Lord Error
Insane For Sony
Actually, this is one game where you absolutely 100% cannot have that just by watching a playthrough.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
IGN names Journey 2012 Game of the Year
- Thread starter GDJustin
- Start date
D
Deleted member 81567
Unconfirmed Member
This mentality is extremely aggravating.
Ahahaha, nope.
Riposte
Member
While I understand that people like them and I think it is totally fair one likes them for their strengths (maybe even fit it somewhere low on your top 10), the reason I find it distasteful for people to say either Journey or The Walking Dead are "GotY" is because they are dead ends.
Journey is purposefully barren to a point of where it is 3D platformer without significant platforming and co-op game without co-op challenges and this people find novel. It seems like people suddenly discovered what they've been doing in anonymous online co-op games all these years, only it needed to be painted on a blank canvas to be visible. (This process of stripping a game to the point where it is unrecognizable (thus "new" and "fresh" and moreover not directly compared to the games in the same genre or which have the same mechanics), like submerging a carcass in acid for a day to the point you can't really call it a humanoid, is thatgamescompany's MO.)
The Walking Dead is a visual novel (the simplest genre, the genre with the least potential. Basically where you put games which have so few mechanics they don't fit anywhere else and it becomes easy to import the virtues of other mediums (e.g. a novel) since there little to get in the way) which strengths mainly come from elements that have very little to do with interactivity, it is about dressing the hell out of nothing. The role-playing (choice) aspect is usually admitted to be shallow, but it is dressed in some fine clothes.
To put it simply, both represent taking videogames backwards. They reduce what games can do already and this sits at the opposite of pushing games forward (a path built on complexity). Perhaps they can get away with this because just how good the music / scenery is (Journey) or how well-written dialogue and storylines (The Walking Dead). It is like you are mocking the medium at this point (like calling a random assortment of color blotches a great "painting"). It is kind of sad that some people have become so reactive to "dudebro", "weeaboo", "insert stupid internet term here" themes that they've come to see the end of creativity as the wellspring of creativity, but this is not a new phenomenon.
If you want to see what happens to a medium after people begin to celebrate the dead-ends as the future... well take a trip to this place and observe some monstrosities: http://www.moma.org/
Ultimately, it doesn't really irk me that Journey or The Walking Dead will win a bunch of awards (from people I don't think have opinions relevant to me) or perhaps the NeoGAF voted GotY (culminated for a vast group of posters whom I likely only care about 1% of). I do see this as a form of degeneration though, an inevitable process videogames must go through. Right now you might dismiss game journos on the grounds that the status quo is short-sighted and very "blockbuster" centric. However, this is a blessing (even perfectly natural) when compared to turning the essentials of game design inside out and reversing values. Soon the pseudo-intellectualism that you mostly see contained to blogs about indie ARTZ games will become much more common (much like its counterpart in film, etc are common enough in big name publications).
As for Mark of the Ninja... I very quickly lost interest once I saw how ridiculously overbearing the checkpoint system was. It doesn't even punish you in score for dying, which is already a lazy and far too safe way of doing it. Seem like it had some cool mechanics, a shame.
Journey is purposefully barren to a point of where it is 3D platformer without significant platforming and co-op game without co-op challenges and this people find novel. It seems like people suddenly discovered what they've been doing in anonymous online co-op games all these years, only it needed to be painted on a blank canvas to be visible. (This process of stripping a game to the point where it is unrecognizable (thus "new" and "fresh" and moreover not directly compared to the games in the same genre or which have the same mechanics), like submerging a carcass in acid for a day to the point you can't really call it a humanoid, is thatgamescompany's MO.)
The Walking Dead is a visual novel (the simplest genre, the genre with the least potential. Basically where you put games which have so few mechanics they don't fit anywhere else and it becomes easy to import the virtues of other mediums (e.g. a novel) since there little to get in the way) which strengths mainly come from elements that have very little to do with interactivity, it is about dressing the hell out of nothing. The role-playing (choice) aspect is usually admitted to be shallow, but it is dressed in some fine clothes.
