People have made valid arguments against MGS4 in terms of gameplay. No way in hell you can do so for Uncharted 2.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Would you explain Journey to me please? I don't get it.
- Thread starter SteveWinwood
- Start date
People have made valid arguments against MGS4 in terms of gameplay. No way in hell you can do so for Uncharted 2.
Riposte
Member
It can barely enhance it for the same reasons why it cannot detract from it. The co-op is mostly meaningless to the game. The novelty here is that there is someone else standing in your videogame world and you can follow him if you like. This shouldn't be a novelty given the history of videogames (especially when we have long since reached the point of economies in MMOs like EVE Online), but if you dumb down something enough it will look new. People are pumping a lot of their own sentimentality into a very barren concept and then reporting it as if they didn't do all the work making up a story for the game (see: modern art). Add this with the way humans will avoid frustration at any cost unless they developed a taste for adversity (consider all the people who avoid multiplayer) and Journey is looking pretty magical.
Calling Journey a non-game is the opposite of what should be done. That gives a few ambitious devs a way to create a tier which will be used almost inevitably to put their (abhorrent) games above the rest of the medium, at least in the circle of critics. The "indie" marketing strategy is bad enough as it is.
SteveWinwood
Member
Someone can't argue that the final boss is trash?
MisterNoisy
Member
Journey is the video game equivalent of jerking yourself off to not quite completion for about two hours, but then telling everyone you met that you got blown for two hours in a surprise location by Sasha Grey (she plays games!) by total surprise for the same duration to make it seem more meaningful.
Citizenkaneclap.gif
Seems like a lot of personal expression going on in this post.
MisterNoisy
Member
Something like that.
MisterNoisy
Member
In all seriousness, Journey is bullshit. It's interesting, but only in the way that Angry Birds is interesting.
You have a limited time on this Earth - Journey's only contribution is that it may consume some of that time if you let it. Ultimately, it's jerkoff wankery.
You have a limited time on this Earth - Journey's only contribution is that it may consume some of that time if you let it. Ultimately, it's jerkoff wankery.
It's funny that two of the biggest RE6 fans don't like a game like Journey. RE6 being an absolute hodgepodge of no direction and terrible design decisions trying to appeal to every type of gamer and making a mess of a game. Whereas Journey had a vision for what it wanted to be and met it. You are free to boil it down to a "walking simulator" and miss the entire point.
MisterNoisy
Member
It's almost like they want actual direction, right? Lord knows that Journey is the antithesis of direction.
EDIT: I'd like to apologize for this and other posts I made this day. I was very drunk. Let's just say that I wasn't a fan of the game, and find it highly overrated
Have you actually played it?
What a crock of bullshit
Let me dissect your post and bring up all the nonsensical things you wrote.
Wrong. The coop is far from meaningless to the game. As the game draws it's main narrative from a story of hardship and "the story of life", playing with another person completely alters the narrative and how the game played. When you play coop, Journey basically urges you to stay together and try to help each other. There are hidden secrets (that enhance your ability to fly) that are much easier to reach (sometimes even impossible to reach if you don't watch your surrounding all the time) without the help of another player. So not only does it ADD something to gameplay, it also adds something on a level, which Journey tries to reach from the get go - an emotional one. When you find someone who plays the way you do, you try your best not to lose this person, because the game becomes a better game when played in coop. Which leads us to:
Wrong. The novelty was never that you can play this game in coop. I don't believe the Journey devs did either. They did not want to reinvent the wheel. There's nothing dumbed down about it, it's simply a game best enjoyed in coop, like Lara Croft GoL.
What are you even talking about here? The game has a very direct story, there is nothing to make up. There are animated pictures every chapter showing you the story and the progression you make. It doesn't get more "in your face" than that.
What people do is interpreting their story in their own way. Is that a foreign concept? Listening to music is the same thing. The lyrics tell one story, what you make of them is up to you. Why shouldn't games do the same. Basically every other medium does that in one way or another.
I don't know why this would be a bad thing. Some people like watching happy movies, some others prefer horror, some thriller. Just because the frustration level is low, does it make it an inferior game?
The hell? You are basically calling games that try to do something different (even though we can see that Journey is actually a far more standard game than some things available in the indie scene) abhorrent.
Every medium has it's forms of deviation, short stories, prose, history, ....
In music you have opera, musicals, the standard song of today, sonnets,... hell you have bands that play songs that are 2 seconds long. I don't know what not categorizing games will add to your enjoyment?!
