Journey Review

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

BehattedWanderer:
Frustrating. I've been waiting for a review of this, and all it tells me is that "I should play it".

Alright, fine. I will. I was hoping for a more substantial review, something that tells me what it is, but I guess it's just one of those things. So. Downloading now, and I curse the slow connection here that it will take an hour to download. We'll see what this is all about.

All this, right here? Ignore all this. This isn't relevant anymore.

Having just played it, my mind is BLOWN. I had no idea this is what I was missing when people suggested play it. Best $15 I've spent in a long time. Fantastic experience. I poured myself a beer right before starting, and hadn't touched it after the first few minutes. I haven't done that before, mind. I'd love to be able to say something to the people playing, but I don't know if I would dare ruin what they've established. Absolutely wonderful.

I say old chap:
What a load of artsy bollocks. So it is a desert trekking, problem solving game with its own distinct art style and a good soundtrack and the reviewer is just smitten in adoration? Walking, jumping and problem solving, where is the originality? It is done in a few hours, where is the longevity? It is a journey, but apart from ticking all the artistic boxes, is it fun?

Because it looks as pretty as a picture, but it doesn't look fun.

It absolutely is fun. But it's not fun in the same way a shooter is fun, or the way Saint's Row is fun. It's fun in the way of self exploration, revelation, and fulfillment are fun. It's got all the art pieces, yes, but this isn't a museum tour. This is the gaming equivalent of seeing the natural beauty in the world, or that wonderful breath after emerging from underwater, having held your breath for awhile. Try it.

too bad it is not on Steam :(

BehattedWanderer:

I say old chap:
What a load of artsy bollocks. So it is a desert trekking, problem solving game with its own distinct art style and a good soundtrack and the reviewer is just smitten in adoration? Walking, jumping and problem solving, where is the originality? It is done in a few hours, where is the longevity? It is a journey, but apart from ticking all the artistic boxes, is it fun?

Because it looks as pretty as a picture, but it doesn't look fun.

It absolutely is fun. But it's not fun in the same way a shooter is fun, or the way Saint's Row is fun. It's fun in the way of self exploration, revelation, and fulfillment are fun. It's got all the art pieces, yes, but this isn't a museum tour. This is the gaming equivalent of seeing the natural beauty in the world, or that wonderful breath after emerging from underwater, having held your breath for awhile. Try it.

Ahh, you think I'm shooter guy, perhaps a 15 year old hyper-kid? Got to have the blood and the death and the endless cover based shooting? Truly I'm not interested in that. I don't play Saint's Row either. Self exploration, revelation, fulfillment, I don't buy this game can give it. There is no real revelation, knowing and fulfillment in a pretty two hour game.

Now I love tea, relaxation, nature, tuning out. The review? I don't see natural beauty in the review. It has its colours, its style, it tries to look big, but it seems to be just a linear journey. Some problem solving, some possible coop.

I get that some people want to lap it up. Talk it up. Talk about how deep it is, even though it is only a few hours of traversing paintings and puzzles. For a lot of reviewers, for some players, this is big. It looks pretty ugly to me though--not ugly in the sense of a grey shooter, no, a mostly empty world, with little to do, but walk, problem-solve, hop. You talk about natural beauty? It has nothing on a great sunset. It is an art cloak, thrown over our eyes to try and make us love it. It tires to say, take games seriously they are art, I just want to know what I can do and what worlds are there to explore? What if I don't want to go through a damn desert? Oh, sorry, there is nothing beyond our constructed sands, vistas and the interiors of the short journey.

I'm not paying for a linear journey of two hours, without excitement, no matter how pretty it is. If I want pretty, there is the actual outdoors, hiking, or gazing at a picture and really knowing it. Shogun 2 does pretty too, but also adds strategy, the complexity of war and battle with replay value. Some are smitten by the journey, I just wonder, what is there to do? What can you do and for how long? Because the deserts will get old, and the puzzles can be solved. Then what? The artistic game is done. It can relax us later but no one is going to ascend into a higher being by watching a cloaked person run through the desert and solve some puzzles.

Thank you for the reply though, we are having a discussion here on worth and games.

Landis963:
Why is this PS3 exclusive? Why, Why, Why? T_T

Cause Sony bought them off :(

Will Journey be available on other platforms?

"Journey" is our third project in a 3-game deal with PlayStation, so unfortunately you won't be seeing it on any other platforms in the foreseeable future. When we were poor kids out of college, Sony offered to fund three games from us, which was a dream come true. There's no way we could have made "flOw" or "Flower" or "Journey". The catch is - they are all exclusive to the PS3.

