Game Debate #143: Journey

[Reed Rothchild | 9,963]

[Gloves | 12,269]

Journey is one of those "you had to be there" kinda games. It's co-op, but online only, and you can only communicate through movement and audio pings. It was a stunningly beautiful game, despite the rather desolate atmosphere. If you can manage to play the game for your first time and play with someone else doing the same, it's *chef's kiss* - an amazing ride, with an emotional ending, despite never saying a word to your partner.

[fox | 1,772]

It’s only 2 hours, but it is the best 2 hour experience you can have.

The visuals and soundtrack are sublime.  The secret co-op is neat and I didn’t even realize I was playing with someone else.  Going on a Journey for the first time is something special and I’ve introduced it to others just to see their reaction.

[RH | 5,226]

How can you play this today (or is there a one player mode where the co-op player is AI?)  I've seen that image for ages, it seemed interesting, but being that I've not touched a playstation since the PS2 era, I have no way of plaything this.

[mbd39 | 2,099]

So not this Journey...

 

[spacepup | 2,488]

Gave it an 8.  

I really enjoyed the experience.

Admittedly, this game is absolutely not for everyone.  It is a very artsy sort of, slow-paced, "vibe" kinda game.  If you're looking for action and complex gameplay elements, this game is probably not for you.  If you like being taken through a unique experience / "story" and don't mind exploring a game peacefully and enjoying the graphics and music, then this game may interest you.

It was pretty creative for the time, and a very nice / interesting *experience* that I quite enjoyed.  I definitely recommend the game, but I know there are people who just absolutely do not like this style of game.

[Webhead123 | 753]

I believe I own this game in some capacity (maybe digital?) but I've never booted it up and I'm not sure it's one I'll ever get around to. I've heard wonderful things...but I could say that about hundreds of games sitting in my "unplayed" pile.

Edited March 3, 2023 by Webhead123

[G-type | 2,816]

I always was interested in this one... not sure about having to play with someone else.

[TDIRunner | 2,912]

7 minutes ago, G-type said:

I always was interested in this one... not sure about having to play with someone else.

My understanding is that the second player is optional so as to not stop you from playing the game in the event that no one else happens to be playing at the same time, or if the servers are not available.  

I started the game once and loved the portion that I made it through.  I had to stop playing due to other things going on at the time that stole my free time and by the time I was able to get back to gaming, enough time had passed that I felt I needed to start from the beginning.  I still need to complete a full playthrough.  Due to the short length of the game, I feel like I've probably played enough to rate it despite not yet finishing it.  

Also I own the soundtrack to this game on vinyl and it's amazing.  

Edited March 3, 2023 by TDIRunner

[rdrunner | 445]

Looks interesting, but not enough to run out and buy a new console for.

(yes it's on Steam, no I don't play games on PC)

[MagusSmurf | 579]

It's two or three hours long so it's an easy completion, it's a bit pricey given that length at $15 but can probably be gotten for pretty cheap during a sale or something, has really neat art design, isn't painful to play or anything, and a lot of people clearly got SOMETHING from it so I'd absolutely recommend giving this one a try.

It just does very little for me. It's fairly pretty and worth a playthrough to look at but it just feels like a total nothing game beyond that. I don't dislike the game (it earned the 5 I rated it and all) but I do think the entire "gaming as art" or whatever the hell people are hyping it up with is largely without substance. The response to this game is generally pretty eye-rolling for me. PRETTY GRAPHICS. NO DIALOGUE. MINIMALISM! SUCH ART. I generally feel like when the term "art" gets so commonly used as a complement to games like this, it's pretty much an admission that "yeah, beyond looking/sounding nice and having vibes this game doesn't have that much else going for it or is at least very clearly missing something or lacking in some way so let's apply this nebulous label to it to justify why we think it's so great." And I know people think this game is a masterpiece because it made them feel things but you'd also probably feel things if you got punched in the face. That doesn't make the punch a 10/10 artistic masterpiece of entertainment.

 tl;dr Journey is Oscar Bait in video game form, you SHEEPLE all fell for it, and I'm a grouch.

