It's a review thread. Not a "post animated .gifs of the later sections of the game" thread.
Anywho, I'm out. Not clicking on any Journey threads until I've played through the entire game myself.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Journey Reviews Thread
- Thread starter kassatsu
- Start date
Anywho, I'm out. Not clicking on any Journey threads until I've played through the entire game myself.
TheJollyCorner
Member
it was almost like staring into Medusa's eyes.
You know if you do it you'll turn to stone, but they glow and you just can't help it. :{
$15
Vire
Member
Ah, excellent.
Can't wait to play this. Any word on length?
I'm getting it regardless.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Thanks for the answers
I get that, I'm just not sure how having someone sitting next to me on a couch and saying "Yo go over there" is any different than having someone sitting next to me a couch and saying "Yo go over there" as they move their character over there.
Even a Zack and Wiki / Mario Galaxy / Hamilton's Great Adventure style co-op option where the second player was just a secondary pointer-outer would be neat. :/
etc
I get that, I'm just not sure how having someone sitting next to me on a couch and saying "Yo go over there" is any different than having someone sitting next to me a couch and saying "Yo go over there" as they move their character over there.
Even a Zack and Wiki / Mario Galaxy / Hamilton's Great Adventure style co-op option where the second player was just a secondary pointer-outer would be neat. :/
What difference does it make what other games are like? The review doesn't specify those things removed two points or anything.
<3
Stumpokapow said:
Well I think the devs were just really attached to the concept of two complete strangers meeting and then sharing a wordless journey. I mean they could have allowed for local co-op probably without missing much but I think they just wanted to encourage players to go online and try the anonymous thing out.
timetokill
Banned
That sentence is absolutely accurate. Why is that being "attention whores" again?
Or are you just mad about an 8/10?
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
Boy, glad I was stuck running errands longer than expected lol
Eurogamer puts it at an hour and a half... which is shockingly short even by my expectations.
Eurogamer said:
Don't think I can spend $15 for that.
Of course after the BETA I was always vacillating between a purchase or not - will my graphics whore side win out, given that this is one of the most beautiful games ever, or will my extremely critical gameplay side win out... since Journey is one of the most boring games I ever played which gameplay amounts to being a barking simulator and surfing sand.
I guess my gameplay side will win this day.
Vire
Member
Hmm.. yeah that's less than I expected, but I still want this.
It's art in the motion that you can interact with. I can't really put a price on that.
I've paid fifteen bucks for far sillier things.
Limbo is a puzzle-platformer. What's more gamey than that?
I don't think anyone was claiming that it was game-ruining but it's definitely something I would have rather not seen until playing it myself. It's not like I'm not going to buy it just because I happened to see some gif.
LightofRohan
Member
Holy shit that was close, dodged a bullet. Whatever the spoilers were... I'M HIDING NOW!
LIMBO is a game. It's a puzzle platformer. You obviously have not played LIMBO.
Me? I was defending against the claim Edge did something contradictory or something to get hits, because I disagree.
From what I've played of Journey, I'm fairly convinced I will like it, Flower is amongst the best games I've played this generation, however it's obviously not going to please everyone, and I'm fine with that of course. If it did manage to appease everyone, it'd have to be a very middling product I imagine.
You are right, I am outta here.
Define "to play"
Either way, Limbo was awful, hardly anything good about it really.
Journey always looked great (gameplay, animation, etc) unlike most other artsy games
Vinegar Joe
Member
That's the only thing stopping me from jumping on this day one.
I'm sure that I'd get more joy out of that one and a half hours than most games can offer in twice the time, yet I'm such a massive cheapskate I just can't bring myself to fork over the best part of £10 for this.
...
/goes back to browsing the CAG thread
Destructoid - 9/10
http://www.destructoid.com/review-journey-223030.phtml
Will buy, Flow and Flower were neat.
http://www.destructoid.com/review-journey-223030.phtml
Will buy, Flow and Flower were neat.
Jive Turkey
Unconfirmed Member
Well sounds like I'm done with thatgamecompany. Been fooled by them twice. Never again.