I say old chap:

Ahh, you think I'm shooter guy, perhaps a 15 year old hyper-kid? Got to have the blood and the death and the endless cover based shooting? Truly I'm not interested in that. I don't play Saint's Row either. Self exploration, revelation, fulfillment, I don't buy this game can give it. There is no real revelation, knowing and fulfillment in a pretty two hour game.

Now I love tea, relaxation, nature, tuning out. The review? I don't see natural beauty in the review. It has its colours, its style, it tries to look big, but it seems to be just a linear journey. Some problem solving, some possible coop.

I get that some people want to lap it up. Talk it up. Talk about how deep it is, even though it is only a few hours of traversing paintings and puzzles. For a lot of reviewers, for some players, this is big. It looks pretty ugly to me though--not ugly in the sense of a grey shooter, no, a mostly empty world, with little to do, but walk, problem-solve, hop. You talk about natural beauty? It has nothing on a great sunset. It is an art cloak, thrown over our eyes to try and make us love it. It tires to say, take games seriously they are art, I just want to know what I can do and what worlds are there to explore? What if I don't want to go through a damn desert? Oh, sorry, there is nothing beyond our constructed sands, vistas and the interiors of the short journey.

I'm not paying for a linear journey of two hours, without excitement, no matter how pretty it is. If I want pretty, there is the actual outdoors, hiking, or gazing at a picture and really knowing it. Shogun 2 does pretty too, but also adds strategy, the complexity of war and battle with replay value. Some are smitten by the journey, I just wonder, what is there to do? What can you do and for how long? Because the deserts will get old, and the puzzles can be solved. Then what? The artistic game is done. It can relax us later but no one is going to ascend into a higher being by watching a cloaked person run through the desert and solve some puzzles.

Thank you for the reply though, we are having a discussion here on worth and games.

Well have you tried it?
There are a lot of things in the world that looks bad from the outside, but are actually good (like Minecraft for example)
I know I had similar feelings about The Longest Journey (not related) and it's sequel Dreamfall
Looks like another Quest/Adventure, I thought, and 2 games later I realized I was wrong
There are games that aren't worth anyone's time, but if people you trust (and after Bastion I trust Susan) claims that game is good, you should give it at least a try.

So are you saying I should buy a game, that I'll be done with in about two hours? How much is it? If I want to have an experience with nature, wouldn't it be better to watch national geographic or David Attenborough?

I say old chap:
So are you saying I should buy a game, that I'll be done with in about two hours? How much is it? If I want to have an experience with nature, wouldn't it be better to watch national geographic or David Attenborough?

2h? Susan claimed that Bastion is 6h game, but it took me almost 3 times longer than that (and I'm not bad gamer) to finish it. I think those are 2 reviewer hours, and those are like dog hours. So I guess it actually could be closer to 5-6h. Anyway it depends on price, if it's 60$ game, then no. But if it's 10-15$ game then why not? If it's digital only it could be even cheaper.

I was referring to the journey. As for bastion, not that interested either.

I say old chap:

Ahh, you think I'm shooter guy, perhaps a 15 year old hyper-kid? Got to have the blood and the death and the endless cover based shooting? Truly I'm not interested in that. I don't play Saint's Row either. Self exploration, revelation, fulfillment, I don't buy this game can give it. There is no real revelation, knowing and fulfillment in a pretty two hour game.

Now I love tea, relaxation, nature, tuning out. The review? I don't see natural beauty in the review. It has its colours, its style, it tries to look big, but it seems to be just a linear journey. Some problem solving, some possible coop.

I get that some people want to lap it up. Talk it up. Talk about how deep it is, even though it is only a few hours of traversing paintings and puzzles. For a lot of reviewers, for some players, this is big. It looks pretty ugly to me though--not ugly in the sense of a grey shooter, no, a mostly empty world, with little to do, but walk, problem-solve, hop. You talk about natural beauty? It has nothing on a great sunset. It is an art cloak, thrown over our eyes to try and make us love it. It tires to say, take games seriously they are art, I just want to know what I can do and what worlds are there to explore? What if I don't want to go through a damn desert? Oh, sorry, there is nothing beyond our constructed sands, vistas and the interiors of the short journey.

I'm not paying for a linear journey of two hours, without excitement, no matter how pretty it is. If I want pretty, there is the actual outdoors, hiking, or gazing at a picture and really knowing it. Shogun 2 does pretty too, but also adds strategy, the complexity of war and battle with replay value. Some are smitten by the journey, I just wonder, what is there to do? What can you do and for how long? Because the deserts will get old, and the puzzles can be solved. Then what? The artistic game is done. It can relax us later but no one is going to ascend into a higher being by watching a cloaked person run through the desert and solve some puzzles.

Thank you for the reply though, we are having a discussion here on worth and games.