To put it simply, both represent taking videogames backwards. They reduce what games can do already and this sits at the opposite of pushing games forward (a path built on complexity). Perhaps they can get away with this because just how good the music / scenery is (Journey) or how well-written dialogue and storylines (The Walking Dead). It is like you are mocking the medium at this point (like calling a random assortment of color blotches a great "painting"). It is kind of sad that some people have become so reactive to "dudebro", "weeaboo", "insert stupid internet term here" themes that they've come to see the end of creativity as the wellspring of creativity, but this is not a new phenomenon.
If you want to see what happens to a medium after people begin to celebrate the dead-ends as the future... well take a trip to this place and observe some monstrosities: http://www.moma.org/
Ultimately, it doesn't really irk me that Journey or The Walking Dead will win a bunch of awards (from people I don't think have opinions relevant to me) or perhaps the NeoGAF voted GotY (culminated for a vast group of posters whom I likely only care about 1% of). I do see this as a form of degeneration though, an inevitable process videogames must go through. Right now you might dismiss game journos on the grounds that the status quo is short-sighted and very "blockbuster" centric. However, this is a blessing (even perfectly natural) when compared to turning the essentials of game design inside out and reversing values. Soon the pseudo-intellectualism that you mostly see contained to blogs about indie ARTZ games will become much more common (much like its counterpart in film, etc are common enough in big name publications).
As for Mark of the Ninja... I very quickly lost interest once I saw how ridiculously overbearing the checkpoint system was. It doesn't even punish you in score for dying, which is already a lazy and far too safe way of doing it. Seem like it had some cool mechanics, a shame.
Unless I was playing it wrong you couldn't always fly around and ski whenever you wanted right? This was one of the things that annoyed me about the game and I kept having to ask myself whether this was a cool moment or I was just happy to be moving how i wanted to, like with the 'golden sand' part where people always post the gif of it. There were other bits with these flying creatures where they boost you along if you 'talk' near them or w/e but I'd always miss it and end up having to trudge slowly towards the next area. Shit me off no end.
I don't wanna sound like I'm shitting on the game, there was a lot to admire about the game. I'm just wondering whether I missed something.
arglebargle
Member
for your sake i hope people are as well. in fact, if i understood how the online worked i may offer to randomly show up in your game. admittedly i havent played many games that came out in 2012, but i really enjoyed journey. had i played more games (which is to say, more games that came out in 2012, i played plenty of games this year) i doubt it would be my GOTY, but figuring out how to communicate and maneuver alongside a stranger you cant talk to is a lot of fun. i guess some of this may be undermined by the fact that demons and dark souls already did it, but the multi in those games are more of a conscious decision. in journey someone just showed up in my game and we realized we could get places together that we couldnt alone and therefore stuck together. im rambling at this point, but point being journey was a great experience, and to me, great experience = great game, regardless of how complex or mechanically interesting the gameplay itself is.
well, the point of what you quoted is that the bond between you and another player charges your scarf, the proximity of the other player charges it up which naturally brings you closer together to the other player. you can then dance and skip and fly in the sky together, never touching the ground as you sing a duet. this is how the game is arguably meant to be played, and is something you are incapable of doing alone, without practice, or without the realization of it.
Conciliator
Banned
OK. I like Journey.
That explains some things. A lot of my play time was spent solo as I never came in contact with another player until nearing the end and even then not for that long (thanks to my own stupidity).
aye, well that's not really your fault then it would seem.
just to be clear, it does suck balls to not have a charged scarf, i agree lol
BladeoftheImmortal
Member
All this said with a Duke Nuke 'Em face.
Mass Effect 3's multiplayer was better than Halo 4's.
And FFXIII-2 or Dragon's Dogma should've won Best RPG imo
I really don't like saying that Journey was the best all-around game of 2012 though. It was great but... its like the Ico discussion, except worse.
And FFXIII-2 or Dragon's Dogma should've won Best RPG imo
I really don't like saying that Journey was the best all-around game of 2012 though. It was great but... its like the Ico discussion, except worse.
reddwarf42
Member
Dragon's Dogma should have won.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
This post confused me the most
Typographenia
Member
Do you truly equate progress with complexity, when it comes to games?
