Ooo…looks like I hit a nerve there. I assume I was pretty close with my assumption.
We both know that's not true. You don't need to assume anything, I explained my motivation in my last post... you just ignored it. Look, all I do is post my opinions in threads where they are relevant. I'm not rude, I don't call people names, I don't attack anyone personally for liking the game. I say over and over again that if someone else likes the game, that's fine, that's their preference. I only wish everyone would treat me the way I treat other people.
I have an idea. Let's not hijack this thread to argue about your personal grudge against me. That's kind of a douchey thing to do, don't you think so?
I'm done replying to Hotel_Security. It's pretty clear he's not open to an actual discussion or debate, and it's a waste of my time to reply to someone who is going to act like a child. Moving on to conduit's reply...
this is a very vague subjective statement. why did you find the game visually dull or bland? what about the environments did you not like? which parts did you think looked nice in "small doses"? What to you would have made it look better? What generally are the kind of visuals you normally enjoy?
I found the environments bland because they just didn't have a lot of variety. The first area was a desert with a few structures that essentially all looked the same. I can overlook that because, realistically, that's what deserts are like. The next area looked pretty much like a palette swap of the first area to make it underground. It was just more sand and more of the same kinds of structures. The next level got you off the ground at least, but again, the structures didn't look any different. After that we have the snow area, which looked pretty much like the desert but white. I thought the last level looked decent and there was one part towards the end of the desert that involved a sliding section and the camera panned around to give you a side view of the sun coming in through the side of the ruins you were sliding through. Those were really the only parts I thought looked good enough to take note of.
As for visuals I enjoy, I like things that are distinct in some way, that stand out, that are interesting, or that do a good job in setting the tone for the world you're exploring. I don't know that I have one particular kind of visual style I like, but some examples of games or series that I think have spectacular visuals are (in no particular order) Jet Set Radio, The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker, Chrono Cross, Feel the Magic, Guilty Gear, Baten Kaitos, killer7, Rule of Rose, Assassin's Creed, Dead Space, Bioshock (I sort of want to exclude Infinite on principle), Shadows of the Damned, Dead or Alive, Enslaved: Odyssey to the West, Dark Souls, Tomb Raider (the latest game, to be specific), and pretty much anything from Vanillaware or PlatinumGames. Those are some examples of games that I think were visually engaging. There are plenty of others that are technically impressive that maybe didn't stand out as having visuals that substantially improve the quality of the game.
More replies to follow...
Why is the gameplay dull? The "puzzles" you talk about are not really puzzles at all, nor are they supposed to be. And if all you did was run and jump then no wonder you found it dull.
I realize that the game isn't meant to be challenging or traditional. I think we can all agree that when a game forsakes the main elements that are traditionally considered to be fun in games, it has to offer something new and different to make up for that. I'm well aware that there are going to be people with differing taste in games. I can't stand sim-style games, but I recognize the traits that make games like The Sims or Animal Crossing enjoyable to people who do like those games.
As for Journey, there really wasn't more to do than run, jump, and fly/float. I appreciate that you were able to actually articulate what about the gameplay you found fun, but I simply didn't find those things terribly engaging. In my opinion, Journey just sacrificed in too many areas. It was minimalist to a fault (again, in my opinion). I'll happily play a game like Rule of Rose that pretty well sucks in the gameplay department because it had a great story, characters, and presentation. On the flip side, I'll play Mario games with essentially no story because the levels are designed well, the controls are great, and they generally have some great challenges late in the game.
There is an extremely rich and grand story, most of which is contained in the cutscenes and is relayed to you via the White Cloths who communicate their history and guide you on your journey...
I have to disagree with you here. I'm sure there's a bit more to uncover than what I saw (though I did, as far as I'm aware, find all the hidden glyphs due to my friend pointing any I was missing out), but it certainly didn't seem like something that would qualify as "extremely rich and grand."
I guess I don't like black and white stories that are spoon fed to me in a very literal and dictatorial way where everything is spelled out and there is no space to apply ones own creative and intellectual interpretation or artistic imagination. I also like originality.
I'm not quite sure if you're trying to say that's the only type of story I like, so I won't be too upset about it. I think there are certainly stories that are told in that fashion that are just fine, but it definitely isn't the only type of story I enjoy. I've mentioned Rule of Rose a few times here. If you have played that, you should know that it is pretty much the exact opposite of what you just described. If you haven't played it and enjoy stories that leave a lot of room for interpretation and creativity in experiencing it, I'd highly recommend the game.
Still more coming...