Well, so as not to make you disgruntled, I apologize for using only shooters as a reference. Fun in games comes in many lights, and this brief affair is a distinct kind of fun not found in pretty much any other game. You seem to be unfortunately caught up on a pretense that this is all about the art, and it's not. It's about an experience. It's the video game equivalent of seeing a sunrise from atop a mountain, of finding something absolutely serene and letting that serenity reflect into your life.

The review honestly does it no justice, with all apologies to Susan, though I understand why she kept so much of what the game is out of the review. The world feels enormous, and as you traverse it and it's many landscapes, you find a sort of solace in your self. It's not exactly linear, with several different ways to go from one point to another, but the purposefully limited mechanics make for a kind of solidarity with the people you end up playing alongside (and I thoroughly recommend trying to find someone to play the whole experience with, if you can).

You make the statement of "without excitement", but the music, atmosphere, environment, and gameplay all blend seamlessly to build excitement in ways that no other medium can. Staring at a picture may entice your eyes, but as you control the character, a variety of your senses are receiving stimuli, and it all blends together perfectly.

Because this is a discussion of worth, I'd like to tell you that Journey is absolutely worth it, if you're willing to give it a chance. For what this is worth, it's not something like Braid, where the art and the pretense around it cause people to forget that the underlying game isn't exactly well worked out. Before playing it, I'd had expectations of it being an overly praised game without enough gameplay to back up the acclaim, but after playing it, I'm on the other side. Between the way you learn to communicate with a partner to way the events play out, it's all almost insidiously heartwarming.

If you're worried about replay value, then know that it's medium to high, and that there's probably always something to marvel at in each playthrough. It is a short game, only a couple of hours from tip to tail, but it is a thoroughly complete experience. I've played it twice as of writing, and both times I played in near-reverent awe. If you find yourself willing to give it a try, I wholeheartedly suggest doing so. Even if you have doubts, or want to believe it's all just hype, then try it out. Because, in a discussion of worth, this is a title that's absolutely worth it.

couldn't you buy a PS3, play Journey and then return the PS3? It did say the game was kinda short.
I know everyone wants to play it on their native platform. I know I do.

I am severely disappointed by the lack of "Don't Stop Believing", "Separate Ways (Worlds Apart)", and "Wheel In The Sky" in this game's soundtrack!

I say old chap:
So are you saying I should buy a game, that I'll be done with in about two hours? How much is it? If I want to have an experience with nature, wouldn't it be better to watch national geographic or David Attenborough?

Yes you should buy the game that you will be done with in two hours. Because I, and a lot of other people think it's fun. Yeah, you could absolutely watch National Geographic for a beautiful shot of a sunset in a desert or a blizzard in the mountains, but it will not be the same, because all National Geographic does is offer you a pretty picture - Journey offers you an experience. (Pro tip: if you want to have an experience with nature it is always best to go outside). And, unless you have ever gone on a pilgimage with a sort of mute stranger and bested deserts and high mountaintops with him in real life, it will be something absolutely unique.

But honestly, judging from your comments it looks like you don't really need anyones advice on whether to buy or not to buy Journey, as you seem to have already made up your mind on the matter.

BehattedWanderer:

BehattedWanderer:
Frustrating. I've been waiting for a review of this, and all it tells me is that "I should play it".

Alright, fine. I will. I was hoping for a more substantial review, something that tells me what it is, but I guess it's just one of those things. So. Downloading now, and I curse the slow connection here that it will take an hour to download. We'll see what this is all about.

All this, right here? Ignore all this. This isn't relevant anymore.

Having just played it, my mind is BLOWN. I had no idea this is what I was missing when people suggested play it. Best $15 I've spent in a long time. Fantastic experience. I poured myself a beer right before starting, and hadn't touched it after the first few minutes. I haven't done that before, mind. I'd love to be able to say something to the people playing, but I don't know if I would dare ruin what they've established. Absolutely wonderful.

I love how this is the general scenario.

Before Journey - 'What's the big deal? Fine, I'll try it, a bit expensive though...'

When we're just about to think that video games can't get any better, something like this comes along and blows us away.

I say old chap:

BehattedWanderer:

I say old chap:
What a load of artsy bollocks. So it is a desert trekking, problem solving game with its own distinct art style and a good soundtrack and the reviewer is just smitten in adoration? Walking, jumping and problem solving, where is the originality? It is done in a few hours, where is the longevity? It is a journey, but apart from ticking all the artistic boxes, is it fun?

Because it looks as pretty as a picture, but it doesn't look fun.

It absolutely is fun. But it's not fun in the same way a shooter is fun, or the way Saint's Row is fun. It's fun in the way of self exploration, revelation, and fulfillment are fun. It's got all the art pieces, yes, but this isn't a museum tour. This is the gaming equivalent of seeing the natural beauty in the world, or that wonderful breath after emerging from underwater, having held your breath for awhile. Try it.

