Journey is IGN's Game of the Year. Now Gamespot GOTY too! What in the world.....

Lets face it from a reviewer point of view games like Journey are gold. Fun and short would be exactly what I would want if I were being paid to play and review games.

I'm surprised at People's Choice award and seeing ME3 probably winning it all despite the backlash, guess the minority are quite a VOCAL group.D3s7rUc71oN

[QUOTE="lozengez"]

Vader is going to explode.

SciFiCat

:lol:

[QUOTE="Lulekani"]Mass Effect 3 didnt really have a bad ending, it was decent, the contreversy started because somebody at Bioware miss calculated their hype to product ratio during prerelease.wiouds

It was bad end with or without the hype.

Yup. You dont have the player spend the entire game collecting allies and war assets and then completely ignore that in the final mission. It's like what's the point. not to mention the fact that the ending didnt even have proper cutscenes or made any kind of sense whatsoever.

I still like the game, and i suppose it's still my GOTY (havent played AC3, Far Cry 3 or Dishonored) but the whole end game was the most disappointed i've been ever.

I'm so glad that GameSpot is standing up to violence in games, and have stopped rewarding them. Kudos to them for breathing fresh air into gaming journalism by denying more samey lamey ole FPSs that have saturated the entire generation. Thank you GameSpot.

[QUOTE="MirkoS77"]

[QUOTE="dvader654"]

What happened to your other super angry post. :P

dvader654

Eh, a post that was overly rude and not needed, made in the passion of the moment due to my frustration of you not seeming to me to give Journey its due credit as I've seen from you in various threads. Thought better to delete it hoping you hadn't seen it, too late. :( Didn't mean to come off as personal even though it seemed that way. But in all fairness what you did say was fairly condescending which is where the anger came from.

Anyway, you have some valid points. It's just that I'm frustrated that I'm unable to eloquently express my feelings towards Journey through, as said, the traditional means that has defined gaming so far. I really can't defend it through conventional means and definitions gaming has such used, which strangely is part of why I find Journey to be such an accomplishment. Thing is, I find gaming to fit a broad definition under the umbrella of interactive entertainment as a whole, which is why I don't see how the game necessarily plays or the options it affords the player should be the #1 determining factor in its quality or merit. If you are going to judge a game on that aspect alone, where does the line begin, and where is it drawn? What is the standard?

It's the same way I view puzzle games. Do they not suffer from all the same issues (if not more so) than Journey does? Therefor, are they not games, or lesser games as the interface is so rudimentary? Puzzle games can in fact be some of the most in-depth experiences out there. I find your issue (and others who take your position) to be that you're critiquing games through the lens of the tools given to you to play them and while I can understand such a viewpoint I also find it to be a linear, one-way, and closed-minded one. I've always found gaming to be about the end product, the interface and gameplay to be able to enjoy them is a means to an end, not the end themselves and should not be judged entirely by and through them, as much importance can be placed on them.

I don't know how to better express my thoughts on this matter as so many of you can quite well, but I hope you can at least try to see what I'm saying. Perhaps Journey does not fit into the category for what we have known games to be in the past, but I don't think that should automatically preclude it from acclaim and due accolades, even the most prestigious ones this industry has to offer.

Explain to me the great gameplay. I played a bit recently and all I did was walk forward on sand, easily avoid a flying thing with a spotlight. Then slowly climb a tower by going to the clearly marked area where you press the only button that does anything other than jump. Then you just magically float up stopping at the same shirne like things with zero challenge, zero skill involved, zero level design involved. So explain how that is great.dvader654

[QUOTE="Zen_Light"]

I'm so glad that GameSpot is standing up to violence in games, and have stopped rewarding them. Kudos to them for breathing fresh air into gaming journalism by denying more samey lamey ole FPSs that have saturated the entire generation. Thank you GameSpot.

dvader654

Jesus. Journey is pretentious art trash, and this generation needs to die. How this won over the slew of great games this year is baffling. I can't believe any of you would be happy paying $15 for a two hour non game. Mario Party and Barbie games have more gameplay.GodModeEnabled

*Shrugs* I can't believe anyone paid $60 for the POS that was ME3 and felt they got their money's worth, let alone confused it with quality (its an rpg that plays like a mediocre tps!). Obviously, tastes differ.

[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"]Jesus. Journey is pretentious art trash, and this generation needs to die. How this won over the slew of great games this year is baffling. I can't believe any of you would be happy paying $15 for a two hour non game. Mario Party and Barbie games have more gameplay.CarnageHeart

*Shrugs* I can't believe anyone paid $60 for the POS that was ME3 and felt they got their money's worth, let alone confused it with quality (its an rpg that plays like a mediocre tps!). Obviously, tastes differ.