...your criticisms still basically boil down to this: you find the visuals "dull" but cannot explain why, you find the gameplay "dull" but you cannot adequately explain why, the story is not "compelling" enough, in fact you admit to not even seeing the story ("virtually no story"), and overall you find the game dull and boring. Am I the only one who finds this critique a little flat and uninsightful? And yet you seem to think this is a perfectly adequate articulation of your point of view.
I certainly haven't just repeated the words "dull and boring" to explain my issues with the game.
Visuals: There is not much variety in the environments. Over half of the areas just feature dirt/snow and the same structures in different color variations. There's nothing about the environments (save the last level) that stands out.
Story: There isn't any more of a story than your average Mario game. It's very simplistic, there aren't any characters to speak of, and there isn't really any narrative force prompting you to continue to progress. What little story exists is so abstract and "up to the imagination" that it hardly qualifies as story at all.
Gameplay: While the controls are fine, there just isn't a lot to do. The flying/floating could've been interesting, but it just wasn't used for anything creative. In addition to the gameplay options being quite limited, there was no challenge. The puzzles were easy and didn't really serve any purpose (the game wouldn't have been any worse if the puzzles just weren't there and everything was as simple as 'walk forward'). The gameplay was very repetitive and just wasn't rewarding because you weren't working towards earning anything of interest.
...after all your complaints the only thing I don't understand is what attracted you to the game in the first place? I mean it looked boring to you, the gameplay was boring, why did you even bother playing the game? and I hope you didn't pay for it, otherwise I can imagine the disapointment. but normally if a game looks boring to me then I don't buy it, and don't play it.
I've mentioned it before, but you may have just missed this with all the other posts that have been made. Anyhow, I have a couple close friends who generally have the same taste in games as me. They love this game. One of them in particular said he thought it was the best game of the year in 2012 and has even said he thinks it's his favorite game of the console generation. That was enough for me to take notice. Despite it looking uninteresting to me at first, he assured me that it is a lot better than it looked and that there's so much more to do and explore in the game.
I was holding out for a PS+ freebie, but eventually he just let me sign in on his account on my PS3 and download the game so I could try it. So I didn't pay for it, thankfully.
I generally don't go out of my way to buy or play games that look bad to me, but I also am a gamer with a wide variety of tastes and I like to have an open mind about new and unique gaming experiences. I was perfectly happy shelling out $50 for Stretch Panic on launch day and finishing the game in under 3 hours. It was well worth every penny because it was unique and interesting. The same is true for Feel the Magic. Journey just didn't do it for me.
I appreciate your effort to expand and elaborate on some of your issues with the game. but of course a lot of this is very subjective
I disagree with your comment on lack of variation in the environments. I guess because of my fascination with mood and atmosphere I found the environments quite varied, each different setting had a distinctly different tone. the music, the lighting, the design, all combined to give each area a completely different feeling imo. so yeah I found the environments varied and diverse by my own subjective standard. also you'll hear the word "feeling" a lot since everyone keeps saying this game is an "emotional experience".
the only games I've played that you mentioned I think are AC and Tomb Raider. AC3 had an awesome wilderness environment, loved exploring that. the new Tomb Raider was meh. didn't like the gameplay that much, though some of the environment was cool it did all start to get a bit samey (and claustrophobic) after a while. generally speaking I'm not really into platformers, or fantasy/RPGs (barring some exceptions - Skyrim, Ni No Kuni), but I've always preferred open-world free roam/sandbox type games. Red Dead Redemption is one of the games that stands out for me as having an amazing looking setting/environment.
and its a shame that you had virtually no interest in the story. thats probably my favourite aspect of the game, and its probably one of the main influencing factors which determine whether or not people like the game imo. It certainly has some abstract themes and concepts, but the backstory isn't that abstract at all, maybe it takes a few playthroughs to work out what the imagery means, but the backstory is pretty simple. I guess I just find the subject matter interesting so I choose to explore it in more depth.
as for the present story, thats left more for the player to interpret and is more open-ended, but I like the mystery and intrigue, and trying to work out my own interpretation. I just find that more stimulating and rewarding. I like stories which make me think and question. And to me that was the main driving force prompting the player to progress - my own curiosity, inquisitiveness and desire to learn and figure out what was going on in the game. and again thats just a subjective preference, I just like to explore concepts and ideas to figure out meaning and context.
right from the start of the game my first questions are: Who am I? What am I? Where am I? Where do I come from? These are very simple but quite fundamental questions necessary to pique the players interest in the game. If you start the game not caring about any of that then its no wonder some people find the game boring. also I came into this game knowing nothing about it and oblivious to any popular hype. I simply noticed the free trial demo while randomly browsing the PSN store and liked it as soon as I played it.