Ahh, you think I'm shooter guy, perhaps a 15 year old hyper-kid? Got to have the blood and the death and the endless cover based shooting? Truly I'm not interested in that. I don't play Saint's Row either. Self exploration, revelation, fulfillment, I don't buy this game can give it. There is no real revelation, knowing and fulfillment in a pretty two hour game.

Now I love tea, relaxation, nature, tuning out. The review? I don't see natural beauty in the review. It has its colours, its style, it tries to look big, but it seems to be just a linear journey. Some problem solving, some possible coop.

I get that some people want to lap it up. Talk it up. Talk about how deep it is, even though it is only a few hours of traversing paintings and puzzles. For a lot of reviewers, for some players, this is big. It looks pretty ugly to me though--not ugly in the sense of a grey shooter, no, a mostly empty world, with little to do, but walk, problem-solve, hop. You talk about natural beauty? It has nothing on a great sunset. It is an art cloak, thrown over our eyes to try and make us love it. It tires to say, take games seriously they are art, I just want to know what I can do and what worlds are there to explore? What if I don't want to go through a damn desert? Oh, sorry, there is nothing beyond our constructed sands, vistas and the interiors of the short journey.

I'm not paying for a linear journey of two hours, without excitement, no matter how pretty it is. If I want pretty, there is the actual outdoors, hiking, or gazing at a picture and really knowing it. Shogun 2 does pretty too, but also adds strategy, the complexity of war and battle with replay value. Some are smitten by the journey, I just wonder, what is there to do? What can you do and for how long? Because the deserts will get old, and the puzzles can be solved. Then what? The artistic game is done. It can relax us later but no one is going to ascend into a higher being by watching a cloaked person run through the desert and solve some puzzles.

Thank you for the reply though, we are having a discussion here on worth and games.

I get it, I really do. I was completely skeptical before I played it. I saw the gushing praise from my fellow game journos and scoffed. They were just getting caught up in the hype and ooo, it's indie! and all that. It can't actually be that good, I thought, they're just freaking out because it's not the same old shooter. And then I actually played it. I completely understand why you're inclined to write it off, but this isn't about it being pretty, and I'd urge you not to fixate on the length. Yes, it's short, and it's not very "game"y, but it's really very special. You'll notice I never called it an "art" game, because that isn't what it is, despite its inherent loveliness. If you focus on the activities, the puzzle solving and whatnot, it'll never seem worth it, but you can't really judge Journey's worth by using the typical game metrics.It's just not that kind of thing.

It sounds worthwhile, like there is a lot to it. I'll try it sometime.

Susan Arendt:
Journey Review

Quietly masterful.

Read Full Article

There have been two games I've played in which the travel was more fun than the game itself (and not because the game was bad). The first was The Wind Waker's sailing -- the combination of the music, the waves, the weather, the sweeping lines suggesting the wind, it really felt epic. The second was Spiderman 2 -- never in any game before or since have I really felt a game nailed a superhero's travel ability.

When I experience this game, it feels like someone climbed into my head and pulled out the core of those moments, then assembled them into a separate experience. There are some folks behind this game that have a very firm grasp on the artistry of world creation and interaction.

In music (or even sound engineering), there is a great way to create the illusion of a three-dimensional space: you have a very acoustically "wet" (high reverb) background, contrasted with a very "dry" (low reverb) foreground. The effect it creates is simultaneously spacious and intimate... like you're standing next to someone whispering to you in a massive cavern.

I think that's what Journey does to me.

Visually, you're in a massive setting, but it's relatively flat. That allows you to see into the distance, and really feel the space. The choice to keep you so far zoomed out from your avatar keeps you away from the "safety" of the screen's edge, and makes the world seem that much bigger. And the tiny touches, like the "wind" lines sweeping through, do just enough to make that space feel alive.

Mechanically, the travel is exactly right. In the real world, there's a reason we love riding with the top down, or speeding along in a boat, or anything that creates the sense of flying. You're out in the wind, you feel the rushing air, you get a direct, tactile sense of your speed and movement. Flight is the most liberating form of travel. The flight is animated and controlled in such a way that you can almost feel the pushing and pulling of the air around you, rather than just showing you a character propelled through empty space.

And socially, that's where the game really shines. Our "programming" as humans leads us to communicated out of mutual need. In games, we often spend a lot of the time not really needing each other (this includes both real and AI partners), and when we do, it's a simple, "Hey, go press that," and we're done. By removing the conduit of language, we're forced to watch more closely, to really "listen" to the other person in a visual sense. Our interaction is limited in format, but the communication still has weight.