If these have really had such a profound impact on gaming and are, in fact, taking games backwards, where are their imitators? Where is this impact being seen, currently? Is it all potential negative impacts based on the buzz surrounding them?
Was there a significant impact caused by Shadow of the Colossus, as well (positive or negative)? I think it could fit snuggly next to the Walking Dead and Journey when it comes to its minimal systems and a focus on presentation before gameplay. All I ever really saw come from it was a lot of people saying they liked it.
I was planning on buy journey until I tried the demo, Looked beautiful but I had no clue what I was meant to be doing, all did was walking around all over the place(plus did some jumping) I know I must be missing something, does journey have puzzles? then that would explain things.
Macho Madness
Member
Okay okay okay. I bought the Journey CE for $10 on Black Friday. Tomorrow, we do this thing. After all the hype, I almost feel I have to underestimate it going in.
flabberghastly
Member
Behind all your blustery hysterics there's a marked lack of actual content. Your entire conception of "progress" through "complexity" is vague to the point of being utterly meaningless. Progress towards what? Complexity in what way and for what purpose?
Journey, Dear Esther, or To the Moon, for just a few examples, convey more emotional complexity than any of the AAA, focus-tested blockbusters that you would seem to prefer. Is this, however, invalidated in advance by the fact that they lack a half-dozen types of jumps, a vast array of weaponry, and an extensive leveling system? What good are such elements when they are put to shallow ends, full of polygons and button-presses, signifying nothing?
What these games produce is something conceptually complex, but mechanically minimalist, much like those painted "monstrosities" on the walls of MOMA that you decry. While your ideal games are blundering around in the dark, using their clockwork systems in search of endless iotas of "fun," these "dead ends" are illuminating new provinces of experience.
Teletraan1
Banned
Blame Nintendo and god for being too cheap to localize this and release it when it should have.
Joeshabadoo
Member
exactly this. I do feel quite lucky, as my first playthrough was as a PS+ member, during the pre-release, with another first-timer. It wasn't long before we developed this beautiful symbiosis and were intuiting eachother's next moves, anticipating what had to be done so that we could keep sustained flight. It made the third overall section just amazing: carefree and composed of pure joy. the way the the camera panned, and the soundtrack swelled and fluttered, then my own tweaks to the camera, and the tones coming from the two of us singing...it's hard for me to describe. the bond we formed was unlike any ive really ever formed in my entire life because of the circumstances (not to say it was the deepest or most meaningful or anything, but it was unique, and powerful as a result) toward the end when danger looms largest, he ended up getting swept up and damaged, and I can just remember the panic and the concern and the pain I felt. It was intensely real. I was able to help him back to safety, and the remainder of the journey was all the better for it.
Under ideal conditions, with the right companion, it can be like a giant digital hug from some grand benevolent entity
This. While I appreciate finely tuned gameplay, I love the fact that videogames are striving to do more in the past recent years.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
MrCookiepants
Member
You haven't got a clue what you're talking about.
Imp the Dimp
Member
Ahead of...
Dark Souls: Prepare to die (PC)
Xenoblade
The Witcher 2: Enhanced Edition
Persona 4: Golden
Diablo 3
Dragon's Dogma
Devil Survivor 2
Mario SS
The Last Story
Guild Wars 2
?
First 4 are ports or versions of old games.
Diablo is considered just as bad as ME3 by most or a huge disappointment at least.
Dragon's Dogma is a mid tier release earlier in the year that was likely forgotten.
I've never heard of DS2 so you can damn well be assured the media didn't.
Mario SS is a handheld game.
Last Story is a jrpg on a dead system.
GW2 is a MMO. No MMO short of something revolutionary like WoW originally was is going to unseat a normal RPG since the gameplay and story/writing are usually way below what normal RPGs give. Yes even the ME series.
twinturbo2
butthurt Heat fan
Doritos Pope says hi.
This made me sad. XIII-2 is a lot more RPG than ME3.
ME3 has an action mode for crying out loud.
Imp the Dimp
Member
I don't see how any of these excuses are valid.
Just saying that's probably how it went for most western media outlets.