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"]Jesus. Journey is pretentious art trash, and this generation needs to die. How this won over the slew of great games this year is baffling. I can't believe any of you would be happy paying $15 for a two hour non game. Mario Party and Barbie games have more gameplay.Zen_Light

*Shrugs* I can't believe anyone paid $60 for the POS that was ME3 and felt they got their money's worth, let alone confused it with quality (its an rpg that plays like a mediocre tps!). Obviously, tastes differ.

I got halo 4 for the campaign and I do not feel bad.

I played The Journey at a friend's and I felt overpaid for it. IT show that graphic and sound is all you need to make GoTY.

[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"]Jesus. Journey is pretentious art trash, and this generation needs to die. How this won over the slew of great games this year is baffling. I can't believe any of you would be happy paying $15 for a two hour non game. Mario Party and Barbie games have more gameplay.CarnageHeart

*Shrugs* I can't believe anyone paid $60 for the POS that was ME3 and felt they got their money's worth, let alone confused it with quality (its an rpg that plays like a mediocre tps!). Obviously, tastes differ.

[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"]Jesus. Journey is pretentious art trash, and this generation needs to die. How this won over the slew of great games this year is baffling. I can't believe any of you would be happy paying $15 for a two hour non game. Mario Party and Barbie games have more gameplay.CarnageHeart

*Shrugs* I can't believe anyone paid $60 for the POS that was ME3 and felt they got their money's worth, let alone confused it with quality (its an rpg that plays like a mediocre tps!). Obviously, tastes differ.

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"]Jesus. Journey is pretentious art trash, and this generation needs to die. How this won over the slew of great games this year is baffling. I can't believe any of you would be happy paying $15 for a two hour non game. Mario Party and Barbie games have more gameplay.GodModeEnabled

*Shrugs* I can't believe anyone paid $60 for the POS that was ME3 and felt they got their money's worth, let alone confused it with quality (its an rpg that plays like a mediocre tps!). Obviously, tastes differ.

Aside from the endings and the bugs (which weren't as nasty as Skyrim's but that is a very, very, very low bar) ME3 continued Bioware's trend (which started with Jade Empire) of incompetently aping popular action genres. The move has paid off well for them (clearly a lot of people would rather play a mediocre action game then a good turn based game) so I don't blame Bioware, but that doesn't mean that move hasn't turned combat into something much shallower than what one finds in the best turn based rpgs or modern shooters.

Since Christmas just passed, I'll give your last insult an honest, non-insulting answer. Exclusivity has nothing to do with quality (or lack thereof). I created no less than three threads about X-com Enemy Unknown and have defended it against its few (badly misguided) detractors because like Journey, it is an awesome game.

Aside from the endings and the bugs (which weren't as nasty as Skyrim's but that is a very, very, very low bar) ME3 continued Bioware's trend (which started with Jade Empire) of incompetently aping popular action genres. The move has paid off well for them (clearly a lot of people would rather play a mediocre action game then a good turn based game) so I don't blame Bioware, but that doesn't mean that move hasn't turned combat into something much shallower than what one finds in the best turn based rpgs or modern shooters.

CarnageHeart

What bugs did you experience btw? I put in close to 30 hours in the single player and maybe another 50 in the MP and I dont recall any major bugs. Or minor ones. Maybe my memory is failing me, but I still remember the terrible framerate in Mass Effect and Assassin's Creed, the constant out of sync audio in Killzone 3 and the awful aiming system of Uncharted 3. With mass effect 3, my experience was smooth as butter... both online and offline.

And you keep calling Mass Effect a medicore shooter and I just dont get that. How many shooters allow you to have biotic powers along with your more traditional weapons? How many shooters allow you to control your entire squad and their powers? There is nothing mediocre about the shooting itself which is perfectly adequate as evidenced by how well the game plays online. Getting headshots is just as easy as it in the best third person shooters like Gears, Uncharted and Max Payne 3. The enemy variety is unmatched and the level design is a lot more vertical than Gears or Max Payne 3.

The only thing it doesn't do well is cover mechanics, but even Gears and Uncharted have trouble with cover. Uncharted only gets away with it because of how agile Drake is, but going from cover to cover is a pain in the ass in every game.