This is a game that understands the emotional states it wants to achieve, and how to get them in a very authentic way. This kind of concept in abstract has real value, but it could also have tremendous impact on "normal" games, too.

This thing... it's like t'ai chi in video game form. (Or maybe it's an interactive haiku...)

Heard about Journey. Seemed like something interesting, and I need more reasons to use my PS3. When I saw it was for $15 I was about to give it a pass until a price drop, but then saw who made it. thatgamecompany/Jenova Chen. I loved the everloving crap out of fl0w back when it was a simple Flash game, and I *knew* that it would be worth it right then. Was not disappointed.

I will say with respect to the review that I'm pretty sure your partner carries through levels and the only time ya get a new one is if your current one drops. Probably one of the most disappointing times I've had was a guy I was playing with since the beginning dropping out midway through the underground cavern. I totally thought we'd reach the summit together. As for how I knew it was the same guy? We'd pick up where we left off at the start of each new level. You usually have to get in *some* kind of acclimation with a new guy, even if ya can't say a word to him.

I also never was able to be rubbed the wrong way by other players. Dunno how they could ever manage to irritate you since its literally impossible for them to effect you in any negative way, unless you think ping spamming is annoying (and even when they do that, I just write it off as them trying to say something to me).

On this thread and the game in general:

I think a friend said it best when the game was more akin to a spiritual/religious experience than anything. You really mesh into the world and with the other player; I'd go so far as to say that there should be *no* singleplayer mode at all.

Truly this is a game you cannot explain with mere words. You must play it to understand, for it is a wholly individual experience. Kinda like Minecraft in that sense I suppose, though for vastly different reasons.

As for the whitecloaks, I never seem to be able to play with any of them for longer than 5 minutes before they leave or something, despite I myself being whitecloak too (managed to collect everything in my first playthrough by scouring EVERYTHING; strangely it was an unintentional solo run too since no one joined for more than a few minutes). All my substantial runs with others have been with reds, which I find dead useful actually. Can actually tell who's who when we're close together.

After reading Susan's review (despite getting slight warning vibes out of the gushing, if wanky video portion), I rushed out to buy Journey.

What a waste of money.

A 90-minute, first year college wank-fest of pretentious art house crap.

It felt like something that would have passed as a technology demo just some five years ago, but never anything more than a free game, let alone a "full priced" arcade game. 12 Euros for what amounts to a

Ugh.

It's called "journey" but there's barely anything there to qualify even as a prologue. Never once does it feel like you're taking a long trip anywhere. Sure, scenery changes, but it happens at such a fast rate that it feels like the scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. "Summer went to autumn, autumn to winter, winter skipped summer and went straight back into autumn again."

Yes. It looks pretty. One of the prettiest games around. But no, it does not create some kind of "bond" between players, because the level design doesn't reward co-op experiences besides the obvious "you're stronger as one!" imagery.

What it results to is a wannabe short film, a very pretty cut scene that allows the player to every once in a while walk to the next pretty cut scene, with little investment in anything and nothing to gain.

Sure, it'll be a hit with the art-gang, the hipsters and the critics that love the sound of their own voice. But as for having that "thing" that makes gaming, well, gaming? Hah. It would need to be a game first.

"...and it won't be made into a movie." Susan Arendt

I'd like to believe that, but these days as soon as anything gets popular enough, Hollywood grabs it and mutilates it to make a movie.

So yeah ... 2014 - Journey, the movie. Directed by Micheal Bay.
Seal up your heart and prepare to lose your money.

Sougo:
"...and it won't be made into a movie." Susan Arendt

I'd like to believe that, but these days as soon as anything gets popular enough, Hollywood grabs it and mutilates it to make a movie.

So yeah ... 2014 - Journey, the movie. Directed by Micheal Bay.
Seal up your heart and prepare to lose your money.

Yeah, I thought of that and decided that I would choose to believe it won't happen.

SpiderJerusalem:
After reading Susan's review (despite getting slight warning vibes out of the gushing, if wanky video portion), I rushed out to buy Journey.

What a waste of money.

A 90-minute, first year college wank-fest of pretentious art house crap.

It felt like something that would have passed as a technology demo just some five years ago, but never anything more than a free game, let alone a "full priced" arcade game. 12 Euros for what amounts to a

Ugh.

It's called "journey" but there's barely anything there to qualify even as a prologue. Never once does it feel like you're taking a long trip anywhere. Sure, scenery changes, but it happens at such a fast rate that it feels like the scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. "Summer went to autumn, autumn to winter, winter skipped summer and went straight back into autumn again."

Yes. It looks pretty. One of the prettiest games around. But no, it does not create some kind of "bond" between players, because the level design doesn't reward co-op experiences besides the obvious "you're stronger as one!" imagery.