What does this even mean? Journey is not only a pretty linear game, but also has clear goals. Where is the lacking direction?
Riposte
Member
Not sure how this is relevant. Moreover you are putting words in my mouth. I don't think a game is good based on its arbitrary "goal" in production. What matters is the pleasure/fun to be had in the end result. Journey succeeds at aiming very low (simplified versions of game concepts, avoidance of difficult to balance systems like combat, low-detail sparse world, little effort put into character models, short game, small soundtrack, etc) and people have reacted to that low in a special way (minimalism and whatnot). This is thatgamecompany's history in a nutshell, actually.
EDIT: Ah, sorry Des0lar. I try to avoid the "answer someone who breaks your post in a bunch of quotes with even more splintering" thing. Sometimes I might if I see something worthwhile in it, but you shortly killed me with this line:
There are no real hardships to had in Journey nor can something as complex as "the story of life" told with a 3D Platformer without any concise communication in its ideas (like, say, a piece of philosophical literature would have). I refer to what I said about pumping sentimentality into a barren concept.
AHA-Lambda
Member
For what it's worth I haven't played RE6 but I hated the demo and I wasn't enraptured in Journey either. Like I said earlier in this thread, for all of the hate it gets I thought Dear Esther was a better experience than Journey.
Do people who dislike Journey share some sort of masturbation complex or is that just an odd coincidence over the last page or so..?
Are you saying that neogaf represents the "circle of critics"? Didn't people just vote it GOTY here? Interesting argument, seems self defeating at the outset in light of what inspired this thread in the first place.
You've completely missed Journey's coop mechanics, which I've personally never seen in another game before (maybe that's why they're hard to recognize?) But maybe someone can tell me a game with similar mechanics, in between breaths after they've recited a haiku about jerking off. Journey's coop involves timed button presses which, if done badly, make the coop seem awkward and pointless, and if done well, lead to basically an infinite jump god mode where you can explore any part of any level.
It's almost exactly the same as if someone made a coop RPG where two level one players could beat a level fifty player, provided they coordinated incredibly well. That's how dramatically the GAME MECHANICS are tied to the coop. They mark the difference between total powerlessness and total transcendence.
ThatGameCompany's specialty seems to be cooking up game mechanics so unorthodox or subtle that half the game's audience doesn't realize they're there.
I do agree that calling journey a "non-game" is the opposite of what should be done though. I don't think it should be avoided because I have a paranoid theory about how a group of people who make games I don't like will be empowered by that, however. I just can't help but see that it's factually incorrect.
Are you saying that neogaf represents the "circle of critics"? Didn't people just vote it GOTY here? Interesting argument, seems self defeating at the outset in light of what inspired this thread in the first place.
You've completely missed Journey's coop mechanics, which I've personally never seen in another game before (maybe that's why they're hard to recognize?) But maybe someone can tell me a game with similar mechanics, in between breaths after they've recited a haiku about jerking off. Journey's coop involves timed button presses which, if done badly, make the coop seem awkward and pointless, and if done well, lead to basically an infinite jump god mode where you can explore any part of any level.
It's almost exactly the same as if someone made a coop RPG where two level one players could beat a level fifty player, provided they coordinated incredibly well. That's how dramatically the GAME MECHANICS are tied to the coop. They mark the difference between total powerlessness and total transcendence.
ThatGameCompany's specialty seems to be cooking up game mechanics so unorthodox or subtle that half the game's audience doesn't realize they're there.
I do agree that calling journey a "non-game" is the opposite of what should be done though. I don't think it should be avoided because I have a paranoid theory about how a group of people who make games I don't like will be empowered by that, however. I just can't help but see that it's factually incorrect.
NoirVisage
Banned
the irony..
i could watch a youtube video of dear esther and get the basically the same effect. you're being spoon fed emotion full stop.
Journey has to be played to be experienced.
its interactive not just in the case of you manipulating your placement in the world, and the world..but in the sense that you and another anonymous entity interact with each others..minimally.. you learn and and gain insight with subtle clues, and are able to share that with someone else in another playthrough.. you can spot a "noob" a mile a way just by their movements.. going in with an open mind helps quite a bit.
Much as I love playing them I can't think of a single videogame that isn't a total waste of time judged by that criteria. I simply fail to see why you'd even post that in a videogame forum.