Riposte
Member
Complexity is a required ingredient for progress, even if the most complex games are not necessarily the best ones right now. From complexity you can derive more depth (which is in other words "meaningful complexity", complexity in mechanics which is not immediately superfluous) and more gripping immersion (nothing is more complex than the reality videogames try to supplant). These together provide stimulation. Some games can capitalize more of its limited complexity by being deep (2D action games, small-scale tactics games for some examples), but this doesn't really apply to extremely (and purposefully) shallow games. Remember my problem with these two games is that they only work on any level after sacrificing what makes games great. To celebrate them as the best is to sell complex games short.
What I'm saying is not so much that these games have a special impact, but what they show us. They are capitalizing on the changing nature of how people (although I'm mainly speaking about the "critics") view games. If nothing else (although I would argue against its inclusion in such company) Shadow of the Colossus's hyperbolic reception (and perhaps elements of how people received story heavy games in the past) was an early example of this, an outlier then. We are in a very different environment now than we were in when SotC came out. "Indie" as a marketing sensation is in full effect (even when games are directly backed by 1st party publishers) and downloadables being fully established allows people to remove a lot of the risk of making a cheap game which betrays expectations. A prime time for novelty chasers.
You use a very limited application of "emotion". Certain brands of artistry try to claim ownership over what "emotion" is, often limiting it to sappy sentimentality things of less grandeur specialize in (which of course is joined by the attempt to demonize big budget things, as if greatness doesn't come at a cost). The truth it is every game's objective is to generate emotion and every one of them succeeds at this to varying degrees of quality. The idea that the goal of competitive multiplayer in Call of Duty is to create emotion might seem alien to someone reading this, but that's because of a now very old misunderstanding deeply engrained into the criticism of other mediums (much like "art" bullshit).
Journey, Dear Esther, and To the Moon are all bad (in some cases truly repugnant) games because the emotions they produce are comparatively weak (so I wouldn't say it has "more emotion") to losing yourself in a more consuming game ("shootbang" may or may not be included). They are less stimulating, sentimentality and all. What these games usually lack is any real depth to interactivity and feedback, removing an opportunity for players to release or sharpen their strength. In other words, they are less fun (btw, I'm more or less defining what fun is here, which I will bring up again). What they do provide is something "new", in theory anyway.
These systems are tools in place to enhance the pleasure one get from the game. Sometimes people use the word "shallow" to attack what is honest and natural. So wanting to make yourself feel good might be thought of as shallow. What I'm seeing here is nihilism.
Your idea of "conceptually complex" leaves a lot of room for nonsense (a space as endless as the human imagination, even!) of which none of it actually can be shown to exist in a perceivable (non-sense) "reality" (a painting in this case). So yes, with that, people can point to something that looks like it was drawn by a child (or worse, frankly) and say it holds some deep truth about the universe and the human experience (although it would make more sense just to study the universe and humans instead).
This sentence in particular slays me. To say games with good mechanics (oh no, mechanics... like a clock! Or like our understanding of the sciences) are blundering is quite silly. The ideal games (and a whole bunch of the mediocre ones) are succeeding at generating great amounts of pleasure. To say that this is in "darkness", well, like I think I spoke about nihilism...
Here you seem to demean "fun". I on the other hand would say there is nothing more important than having fun. This is true not only in games, but life itself. Would you balk at the idea that humans live to have fun? That "above all, a living thing wants to discharge its strength"? We have to look at what "fun" really is (especially since it is so often associated with "dumbness") and that requires looking at human nature at some point if it is going to be challenged every step of the way, but I won't explore this very far because talking philosophy will only serve to make myself fringed on GAF (plus I'm not sure how well I could do it).
Usually when I break down a post into a few quotes like that it means the conversation is too much work to be worth continuing for long. That is what happens when there is little common ground, you have to seemingly attack every concept (and I hold very little common ground with someone who doesn't find modern art grotesque).
Look at this wretched human.
One way Journey fails is that the game doesn't make good use of this at all. Good cooperation games test you on your ability to cooperate. The bond between players become stronger when it must endure challenges and adversity. Though I must admit if I were to voice examples it wouldn't quite sound like a ballerina performance.