What it results to is a wannabe short film, a very pretty cut scene that allows the player to every once in a while walk to the next pretty cut scene, with little investment in anything and nothing to gain.

Sure, it'll be a hit with the art-gang, the hipsters and the critics that love the sound of their own voice. But as for having that "thing" that makes gaming, well, gaming? Hah. It would need to be a game first.

"a wannabe short film"

It does look like that.

Abandon4093:

Daystar Clarion:

Casual Shinji:
Journey is this year's Portal.

I usually hate comparisons like that, but it's just that similar to Valve's short and sweet perfection.

Except there's no way it can spawn a meme that got boring 2 weeks after the game's release.

I hope...

Challange accepted.......................................

............................... I got nothing.

Oh come on! It's staring you right in the face. Hell they could even get cheesy and use it for the marketing.

I'll give you one hint, and if you still can't see it I'll tell it to you, friend.

Hint to the possible meme; the games name.

I say old chap:

SpiderJerusalem:
After reading Susan's review (despite getting slight warning vibes out of the gushing, if wanky video portion), I rushed out to buy Journey.

What a waste of money.

A 90-minute, first year college wank-fest of pretentious art house crap.

It felt like something that would have passed as a technology demo just some five years ago, but never anything more than a free game, let alone a "full priced" arcade game. 12 Euros for what amounts to a

Ugh.

It's called "journey" but there's barely anything there to qualify even as a prologue. Never once does it feel like you're taking a long trip anywhere. Sure, scenery changes, but it happens at such a fast rate that it feels like the scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. "Summer went to autumn, autumn to winter, winter skipped summer and went straight back into autumn again."

Yes. It looks pretty. One of the prettiest games around. But no, it does not create some kind of "bond" between players, because the level design doesn't reward co-op experiences besides the obvious "you're stronger as one!" imagery.

What it results to is a wannabe short film, a very pretty cut scene that allows the player to every once in a while walk to the next pretty cut scene, with little investment in anything and nothing to gain.

Sure, it'll be a hit with the art-gang, the hipsters and the critics that love the sound of their own voice. But as for having that "thing" that makes gaming, well, gaming? Hah. It would need to be a game first.

"a wannabe short film"

It does look like that.

Judge the game for yourself.

I disagree with everything Spider Jerusalem has said, but that doesn't mean he's wrong.

The only person who can form your opinion, is you.

BehattedWanderer:

I say old chap:
What a load of artsy bollocks. Walking, jumping and problem solving, where is the originality? It is done in a few hours, where is the longevity? It is a journey, but apart from ticking all the artistic boxes, is it fun?

Because it looks as pretty as a picture, but it doesn't look fun.

It absolutely is fun. But it's not fun in the same way a shooter is fun, or the way Saint's Row is fun. It's fun in the way of self exploration, revelation, and fulfillment are fun. It's got all the art pieces, yes, but this isn't a museum tour. This is the gaming equivalent of seeing the natural beauty in the world, or that wonderful breath after emerging from underwater, having held your breath for awhile. Try it.

You kind of hit the nail on the head, as well as possible, when it comes to explaining how the game feels, or at least for one of the parts I liked in particular anyway. Specifically when you go from one area in the game to the next. It really does give you the feeling of going from under water to the surface, and back down again. I think that may be helped by how the player and the other creatures move in the world.

It is a little odd how a game mostly in the desert can make you feel like a fish swimming through water.

Imp Emissary:

BehattedWanderer:

I say old chap:
What a load of artsy bollocks. Walking, jumping and problem solving, where is the originality? It is done in a few hours, where is the longevity? It is a journey, but apart from ticking all the artistic boxes, is it fun?

Because it looks as pretty as a picture, but it doesn't look fun.

It absolutely is fun. But it's not fun in the same way a shooter is fun, or the way Saint's Row is fun. It's fun in the way of self exploration, revelation, and fulfillment are fun. It's got all the art pieces, yes, but this isn't a museum tour. This is the gaming equivalent of seeing the natural beauty in the world, or that wonderful breath after emerging from underwater, having held your breath for awhile. Try it.

You kind of hit the nail on the head, as well as possible, when it comes to explaining how the game feels, or at least for one of the parts I liked in particular anyway. Specifically when you go from one area in the game to the next. It really does give you the feeling of going from under water to the surface, and back down again. I think that may be helped by how the player and the other creatures move in the world.

It is a little odd how a game mostly in the desert can make you feel like a fish swimming through water.

I hadn't noticed that, but yeah, the movement is very indicative of a fish moving through water. The ever shifting environment flows about you, and your graceful movement is extremely fluid. Less fish and more jellyfish, now that I really think about it.