OP - there is nothing to "get" or not if something doesn't appeal or work for you. That's subjective. I guess you could fail to "get" say the simple tale unfolded in the cutscenes, but the game and experience as a whole? There's no way to meaningfully explain an experience that doesn't work for you that I can honestly think of.
In the end like most simple media works trying to elicit a narrow but focused set of emotions it either worked or didn't depending on the individual. It's the sum of the parts - the setting, pace, music and art direction either impart their meaning to you or they don't.
TBH I find these kind of requests akin to asking someone to explain to them how to ride a bike - which is possible in terms of expressing the ideas but useless to put into practice for the most part.
Anyway - now I've learnt I'm wasting the finite seconds of my life I'm off to do something useful and relevant in the real world.
You're an idiot. It's not enough that you didn't enjoy it, you have to go out of your way to diminish other's enjoyment. And then you say they are wasting their time with "jerkoff wankery", apparently missing the irony that you are spending your own limited time in a thread filled with a "fuck this game" circle jerk.
Not liking something is fine, but this narcissistic need to prove you are so far above it is fucking ridiculous.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
Riposte said:
Well given that Journey was GAF's democratically chosen GOTY, its safe to say that a lot of us found a great deal of pleasure in playing it.
Journey has been a success with both the critics and public, and you are really desperately stretching to rationalize why you personally didn't like it.
Why not simply accept that it's just not your cup of tea and move on?
I can understand it's very complex since it involves more than pushing forward and trudging to the occasional air duct or hill like in Journey (or tapping a button in tandem with a co-op partner to float around, as someone else mentioned). But once one learns how to play it, the core combat and mobility is a blast. Pro Mercs videos show how incredible the gameplay gets.
I fully acknowledge there are lots of rough spots in the campaign -- abrupt transitions, poorly telegraphed one-hit kills, etc. It's a VERY flawed campaign, and personally, I prefer Mercs, which is a game unto itself. But even the worst bits of the campaign still have lots to actually play, and if you play co-op, you can form meaningful, even sentimental connections with the other player, as well.
But yeah, ultimately, apples and oranges here. You're comparing a game that actually attempts to have engaging mechanics with one whose threadbare mechanics are more or less a vehicle for the AV to work you over emotionally. Shivering behind the same rock or tapping buttons in sequence to gain altitude only goes so far.
And speaking of the multiplayer in Journey: I find the way it builds "empathy" to be a hollow experience. Connecting over a game is a nice commonality, but it works in Journey only because they take away the very voice that makes us individuals -- our viewpoints, our walks of life -- and homogenizes it in a way where we feel false attachment projecting our own emotional wants onto the other person's avatar. A real accomplishment in empathy would be highlighting what makes us different -- even repulsive to each other -- and, without hiding that, proceeds to teach us to love one another regardless. I'm not sure how a game would attempt that, though.
I played Journey. I played Dear Esther. Dear Esther was way more effective for me. It didn't constantly diminish its own emotional impact with cutscenes and flimsy attempts at gameplay. Dear Esther didn't try to be anything other than a non-game focused on emotion -- basically a poem you could accelerate at your own pace. Since it didn't dilute itself with iffy platforming, stealth, etc, it worked well for what it attempted. I could stand on a single beach at length, breath at my own pace and proceed at will, without having to traverse terrible platforming sequences or forced stealth segments.NoirVisage said:
I'm saying complexity does not always equal a good game, and vice versa. If that's your narrow view that only games with complex mechanics deserve to be called good, that's up to you.
NoirVisage
Banned
The irony. I'll take a flawed game over a talking screen saver any day of the week, different strokes and whatnot. Your breakdown of Dear esther and hyperbole regarding Journey says enough.
Riposte
Member
Ah, you are quite snarky. That's not a good look. I don't think I've brought up masturbation.
No. I'm talking about a long-term process where values are reversed as seen in other mediums (painting and sculpture most prominently). The note about the critics was to say that eventually most critics will actually believe and propagate the idea, whereas the larger population will just assume critics know better but ultimately just enjoy what is most entertaining to them (which could be great or terrible depending on a bunch of things, e.g. the blockbuster film, though film is much less corrupted when compared to my previous examples). This isn't really about Journey, but "art" and what a scam the word has become. Separating Journey from "mere" "entertainment" (i.e. the rest of videogames) enables it to join in that scam. People seem to think by saying it is "not a game" will put it beneath everything else, but values can be reversed very easily when you begin to change the way you critique something. All it takes a little of pseudo-intellectualism and, bam, artistic skill, pleasure, and depth no longer matter. (Actually, it doesn't matter what you do, since this process has already started and will continue here on.)
