was the mechanics that kind of spoiled the overall feeling of the game for me too. The simple nature of the control means I have a few issues when I played it. Perhaps it's just my gamer orientated mind, when I am looking for a way to get a high score or do some fantastic move that others can't, perhaps that's looking at the game wrong. Maybe you need a blank perspective on games to get as much out of this as possible.

I know it sounds weird, but the game really isn't meant to be entertaining in the way you two are talking about. The mechanics aren't meant to give you a rush, all the rules together are supposed to make you think. It's a peice of art, after all.

The game only lasts a few minutes, it's really more of a singular experience. It's not a game that you're supposed to keep returning to again and again because you're addicted tot he gameplay.

Asking The Marriage to continue engaging you for extended periods of time is like staring at a painting and complaining that it never changes. Like a painting, you're meant to absorb the experience and move on.

Anyways, I would say that this game definitely evoked a reaction in me. It's actually quite clever when you think about it, to express a concept to you in interactions rather than words or pictures or sounds.

The game's visual aren't just so totally stark to leave room for interpretation or to be "vague", it's part of the design philosophy for the game: the idea was to not have any other forms of media bleed into the game. No sound, and as few visuals as possible. When you get down to the core, a video game is defined by having a set of rules and interacting with what is on screen within the boundaries of those rules. sound and visuals are other mediums of entertainment, and do not necessarily need to be in a game. In the case of The Marriage, they were intentionally left out. Rod Humble has said that he sees game rules as an art form in a certain respect and that's what he wanted this game to be about. In this way, the message, or experience, or the idea, of The Marriage is not attained by seeing or hearing, but by interacting with the rules, and only that.

When I first read that he sees game rules as art I was completely perplexed but I've been thinking about it for hours and I now actually understand but in a weird way that I can't explain haha.

And this is what makes art, art. It's presenting something as a manifestation of an idea and to provoke thought as to how the manifestation represents the idea and what that representation might say about that idea.