Susan Arendt:

Sougo:
"...and it won't be made into a movie." Susan Arendt

I'd like to believe that, but these days as soon as anything gets popular enough, Hollywood grabs it and mutilates it to make a movie.

So yeah ... 2014 - Journey, the movie. Directed by Micheal Bay.
Seal up your heart and prepare to lose your money.

Yeah, I thought of that and decided that I would choose to believe it won't happen.

I really doubt we really have to worry about Journey being made into a movie. I think you said it best yourself. What makes the game so great is how it uses itself to make the players feel connected, and it is very difficult to explain how it does that in words. I can't imagine how difficult it would be to translate into a film. At least a film that will do well. Don't get me wrong, I don't think its impossible, but why would anyone try to do it?

Can one give an audience the same feelings from a movie that you can get from Journey? Probably not, but maybe something similar. However, its like you said. Journey shows how a game can really be used to give people a great experience, so why try to make a film do that when you already have the game? Then again.....they are planning to make a Battle Ship movie....so maybe making no sense means nothing.

But if all this hopeful/nasty speculation does nothing for your imagination, how about a question?

Do you think Thatgamecompany would ever let someone make a movie about Journey, even if say Sony or a very respected director wanted to?

Also, this probably goes without saying, but thanks again for recommending Journey. It is definitely something special.

BehattedWanderer:

Imp Emissary:

BehattedWanderer:
[quote="I say old chap" post="6.355312.14119965"]

It absolutely is fun. But it's not fun in the same way a shooter is fun, or the way Saint's Row is fun. It's fun in the way of self exploration, revelation, and fulfillment are fun. It's got all the art pieces, yes, but this isn't a museum tour. This is the gaming equivalent of seeing the natural beauty in the world, or that wonderful breath after emerging from underwater, having held your breath for awhile. Try it.

You kind of hit the nail on the head, as well as possible, when it comes to explaining how the game feels, or at least for one of the parts I liked in particular anyway. Specifically when you go from one area in the game to the next. It really does give you the feeling of going from under water to the surface, and back down again. I think that may be helped by how the player and the other creatures move in the world.

It is a little odd how a game mostly in the desert can make you feel like a fish swimming through water.

I hadn't noticed that, but yeah, the movement is very indicative of a fish moving through water. The ever shifting environment flows about you, and your graceful movement is extremely fluid. Less fish and more jellyfish, now that I really think about it.

Hmmm. Yeah, your right. Especially that one Cloth creature that pretty much is a jellyfish. You know the one that sounds like it laughs when you jump on it? Though the "enemy" creature (and the one really big cloth creature to a lesser extent) moves a bit more like a snake, eel, or shark. Depending on how ya look at it. But still most move more like jellyfish, or a kite.

Imp Emissary:

BehattedWanderer:

Imp Emissary:

You kind of hit the nail on the head, as well as possible, when it comes to explaining how the game feels, or at least for one of the parts I liked in particular anyway. Specifically when you go from one area in the game to the next. It really does give you the feeling of going from under water to the surface, and back down again. I think that may be helped by how the player and the other creatures move in the world.

It is a little odd how a game mostly in the desert can make you feel like a fish swimming through water.

I hadn't noticed that, but yeah, the movement is very indicative of a fish moving through water. The ever shifting environment flows about you, and your graceful movement is extremely fluid. Less fish and more jellyfish, now that I really think about it.

Hmmm. Yeah, your right. Especially that one Cloth creature that pretty much is a jellyfish. You know the one that sounds like it laughs when you jump on it? Though the "enemy" creature (and the one really big cloth creature to a lesser extent) moves a bit more like a snake, eel, or shark. Depending on how ya look at it. But still most move more like jellyfish, or a kite.

Oh man, that thing. I nearly messed my pants when that thing arrived. So there's sharks, the giant serpentine fellows, and jellyfish. Oh, the trapped guys in the desert kind of look like stingrays, too. The small clusters of cloth that hop you along do behave kind of like a school of fish, now that I'm really thinking about it.

Maybe that's part of the majesty. It's like being in an ocean or aquarium, but rather than being an observer intruding, you fit perfectly into that world. Whoa...this game is even deeper than I'd realized.

NOTE TO DEVELOPERS: See this? This is 3D with something called "ART STYLIZATION", it's not about realism or gritty brown/grey filters for your gritty shit that you've pumped out of the video game genero-tron these past 6 years that all look the same.

It's how games used to differentiate themselves in the 8 and 16 bit era.

(I know none are reading this but I can dream)

You know something, for all the other games I've seen for PS3, this is the first title that I would drop an easy couple hundo dollars just to play this game. I know it's only like 2 hours long but.... it just looks so beautiful.