[G-type | 2,816]

Just now, MagusSmurf said:

It's two or three hours long so it's an easy completion, it's a bit pricey given that length at $15 but can probably be gotten for pretty cheap during a sale or something, has really neat art design, isn't painful to play or anything, and a lot of people clearly got SOMETHING from it so I'd absolutely recommend giving this one a try.

It just does very little for me. It's fairly pretty and worth a playthrough to look at but it just feels like a total nothing game beyond that. I don't dislike the game (it earned the 5 I rated it and all) but I do think the entire "gaming as art" or whatever the hell people are hyping it up with is largely without substance. The response to this game is generally pretty eye-rolling for me. PRETTY GRAPHICS. NO DIALOGUE. MINIMALISM! SUCH ART. I generally feel like when the term "art" gets so commonly used as a complement to games like this, it's pretty much an admission that "yeah, beyond looking/sounding nice and having vibes this game doesn't have that much else going for it or is at least very clearly missing something or lacking in some way so let's apply this nebulous label to it to justify why we think it's so great." And I know people think this game is a masterpiece because it made them feel things but you'd also probably feel things if you got punched in the face. That doesn't make the punch a 10/10 artistic masterpiece of entertainment.

 tl;dr Journey is Oscar Bait in video game form, you SHEEPLE all fell for it, and I'm a grouch.

Any time games as art debate comes up, it tends to be concerned with art of the fart sniffing variety. They're typically grandiose, but with meditative qualities, and also with some deeper philosophical layer.

[Tanooki | 5,125]

I gave it an 8, but can't add more reason why some reviewer here or elsewhere hasn't said.

 

I'm posting this to point out you can get it for some few years now on iOS and Android affordably so, Flower as well.  I'd suggest getting it as they're both chill and well worth zoning out on in such an easy accessible pocketable format.

[Sumez | 3,165]

It's a pretty game, very evocative and cool in many ways, obviously takes a lot after Ico and Shadow of the Colossus, but doesn't really manage to have anything near the emotional impact those games had. It's literally just walking around - I know saying that is really selling it short, but I do think that no matter what deeper meaning you feel is fitting to transpose unto the game, it doesn't really change what it does and what it is ultimately like.

6/10 because I enjoyed playing it through, but it gave me no new meaningful memories, and I don't have any reason to ever return to it again.

Edited March 3, 2023 by Sumez

[Sumez | 3,165]

3 hours ago, MagusSmurf said:

 tl;dr Journey is Oscar Bait in video game form, you SHEEPLE all fell for it, and I'm a grouch.

Oh man you're gonna have a field day with Inside.

That said, I'm inclined to agree with you, with the asterisk that I do also enjoy a lot of oscar bait movies.

Edited March 3, 2023 by Sumez

[Brickman | 4,215]

I've only ever played one of these arty type games and it was Gris, which was a fantastic game. Is this like Gris? If so, I might check it out.

[Reed Rothchild | 9,963]

I'd just like to add that I haven't played this, but I HAVE played Inside and Gris, and I found the former a lot more compelling

[spacepup | 2,488]

Inside is definitely great! 

[Gentlegamer | 226]

It's practically not even a game, aside from some mild platforming.

I get that it's supposed to be an 'experience' but the experience was boring.

Journey taught me never to listen to NeoGAF back in the day.

 

Edited March 4, 2023 by Gentlegamer

[G-type | 2,816]

On 3/3/2023 at 3:44 PM, Sumez said:

It's a pretty game, very evocative and cool in many ways, obviously takes a lot after Ico and Shadow of the Colossus, but doesn't really manage to have anything near the emotional impact those games had. It's literally just walking around - I know saying that is really selling it short, but I do think that no matter what deeper meaning you feel is fitting to transpose unto the game, it doesn't really change what it does and what it is ultimately like.

6/10 because I enjoyed playing it through, but it gave me no new meaningful memories, and I don't have any reason to ever return to it again.

I do enjoy Shadow of the Collossus quite a bit. I ranked it #2 in my top 10 games list. But what I liked about it more than the beautiful atmospheric world was the puzzle solving platforming.