I suppose to me there was only two "main characters" on the story side. one of them is the player (along with the other red cloths), and the other is the white cloths (though both the past generation and present generation are arguably distinct). but I tend to generalise each culture/race, while inextricably linked, as having its own definable and discernable traits and characteristics, hence to me they constitute "characters".
gameplay. I still think the gameplay is fun, for what it is. I mean it was obviously going to be simple, shouldn't have expected much more, and you could easily tell that from the free demo. but to me there are just subtle nuances of the movement and physics that in my opinion just make it fun to move around and interact with the environments. but crucially, and contrary to what Hotel Security says, I don't think the gameplay is itself the main aspect of the game. I just think its an added bonus!
~we are a part of the process, not instigators of its progress~
In summary, if you're still struggling to work out why some people really love this game, all I can really tell you is why I like it, and it has to do with my own subjective preferences and interests. To give you a better idea I'll quote the following description from my own personality type, mainly regarding music, but which I think is still extremely relevent when broadly applied to most artistic/creative mediums.....
INTP (introversion, intuition, thinking, perception)
Another area of interest common to INTPs, where Si has a strong influence, is Music. INTPs are usually fascinated by music and may have deep and wide-ranging tastes. Each of their three main functions (Ti, Ne, Si) plays a role in the enjoyment of music, and indeed music is a key interest for bringing out the feeling shadow of the INTP. Si itself brings a fascination for mood and atmosphere in music as well as for a strong sense of personal nostalgia. INTPs are therefore often keen on melancolic minor-key music in which an introspective and/or esoteric mood is conveyed. Equally, INTPs enjoy hearing music that they heard and enjoyed when younger (provided they can still appreciate it now) and yearn for the sense of nostalgia that it yields. INTPs are also drawn to complexly structured music, thanks to their Ti core. An appreciation of modern classical music, as well as perhaps contemporary jazz, is therefore common with them. Such music types are usually too complex to be understood after a single hearing, which hence provides excellent material for analysis, exciting the INTP no end. Once the basic developmental structure of the music has been assessed, Ne provides the impetus to derive a general meaning of the piece. What does the composer wish to convey, for example? Why was that particular development chosen? Indeed, the Ne is usually hard at work during listening sessions, trying to grasp the meanings behind the often fascinating combinations of sound-world evocations, structural developments and nostalgic impressions.
~we are a part of the process, not instigators of its progress~
Plus a basic description of how the three main functions of INTP work. bear in mind these functions are similarly shared by other personality types also and are by no means unique to the INTP, rather they are distinguishable by strength and order of preference.....
Dominant: Introverted thinking (Ti)
~we are a part of the process, not instigators of its progress~
I finally played through this game for the first time the other day and I just don't understand what people are raving about. My main complaints:
Well, for me, when I played the demo, the moment I was hooked came in the chapter select area. There comes a point when you let a bunch of small pieces of fabric out of a cage and then send out a large burst, causing all the fabric to swirl around you and *whoosh* you over to the platform on the far side of the room. I get chills when I remember that experience because it felt incredibly like flying.
For me, the emotional impact of the multiplayer experience the first time I played through it was unforgettable because I could somehow just tell that my partner was also experiencing the game for the first time. Both of us absolutely REFUSED to progress further without the other right by our side. I was touched.
Other reasons I'm obsessed with this game:
-the music is uncommonly good
-awesome glitches to exploit that make traversing the sand an absolute joy
-lots of hidden goodies to discover
-incredibly varied gameplay experience that utilizes the simply jumping and floating mechanics in interesting ways
-gorgeous minimalistic aesthetic
-fascinating world that doesn't bludgeon you with its narrative but asks you to make connections and interpret things for yourself
The best driving shoes are Tod's, but they're...slightly less durable footwear than strapping the Dead Sea scrolls around your feet. -MTV
its without a doubt the best game i've ever played, i've played it probably 40 or 50 times all the way through and have all trophys of course
From: CJayC | Posted: 6/3/2003
GameFAQs isn't going to be merged in with GameSpot or any other site. We're not going to strip out the soul of the site.
Some are going to get a meaningful experience out of it, others won't see the appeal. I fall somewhere in the middle, part of me thinking that its art direction is spectacular and unique, and another part of me thinking that its gameplay is fairly shallow and its story too abstract to fully captivate me.
Add user to Ignore List after reporting