Just finished the game. Whilst it is absolutely gorgeous, and the sound design fantastic, I can't say I found the metaphor particularly interesting or at all original.

Likewise, whilst I like the idea of simply coming across a complete stranger and working with them, in practice I didn't get much emotional resonance from it. The closest I came to feeling anything, really, was when...

But even that was very brief.

I don't think that's helped by the fact that a lot of parts seem to be quite obviously scripted and, whilst you meet people, whether they're there or not means fuck all. I don't really care because I don't need the other person there.

In short: gorgeous, but not original in it's themes and not bold enough (or perhaps simply not able) to follow through on it's key feature.

Susan Arendt:
It's through this interaction with your fellow traveler that Journey reveals its astounding depth. Without the ability to so much as point or draw stick figures, you manage to form profound connections with your companions, interpreting a complete personality from little more than a few musical tones and the length of their scarf.

I find that surprising: bar one person who was wearing a different cloak, I could have sworn blind I was playing with the same person the rest of the time, when at the end it told me I'd "met" 5 or 6.

It's simplicity fails it, because there's nothing to latch on to. Everyone pretty much looks like everyone, sounds like everyone, and behaves in only one of two ways (walks with you or doesn't). I don't care about them in the same way I don't care about background NPCs.

By contrast (and this may seem a bit of an odd comparison), I'd say the co-op campaign for Splinter Cell: Conviction is, in fact, much more effective. I remember playing it with a complete stranger with neither of us using voice chat, and we played through the whole thing. There was no verbal communication, but the game pushes you to work with one another enough so that come the end, you do actually care somewhat about what's going on and about what happens to that other character.

With Journey, you can't fail other players, and other players can't fail you. It's meaningless.

Susan Arendt:
Please go play it

T-T

I Can't!! and i really want to!!

*sobs*

Woodsey:

I don't think that's helped by the fact that a lot of parts seem to be quite obviously scripted and, whilst you meet people, whether they're there or not means fuck all. I don't really care because I don't need the other person there.
<...snip...>

With Journey, you can't fail other players, and other players can't fail you. It's meaningless.

And that's why the game works. You have played it and come away focusing on the multiplayer and that you don't need a companion. And true, a companion is not needed, but the presence of another player going through a shared experience leads to some amount of emotional bonding. (I wonder if they are hitting on the same mechanisms that make email/on-line communication more emotionally open/raw.) This tells me more about your personality, that you are the kind of person that believes in standing on your own more than having another person to help or to even be around.

Woodsey:

It's simplicity fails it, because there's nothing to latch on to. Everyone pretty much looks like everyone, sounds like everyone, and behaves in only one of two ways (walks with you or doesn't). I don't care about them in the same way I don't care about background NPCs.

Just an FYI, The differentiation is in the chirps each player makes. The symbol that shows up is unique to each player (and different on each play through). I didn't know I'd 'met' 9 different players on my run through the game.

Daystar Clarion:

I say old chap:

SpiderJerusalem:
After reading Susan's review (despite getting slight warning vibes out of the gushing, if wanky video portion), I rushed out to buy Journey.

What a waste of money.

A 90-minute, first year college wank-fest of pretentious art house crap.

It felt like something that would have passed as a technology demo just some five years ago, but never anything more than a free game, let alone a "full priced" arcade game. 12 Euros for what amounts to a

Ugh.

It's called "journey" but there's barely anything there to qualify even as a prologue. Never once does it feel like you're taking a long trip anywhere. Sure, scenery changes, but it happens at such a fast rate that it feels like the scene in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. "Summer went to autumn, autumn to winter, winter skipped summer and went straight back into autumn again."

Yes. It looks pretty. One of the prettiest games around. But no, it does not create some kind of "bond" between players, because the level design doesn't reward co-op experiences besides the obvious "you're stronger as one!" imagery.

What it results to is a wannabe short film, a very pretty cut scene that allows the player to every once in a while walk to the next pretty cut scene, with little investment in anything and nothing to gain.

Sure, it'll be a hit with the art-gang, the hipsters and the critics that love the sound of their own voice. But as for having that "thing" that makes gaming, well, gaming? Hah. It would need to be a game first.

"a wannabe short film"

It does look like that.

Judge the game for yourself.

I disagree with everything Spider Jerusalem has said, but that doesn't mean he's wrong.

The only person who can form your opinion, is you.

Yeah, but opinions aren't formed in a vacuum. It is a bit of a fiction to say we are all individuals, our opinions come only from within, without outside input. It is a common fiction though, especially pushed in "individualistic" America.

On the game, I'll check with friends if they have it, and see what its price is like. A 2 hour game isn't going to get a lot of moolah from me.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here