I understand the basic appeal of these games to some subset of people who are always looking for some modern commentary on the videogame medium - and games people love the real artsy games - but they're just so...not fun to play.
At least with Journey, all I did was surf on the sand and occasionally come across cute pictogram's telling a vague story. There was nothing to nothing the whole time I played, except it was astonishingly beautiful. Like, seriously...so beautiful.
I hate the term 'art games', partially because I don't think games are art, partially because the person saying it is implying they do believe they are, but only qualify under very specific circumstances.
I found the Journey beta to be immensely fun, being pretty certainly is important, if the game was ugly, it wouldn't be as effective, but it's not. You can be reductive to the point of putting any game to a couple of word descriptions, I think it's reductive to the point of being misleading. To say Journey is barking and sand surfing is to say SMB is running and jumping. Yes, the game only fundamentally contains a few specific actions, but that says nothing of the game's larger design elements.
I found Flower to be incredible, ultimately it's only doing the same as every other game, using it's interactions and world to illicit a response. You can make those specific elements as ornate or minimal as you want, but it's the way the whole comes together that matters. I'm not surprised anyone wouldn't like those games, but I am surprised Ami would provide such weak reasoning for his disdain, considering how exhaustive his criticisms typically are.
I found the Journey beta to be immensely fun, being pretty certainly is important, if the game was ugly, it wouldn't be as effective, but it's not. You can be reductive to the point of putting any game to a couple of word descriptions, I think it's reductive to the point of being misleading. To say Journey is barking and sand surfing is to say SMB is running and jumping. Yes, the game only fundamentally contains a few specific actions, but that says nothing of the game's larger design elements.
I found Flower to be incredible, ultimately it's only doing the same as every other game, using it's interactions and world to illicit a response. You can make those specific elements as ornate or minimal as you want, but it's the way the whole comes together that matters. I'm not surprised anyone wouldn't like those games, but I am surprised Ami would provide such weak reasoning for his disdain, considering how exhaustive his criticisms typically are.
Flower was boring nothing too, and Jive Turkey and me have always been on the same page about that game.
I don't actually think I'm reducing Journey in the description here. This isn't Mario Bros. Being reductive is practically the whole POINT of Journey. It subtracts, subtracts, subtracts until there is practically nothing there at all. There is nothing to anything. You literally surf from one end of the world to the next in the BETA.
This is how the BETA works...
You surf for a bit -> bark at some 'stone' to open the way -> you surf some more -> bark at several stones to open a bridge -> surf some more.
The only change is that there are scarfs around to collect to expand your own scarf so you can make your leaping/flying a bit prolonged. That's it.
That is not reducing anything. This isn't Mario; there isn't some hidden challenge or complexity around the corner. The mechanics aren't deep. They have made the experience an empty isolating excursion into a dead civilization, and occasionally you bump into someone else who will bark at stones with you.
In Journey, you literally just surf punctuated by moments of barking at things to open the way. That's it. There's nothing more complex to it. Some people may like that; I call it the most boring thing I've ever played. If that criticism is 'weak' because you don't like a spade being called a spade, then I accept your characterization because I will attempt no such impossible feat of trying to make Journey into something it's not.
XBOX HIVES
Banned
I asked Shuhei Yoshida (@yosp) on Twitter for a 3-pack blu ray that includes Journey, Flower and flow. I suggest everyone else that's interested in a physical release to do the same. I really want a physical release!
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Loved Flower, so I'm confident I'm going to like this also.
The game is called Journey. Not "Destination" or "Race". So carping about its length is kind of beside the point.
Personally I find it a bit sad that such irrelevant metrics are being applied. I mean, do you value albums based on their play-time, or how long it takes to take in a picture in a gallery?
PlThe point of everything TGC do is to evoke unusual and unexpected feelings in the player, you either get the value of that or you don't.
And if you do, you realize that the standard gaming logic of playtime extension through repetition would just dull the experience.
The game is called Journey. Not "Destination" or "Race". So carping about its length is kind of beside the point.