I also believe it is "factually incorrect" to call Journey a "non-game", though I suppose a little hyperbole isn't too bad if everyone understands that.
It is not like that at all, because the mechanics are not used in a way that provides any sort of challenge (this would cause frustration, like I was saying). There is (virtually) no adversity to the game, no counter, no weight. Naturally cooperation as a mechanic has very little meaning under these conditions. Sure, maybe you get more "good" to go along with your world where there is no "bad". What good that does you. I'm well aware of the mechanics of Journey "exist". I wouldn't call them neat or anything, but the failure on TGC's part is how they were used (or more honestly: not used).
You are projecting your defensiveness onto to me. Games like Journey and their popularity poses a question I want to answer. I'm glad to state my answer even if it contains a negative impression of others in its conclusion.
No. I'm talking about a long-term process where values are reversed as seen in other mediums (painting and sculpture most prominently). The note about the critics was to say that eventually most critics will actually believe and propagate the idea, whereas the larger population will just assume critics know better but ultimately just enjoy what is most entertaining to them (which could be great or terrible depending on a bunch of things, e.g. the blockbuster film, though film is much less corrupted when compared to my previous examples). This isn't really about Journey, but "art" and what a scam the word has become. Separating Journey from "mere" "entertainment" (i.e. the rest of videogames) enables it to join in that scam. People seem to think by saying it is "not a game" will put it beneath everything else, but values can be reversed very easily when you begin to change the way you critique something. All it takes a little of pseudo-intellectualism and, bam, artistic skill, pleasure, and depth no longer matter. (Actually, it doesn't matter what you do, since this process has already started and will continue here on.)
I also believe it is "factually incorrect" to call Journey a "non-game", though I suppose a little hyperbole isn't too bad if everyone understands that.
It is not like that at all, because the mechanics are not used in a way that provides any sort of challenge (this would cause frustration, like I was saying). There is (virtually) no adversity to the game, no counter, no weight. Naturally cooperation as a mechanic has very little meaning under these conditions. Sure, maybe you get more "good" to go along with your world where there is no "bad". What good that does you. I'm well aware of the mechanics of Journey "exist". I wouldn't call them neat or anything, but the failure on TGC's part is how they were used (or more honestly: not used).
You are projecting your defensiveness onto to me. Games like Journey and their popularity poses a question I want to answer. I'm glad to state my answer even if it contains a negative impression of others in its conclusion.
HueyFreeman
Banned
Because it's a game about living, dying, and being together.
Ollie Pooch
In a perfect world, we'd all be homersexual
Did I just read "You have a limited time on this Earth" from a poster taking time to denigrate others' tastes on a video game forum?
I agree, but I'm not saying complexity is a necessary requirement for "good gameplay." Mario games, for example, are master class design at one or two buttons. I just mean to say that in RE6's case, I could see how someone who prefers Journey's level of complexity wouldn't connect with the mechanics in RE6 -- not to say that a game must have mechanics as complex as RE6 to be good.
The thing is, I absolutely hated the demo to RE6 the first time I played it... AND the second time I tried it, still in disbelief at what I considered a train wreck. It was the third time I tried it, on a whim, that it clicked. I learned the game, and discovered the mechanics are fundamentally solid in terms of the core combat and mobility -- stylish action gameplay married to TPS. It wholly redeemed the combat situations that are the game's bread and butter (in-between the Uncharted-inspired running and vehicle sequences that have no place in the game, mind you).
In Journey, your jumping and sliding abilities -- your main means of interaction with the world -- feel good but are put to use in tedious ways (wonky air-platforming... trudging... waiting for winds to die down... uh...) that break the suspension of disbelief and make me focus all the more on the musical cues and other "swells" that are clearly trying to jerk certain feelings out of me. That's in-between cutscenes that needlessly break up the flow of the game.
I still liked it enough for $15, though. Gorgeous art direction, and dat sand-surfing. <3
OK.NoirVisage said:
MiamiWesker
Member
I enjoyed it but like the OP it did nothing for me. I guess I can see why people would call it an emotional beautiful journey, it can have that effect. That said you have to be totally fine with a game with almost zero gameplay, basically the ultimate graphics/story over gameplay game there is. As a fan of games since I was so young who has always championed the act of playing the game over the story I find the love for this game to be disappointing to me.