[QUOTE="LoG-Sacrament"][QUOTE="dvader654"] Dont worry man, I know how things get in here at time, myself as well. I am going to respond to the puzzle game comparison. Certain puzzle games offer incredible depth, they are games that I could put hours and hours into mastering. A puzzle game has that element of competition that Journey is totally lacking as well. Can a puzzle game be GOTY to me, well something like Tetris or Angry Birds is too simplistic for me but a game like Portal absolutely as it combines all elements into one incredible package. From my point of view most puzzle games offer me something I can really sink my gaming and thinking skills into, while Journey does not. I see what you are saying but to me almost all my enjoyment from games come from the gameplay part. Very rarely is there a game that shows up that I enjoy the aspects around the game so much that I enjoy it even though I find the gameplay to be poor. That is why I play games, so its hard for me to separate the two, its even hard for me to understand why anyone would love video games if not for the love of the gameplay. dvader654

Explain to me the great gameplay. I played a bit recently and all I did was walk forward on sand, easily avoid a flying thing with a spotlight. Then slowly climb a tower by going to the clearly marked area where you press the only button that does anything other than jump. Then you just magically float up stopping at the same shirne like things with zero challenge, zero skill involved, zero level design involved. So explain how that is great.

And yes Demon's Souls is a lot of fun. :)

the thing it really hangs it's hat on is the interaction between players (or the potential lack thereof). yes, thatgamecompany might have made some more elaborate platforming obstacles, but more elaborate obstacles would have hurt that interaction between the players because they would have. i mean, i go to work and everybody has their own task that needs doing. i don't get to know them much as individuals in the normal course of the business day. however, i can go to a party and there is no set activity. all i'm really doing is talking to people and getting to know them. people shine more as individuals because they don't have other activities. journey is more akin to the party than the workplace in that the goals are more general so people can be more like individuals. some players will dance and flutter around (attention whores, i swear), pairs make their own languages with chimes, and whatever other ways they want to express themselves that aren't so direct that cultural barriers would get in the way.

as for my point about demon's souls (and at risk of getting off track), it's one of my favorite games. however, getting my ass soundly kicked by the flamelurker in a few seconds and needing to work all the way back to him with even less health, restoratives, or mercy from the game isn't fun. would i want from software to patch the game and change all that? no, the game would be a lot worse.

[QUOTE="fend_oblivion"][QUOTE="dvader654"] I am aware of that, but Journey does have platforming elements, there is no reason why they cant be good. I have not played Walking Dead yet but I assume its an adventure game so it should have some puzzles. Plus I know in that game your choices effect the outcome, that is a level of interactivity that not even Journey has. dvader654

In that case Walking Dead would be a disappointment, again I have not played it yet.

But I really cant let the Mass Effect comment go by. The choices in Mass Effect CHANGE EVERYTHING. I dont get this obsession with the ending, you played a total of 100+ hours across the three games and all people seem to remember are the last 20 minutes, its crazy. The choices you make in the ME series can completely change the roster of the people in your team in the final game. Entire storylines change. I talked to other ME players and they almost experienced a totally different story than me. I would say in the history of video games no series has ever handled choices as well as Mass Effect has, to do so across 3 games, in this scale is unheard of. So it failed to do so in the final 20 minutes, whatever, what you spent hundreds of hours playing is what matters.

Since Mass Effect 1 I told everyone that your choices would not matter that much so I was not affected by the lack of effect of the choices. With that in mind, I found the ending to be bad. It suck that the ending said that all the playable parts of all three games are meaningless. I wish that the RPG element in ME3 add more choices that affects the game play.

[QUOTE="GodModeEnabled"][QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

*Shrugs* I can't believe anyone paid $60 for the POS that was ME3 and felt they got their money's worth, let alone confused it with quality (its an rpg that plays like a mediocre tps!). Obviously, tastes differ.

CarnageHeart

Aside from the endings and the bugs (which weren't as nasty as Skyrim's but that is a very, very, very low bar) ME3 continued Bioware's trend (which started with Jade Empire) of incompetently aping popular action genres. The move has paid off well for them (clearly a lot of people would rather play a mediocre action game then a good turn based game) so I don't blame Bioware, but that doesn't mean that move hasn't turned combat into something much shallower than what one finds in the best turn based rpgs or modern shooters.

Since Christmas just passed, I'll give your last insult an honest, non-insulting answer. Exclusivity has nothing to do with quality (or lack thereof). I created no less than three threads about X-com Enemy Unknown and have defended it against its few (badly misguided) detractors because like Journey, it is an awesome game.

[QUOTE="Grammaton-Cleric"]

[QUOTE="Socijalisticka"]

I'm pessimistic about adaptations between different mediums. How can a work of literature ever fully manifest in a game? How can you impose the wonderful narrative of Half Life 2 onto paper? However important aesthetics are, it's not enough for a game to function without the "nuts & bolts" and its systems.

Allicrombie

I actually agree with you on this point and furthermore, Campbell's work is not a narrative but rather an anthropological and literary study, identification and classification of redundant myth constructs and paradigms that have been a common factor in various cultures throughout the ages.