[Sumez | 3,165]

On 3/5/2023 at 4:13 AM, G-type said:

I do enjoy Shadow of the Collossus quite a bit. I ranked it #2 in my top 10 games list. But what I liked about it more than the beautiful atmospheric world was the puzzle solving platforming.

I think this exposes an interesting aspect to the whole "games as art" debate, which Journey has been a big part of as well.

You could easily argue that Journey would be less of what it is, if it compromised its concept in favor of adding more interactive gameplay elements to it - but if a game becomes less "art" by being more of a "video game", it's probably not a good proponent of video games being art.

Ico and SOTC are both super enjoyable as video games to me, and I think they would have left much less of an evocative impression without their gameplay elements. After all, the designer specifically coined the term design by subtraction in the context of Ico, so it goes without saying that he feels the game elements in it are essential as well.

But even SOTC was the target of a similar discussion when it came out, on the topic of the horse that you ride.
I think most people would agree that that game wouldn't have been nearly the same experience, if the horse had not felt like a real living creature with its own mind. But the fact that it didn't move like an easily controllable video game vehicle turned a lot of people off from the game, and would argue that the game would simply have been better if it did. Personally it didn't bother me that much, I actually enjoyed the fact that I couldn't just control it 1:1. But it's at least an interesting perspective.

[Gentlegamer | 226]

8 hours ago, Sumez said:

I think this exposes an interesting aspect to the whole "games as art" debate, which Journey has been a big part of as well.

You could easily argue that Journey would be less of what it is, if it compromised its concept in favor of adding more interactive gameplay elements to it - but if a game becomes less "art" by being more of a "video game", it's probably not a good proponent of video games being art.

Ico and SOTC are both super enjoyable as video games to me, and I think they would have left much less of an evocative impression without their gameplay elements. After all, the designer specifically coined the term design by subtraction in the context of Ico, so it goes without saying that he feels the game elements in it are essential as well.

But even SOTC was the target of a similar discussion when it came out, on the topic of the horse that you ride.
I think most people would agree that that game wouldn't have been nearly the same experience, if the horse had not felt like a real living creature with its own mind. But the fact that it didn't move like an easily controllable video game vehicle turned a lot of people off from the game, and would argue that the game would simply have been better if it did. Personally it didn't bother me that much, I actually enjoyed the fact that I couldn't just control it 1:1. But it's at least an interesting perspective.

I loved Ico, so its 'minimalism' was very effective for me, while remaining a game.

I've yet to play Shadow of the Colossus or The Last Guardian, but have both and intend to soon.

Side question: is the frame rate on PS2 SotC really horrendous? I have the PS3 remaster but I understand it's missing particle effects.

[TDIRunner | 2,912]

11 minutes ago, Gentlegamer said:

Side question: is the frame rate on PS2 SotC really horrendous? I have the PS3 remaster but I understand it's missing particle effects.

I recommend the PS4 version over the PS3 version which I recommend over the PS2 version.  In other words, play the most modern console version that you have access to.  The good news is that you can't go wrong with any version you pick.

Please note, the PS4 version is a remake, while the PS3 version is a remaster of the PS2 version.  With that said, while the PS4 version is a remake, it was remade basically exactly the same as the original with only minor enhancements to the controls and a few bonus items.  The fact that it's a remake should not shy anyone away from the game.  

Edited March 6, 2023 by TDIRunner

[G-type | 2,816]

31 minutes ago, Gentlegamer said:

I loved Ico, so its 'minimalism' was very effective for me, while remaining a game.

I've yet to play Shadow of the Colossus or The Last Guardian, but have both and intend to soon.

Side question: is the frame rate on PS2 SotC really horrendous? I have the PS3 remaster but I understand it's missing particle effects.

I'm sure its improved on the more powerful systems, but I only played it on PS2 and it was a good experience

[Sumez | 3,165]

There's a couple of really horrible frame drops, but it's only on a few very specific spots on very specific boss fights. Overall the game is fine, but of course the newer remakes play smoothers like TDI said