Personally I find it a bit sad that such irrelevant metrics are being applied. I mean, do you value albums based on their play-time, or how long it takes to take in a picture in a gallery?
PlThe point of everything TGC do is to evoke unusual and unexpected feelings in the player, you either get the value of that or you don't.
And if you do, you realize that the standard gaming logic of playtime extension through repetition would just dull the experience.
OKOKOKOKOK I'll do it. Not that Shu probably has any control over that kind of thing, lol
Not you, yurinka.
And you could descibe Mario the exact same way, you run right a bit, then you jump, then you run right a little more, then you jump again. It doesn't mean anything without context.
Difficulty I would say you're correct, there is no 'challenge', but there is absolutely off the beaten path material to explore, 'hidden' things as it were. If you don't find them compelling or not is certainly a valid complaint, but their existence isn't questionable.
To me it just seems like you're avoiding actually describing what you don't like by highlighting the fundamental aspects of the game's interaction, not how that's implied to actually make it a game. It reminds me of the people who write off Command-RPGs because 'all you do is hit X for forty hours' or whatever. If you don't find the traversal or exploration entertaining, that's fine of course, but I don't see how the fact all you can do is jump and bark is the reason.
it's possible to make a game MORE dull? Fuck me... this is a world of wonders...
No, you can't. Because there are actually tons of unique core gameplay mechanics punctuating the central platforming aspect; different ways to jump, different enemies to get around, different types of levels (Moving, up-to-down, left-to-right, right-to-left, water, etc). And all these things actually matter to how the game plays out. Getting good at some platforming skill might allow you to access a coin you couldn't or a secret area with even more actual gameplay.
In Journey, there is nothing to get good at. Nothing to impede your journey. Nothing to anything at all, as I said. You literally surf from one end of the screen to next, bark at something, and continue. That is the sum totality of the gameplay. Yes, you can walk a little off the path and get to a ruin that has something else you can bark at so you can briefly see a new pictogram, but that doesn't change anything: you're just surfing, and then barking again.
I understand what you think I'm doing. But the reason it seems this way is because this is LITERALLY an accurate description of the game and it is also precisely the same reason it's the most boring thing ever for me. It is impossible to disconnect from the fact that my time with Journey consisted of surfing, barking briefly at a stone or something, and then surfing more until the BETA ended. I didn't even have to surf. I could occasionally do a really large flying move (with friends, you could fly longer, or with a larger scarf) or just walk tediously, but that's too slow.
I find exploration AND traversal entertaining. But this is a game. The only way I'm going to find that entertaining is if there is something actually to said exploration and traversal. For example. In Prince of Persia, if you remove the fighting you can describe the game as a traversal and exploration experience: but you cannot describe it as dull (at least not compared to Journey), because things are constantly breaking, there are challenges, there are multiple layers to the mechanics (and the mechanics actually MATTER if you master them or not; there are some added layers to how good you are at surfing or whatever in Journey, but there's no reason to actually master it... there's no point in the BETA - and I'm fairly sure now in the full game proper - where if you don't understand how to surf better or fly better you won't be able to continue.)
It's a beautiful game, but dull as nails for me and I'm not reducing anything.
Tricky I Shadow
Banned
Not that I expected anything less, but these reviews are great!
Very much looking forward to this one.
Very much looking forward to this one.
There are different ways to jump in Journey, you have air control, like in Mario. There are different entities in the world that display different characteristics. Different levels I can't speak too, although there are certainly wildly different looking levels. I don't know if if your progression changes substantially or not.
Okay, this is an excellent point. I personally don't have a problem playing a game that doesn't challenge my ability to complete it. A game being a 'cake walk' doesn't stop me enjoying it greatly if other areas are of worth to me.
Are there any very easy games you like?
BlazingDarkness
Member
I suspect every Journey thread will be full of criticisms from Amir0x, that's just how he rolls
reptilescorpio
Member
Well damn, maybe I need to buy this on release rather than wait for a sale.