If you were not expecting deep gameplay mechanics from Journey, and you still didn't like it, then the game is just not for you.
Journey is just like music. I bet you know many people that hate music that you love, and vice-versa. Or maybe you have a friend that loves a music so much, and while you like that music as well, you don't, and will never, understand why he keeps listening to it over and over and it's his favorite music. The quality of the music is besides the point. It either resonates with you or it doesn't.
Journey is more like an experience, and not so much a typical videogame, so it's normal that this experience speaks more to some people and less to others.
There's nothing wrong with that, but what it means is that you will never understand why someone loves the game so much, no matter how much they try to explain it to you.
Fortunately, Journey resonated with me!
Journey is just like music. I bet you know many people that hate music that you love, and vice-versa. Or maybe you have a friend that loves a music so much, and while you like that music as well, you don't, and will never, understand why he keeps listening to it over and over and it's his favorite music. The quality of the music is besides the point. It either resonates with you or it doesn't.
Journey is more like an experience, and not so much a typical videogame, so it's normal that this experience speaks more to some people and less to others.
There's nothing wrong with that, but what it means is that you will never understand why someone loves the game so much, no matter how much they try to explain it to you.
Fortunately, Journey resonated with me!
Terra Firma
Banned
There are some people who don't like chocolate.
Like the OP.
Like the OP.
SteveWinwood
Member
Filthy terrorists.
I "got" Journey and did enjoy it somewhat. It was also completely transparent and mostly shallow.
I played with 10 different people my first time through and both my wife and I said "we're gonna die walking up that hill" within the first 5 or so minutes of the game. 5-10 days before the birth of our daughter. It basically followed the same low/high progression as Flower too.
I played with 10 different people my first time through and both my wife and I said "we're gonna die walking up that hill" within the first 5 or so minutes of the game. 5-10 days before the birth of our daughter. It basically followed the same low/high progression as Flower too.
test_account
XP-39C²
It is subjective, but for me, the atmosphere in Journey is amazing. This really drew me into the game, so to speak. The planet/world looks mysterious and it makes me wonder how it was before and if people were living there, how things were before. Another game that made me feel like this is The Dig, an adventure game from Lucas Arts
Another thing was to meet a complete stranger and only communicate with sound. I really liked this idea.
Another thing was to meet a complete stranger and only communicate with sound. I really liked this idea.
yes the story in Lost in Translation is very literal and straightforward. The story is not the reason people love LiT.
People love it because of the visuals, sound and mood it conveys.... Never played Journey but I feel that's exactly why people are latching onto Journey... visuals, sound, mood.
MotionBlue
Member
Saying you "don't get it" and asking people to explain it. Only to disregard there opinions and equate it to mental masturbation, makes it obvious that you don't care about understanding it. You merely want a soapbox to declare you don't like something conceived to be mainstream.
Journey managed to be minimalistic in gamepaly, beautiful in presentation, and poignant in story-telling. That is why it is good. That is what made it GOTY.
I'm glad I wasn't the only one who noticed this.
Journey managed to be minimalistic in gamepaly, beautiful in presentation, and poignant in story-telling. That is why it is good. That is what made it GOTY.
I'm glad I wasn't the only one who noticed this.
SteveWinwood
Member
I'll keep that in mind.
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
I hate how I disagree with Riposte often, but he seems to do such a good job of making me see things the way he does that I have great trouble arguing with him.
One of my favorite writers in gaming Chris Avellone had to this to say about Journey.
Read more here.
I love that. Journey to me is like the equivalent of 2001: A Space Odyssey (the film) in how the visuals are the story. Kubrick is able to say more in one scene than C. Clarke could with his book. Journey manages to feel the same way to me albeit on a smaller scale.
A final boss does not make gameplay or even a game.
Fine Ham Abounds
Member
This is why we get reviews like the Uncharted 3 review. People should be able to break down why something works or why it doesn't. While some people have done this, we also get garbage like this. Journey very much is a videogame. Now you might have an experience from playing it but making the game itself out to be an experience is ludicrous.
LiquidSolid
Member
Ahaha, this is so fucking dumb. Well done. You've outdone yourself.
I wonder if people will bitch and moan about GOTY 2012 Journey more than GOTY 2008 MGS4. Either way, boo fucking hoo.
There's a lot less Bill Murray.