[This message was deleted at the request of a moderator or administrator]wiouds

Enough. We get it already -- show and dance, Hollywood something-something, and whatnot. You don't have to keep repeating the same damn phrases over and over and over again as if the same shallow argument is somehow going achieve something. At this point, I assume you're more interested in getting a rise out of people than you are discussing anything.

Either start actually contributing to the thread or leave.

In that case Walking Dead would be a disappointment, again I have not played it yet.dvader654

For what its worth, the choices in The Walking Dead do matter, in some sense. Mostly in regards to where your relationship with the group stands across the whole series. It's a lot of small touches, but it goes a long way to making it feel like your actions are having some sort of tangible effect on the whole. The linearity of the story doesn't make the choices any less effective or powerful.

That said, yeah -- there isn't a whole bunch of traditional gameplay there. But then, the whole point is playing it for the story, anyway.

as for my point about demon's souls (and at risk of getting off track), it's one of my favorite games. however, getting my ass soundly kicked by the flamelurker in a few seconds and needing to work all the way back to him with even less health, restoratives, or mercy from the game isn't fun. would i want from software to patch the game and change all that? no, the game would be a lot worse.LoG-Sacrament

I see where you're coming from, but that's precisely why Demon's Souls -- and Dark Souls -- is so much fun to play. It's no different than any number of challenging games (XCOM on Ironman Classic, for instance).

My butt is just fine Black Knight. :Pdvader654

Proof positive of just how much generic, re-packaged trash came out this year.

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"][QUOTE="dvader654"]My butt is just fine Black Knight. :Pdvader654

[QUOTE="wiouds"]

Since Mass Effect 1 I told everyone that your choices would not matter that much so I was not affected by the lack of effect of the choices. With that in mind, I found the ending to be bad. It suck that the ending said that all the playable parts of all three games are meaningless. I wish that the RPG element in ME3 add more choices that affects the game play.

dvader654

The problem I have is that there is very little deviation you can make within a class. It seems to me that Borderland games have a more control of the character within a class. I would like to have two soldiers be able to play noticeable differently.Instead of an offense power why not get a soldier with a special heavy weapon. Have it where alternative paths that needs out of combat skills to get through.

Imagine having a part of the game that you need to defend a location and you have the time to set up a defense of some type. If you have an engineer with the right skills you can fix up defenses there. You have someone with the right biotic skills then have them move objects around to make cover

I understand that would be hard with staging the shooter parts. After all good staging is the art behind a good shooter. While A WRPG art is from give the player option a ways to deal with task before them.

With that poor made segue, game play elements are art. Game play is what makes something a game. We can have great games with poor visual, audio and story, but with poor game play they game as a game is poor. Until we start thinking of parts of the game that make it a game as art, we will interactive stories claiming to be artistic game while the game part is poor or simple.

I am not saying interactive stories are bad. I am saying trying for force them to be games is wrong. We should remove the burden of trying to be a game from interactive stories like journey, The Walking Dead, and Heavy Rain. They are not games. Just as a novel is not a play. It does not mean that novels are bad.

I think that game of the year should take a look at just the game play as a part of the game.

[QUOTE="wiouds"]

[QUOTE="dvader654"] So you found having six different classes to not be enough. You can play the game as a straight up shooter, as a support class, using force powers, going stealth. I found the classes and haracter building to be more than deep enough. Now do you mean the story choices didn't lead you to all new levels and stuff?dvader654

The problem I have is that there is very little deviation you can make within a class. It seems to me that Borderland games have a more control of the character within a class. I would like to have two soldiers be able to play noticeable differently.Instead of an offense power why not get a soldier with a special heavy weapon. Have it where alternative paths that needs out of combat skills to get through.

Imagine having a part of the game that you need to defend a location and you have the time to set up a defense of some type. If you have an engineer with the right skills you can fix up defenses there. You have someone with the right biotic skills then have them move objects around to make cover

I understand that would be hard with staging the shooter parts. After all good staging is the art behind a good shooter. While A WRPG art is from give the player option a ways to deal with task before them.

With that poor made segue, game play elements are art. Game play is what makes something a game. We can have great games with poor visual, audio and story, but with poor game play they game as a game is poor. Until we start thinking of parts of the game that make it a game as art, we will interactive stories claiming to be artistic game while the game part is poor or simple.

I am not saying interactive stories are bad. I am saying trying for force them to be games is wrong. We should remove the burden of trying to be a game from interactive stories like journey, The Walking Dead, and Heavy Rain. They are not games. Just as a novel is not a play. It does not mean that novels are bad.

I think that game of the year should take a look at just the game play as a part of the game.

Truly wiouds, you speak wisdom. All these decades and no one knew that adventure games weren't games :P.