ViewtifulJC
Banned
While I'm pretty sure I'm not in the "Journey is a bad video game" camp that Riposte is president/CEO/camp counselor of, this:
Is one of the most bizarre, ass-backwards quotes about video games I've seen all year. It's like it just brushes aside hundreds of brilliant video games in one fell swoop.
Is one of the most bizarre, ass-backwards quotes about video games I've seen all year. It's like it just brushes aside hundreds of brilliant video games in one fell swoop.
I'm an expert
Formerly worldrevolution. The only reason I am nice to anyone else is to avoid being banned.
Well deserved. Still no idea where the "Journey isn't a game" shit came from. Has as much gameplay as any Mario - run and fuckin jump to the end. Flower had infinitely less "gameplay" but whatever. I'll enjoy the salty tears.
Edit: geezus krist at Riposte's post above..gag me
Edit: geezus krist at Riposte's post above..gag me
eot
Banned
I don't care for paragraph by paragraph replies, so I'm just going to single out this one. Your ideas of what games should be, or should become, come off as being entirely arbitrary. A good cooperative challenge tests your ability to cooperate, but a good cooperative game provides a good cooperative experience and that doesn't have to be predicated on challenge. If anything Journey proves what you're saying wrong; people did feel like they bonded with someone when they played Journey, despite the fact that it didn't do what you think it should've.
Halo 4 wins best graphics, multiplayer and sound, while Journey wins best music... and Journey is GotY.
Interesting.
Hot Coldman
Banned
Is Trials really a racing game? Seems like speed = death in that.
It's arguably a puzzle game, kinda like Punch-Out!! is a puzzle game.
It's arguably a puzzle game, kinda like Punch-Out!! is a puzzle game.
It's not a number based award. I wouldn't give walking dead any other award but best story/writing and it was still my goty because it was the game that pleased me the most this year.
Robert at Zeboyd Games
Banned
Your impression of Journey depends greatly on who you got paired up with.
My partner appeared to be an especially buggy AI. After trying to work with him or her for a while I gave up and resigned myself to slowly walking through Journey's world. Needless to say I'm not a fan of the game.
My partner appeared to be an especially buggy AI. After trying to work with him or her for a while I gave up and resigned myself to slowly walking through Journey's world. Needless to say I'm not a fan of the game.
funkystudent
Member
I actually think its interesting the made different categorises for Music and Sound.
Riposte
Member
Journey succeeded more at making the cooperative nature found in many games more obvious and with less frustration. By not being buried within a larger set of mechanics and not having the stress that comes from working with someone else to tackle obstacles (in many ways removing the purpose), it allowed people to be more introspective about it. However it does this at the cost of being a poor, simplistic example. I think the failure to be introspective about co-op mechanics in the past is more of a failure on the player's part. I also figure that this basic form of co-op would not be of much note if not for the game's main appeal, the artsy aesthetics.
Pseudo_Sam
Survives without air, food, or water
Correction: Journey has no interesting gameplay.
Correction - your definition of gameplay is not interesting.
The Awesomest
Member
And Pokemon! BW2 came out this year!
This is a bit off-topic, but I'm curious - what do you think of the level of complexity in modern music? We've gone from orchestras of 50 people playing music with multiple movements or jazz music and improvisation to smaller groups with a limited number of instruments and a more limited style of music. Is music progressing or going backwards?
Honey Bunny
Member
You haven't actually explained why you think the co-op is poor here. You've just explained the situation then said 'it's a poor, simplistic example'. You need to say why. The closest you've come to it was 'in many ways removing the purpose' which is a very general weak statement and needs clarification.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Ah Riposte, so many words and such little actual understanding.
I'm going to keep this short and simple:
Open a dictionary and look up the meaning(s) of the word "play".
That's the sphere we're talking about, and arbitrary stuff like complexity and challenge don't enter into it.
I'm going to keep this short and simple:
Open a dictionary and look up the meaning(s) of the word "play".
That's the sphere we're talking about, and arbitrary stuff like complexity and challenge don't enter into it.
Delusibeta
Banned
At this point, I've reached the conclusion that Riposte is a troll, hating on a select few games that GAF thinks are good for reasons that don't involve shoot-bang in order to prompt a ban-worthy reaction.