Can you not understand the very basic difference between mechanics that are fundamental to the experience and mechanics that are incidental?
Journey has a few 'incidental' mechanics that you can or cannot indulge in if you like, but it won't change anything at all... there is never a requirement to get better at what you were taught from the very second you start the game. Nothing else matters but that you know how to do a basic jump/surfing and barking. And it's not like you're using your barking or jumping in ever impressive platforming or puzzle challenges. You're always using it in the dullest, most barebones fashion. Again, I'm not arguing against anyone's ability to like the game. I'm sure thirty people are lining up to suggest how Amir0x - yes, Amir0x personally - has ruined this topic for suggesting something other than circle jerking (edit: well that didn't take long, BlazingDarkness ^^), but I'm just stating my personal point of view.
The game has nothing there. It's a nothing game. That's how I feel.
Again, we've got to make a distinction here. There is easy - say, Okami... or Kingdom of Amalur - and then there is Journey. Journey is not 'easy' or 'hard.' It's 'nothing.' There is 'nothing' there. It's not making a play at anything relating to the realm of challenge. The second you start you might as well be placed at the end marker; you will never encounter anything that causes you to pause (other than the fucking BEAUTY MY GOD)...
...for even more than a split second. If it played itself, you might not notice. I'm exaggerating a bit here obviously, but the point remains the same: I need some engagement with the mechanics, and there is never any engagement.
I'm basing it on the BETA and the reviews, which seem to suggest nothing changes at all in the experience from that regard. If something drastic does change, I'd love to know when, since the game is apparently 2 hours long or something absurd like that
It's really my fault for addressing it, it's not like he'd have replied off of nothing.
The game is seemingly not at all challenging, true, there does appear to very literally be no challenge at all, however I find lots of games to be completely vapid, that hasn't for me inherently lead to a negative experience (although of course it has at times). However, as you clearly know, the game doesn't want to tax you, it wants you to move thru these environments and consume the various story related content. I don't know, but I don't believe the impact would be comparable when watching the game. It certainly would have been with Flower, or from my experience of the beta it's not. I don't find the gameplay to be lacking, I find it to be servicing the game's intent.
I have one last question, do you like Dear Esther?
toddhunter
Member
I don't have a problem with that. To me it is a great endorsement for the game. Different people have different tastes and it is nice to have problems pointed out in detail, even if I feel they actually are strengths from my point of view.
Will probably wait for a price drop though. $15 will probably mean about $30 in Australia which is going to be way too much.
To be fair, I do avoid threads for games I don't like for a few months because it's really not conducive to discussion which might be a little negative. I was hoping 3DSGAF had calmed down, I mentioned it was disappointing and got completely raped last week. That's going to take a few years I think.
StuBurns said:
The second people start calling a game an 'experience' rather than 'a lot of fun' is when I know I'm going to not like it typically. Like I said, i need the mechanics to engage me. I like exploration and traversal when it's married to mechanics that require some level of forethought. I don't like games that don't require much of anything of me.
That goes for Dear Esther, yes. Which was recommended to me by like eighteen GAFers and which, upon completion, I promptly closed, rolled my eyes and said 'oh it's one of them games.' It didn't impact me or leave a lasting impression, if that's what you mean. It was extremely pretentious, I felt, in that it was always felt as if the developers really really deeply knew how important this experience they were making was, and how it was going to change things and impact things. It practically was screaming "look how Avant-garde I am! Sure it's not fun to play at all, but didn't it make you think?"
That sucks that 3DSGAF is still like that. I'm pretty disappointed with my 3DS too at this point, especially now that I've played Revelations and have been thoroughly disappointed by it and Super Mario 3D Land too. So I'm waiting for Paper Mario 3DS to save me now
On topic, do you think it's right to have to impose restrictions on the type of post you can make regarding positivity/negativity simply because some OTHER posters lack the self-control to take those posts as the subjective bits of criticism they are? That they are so integrally obsessed with these inanimate objects in their empty, petty lives that they are incapable of disconnecting criticism of that object with criticism of themselves?