Quick Look: Journey Beta

Exclusive to PSN..... gay ........

Looks very pretty. Too bad I don't have a PS3.

looks amazing, i never really realised what kind of game this was before, it hard to explain without seeing it 

@zombie2011 said:

The way the sand ripples in front of the character is really weird, it's sand not water.

Dude, yeah. I don't think walking in sand does that. Very weird.

Nicwe tech demo, thought not sure where the game is in all this.

Really cool, I like what they're doing with this even though I won't play it cause it's on the PSN. I also noticed that the dress gets more symbols on it so that's more "customization" which I think is really freaking cool also the scarf is awesome!

Am i the only one who lol'd when brad said any way you want it without referencing journey?

This made me yearn for a Windwaker game on this engine!

Does Brad never actually talk about the goal of the game? IT'S NOT AS VAGUE AS HE MAKES IT SOUND. You know absolutely nothing about the world you're in, yes you will traverse from place to place and discover things about yourself and the world, but the goal is to reach the mountain with the big column of light shooting out of it. That is the goal, that is the "journey".

I could not stand the band Journey. This game though is impressive.

I love a good art style but none of this looks even slightly appealing or pretty to me, sorry : / 
The sand ripple effect sure is weird though lol

@Disgustoid: Brad and Patrick pretty much said that they were afraid to show everything for fear of "spoiling" other people's experiences. Which leaves things... inconclusive at best.

And to the on-going conversation: Grrr, how dare developers make games that don't target my demographic, my rarified tastes, my impeccable judgement. Curse you mainstream / indie developers and the masses / elitists you cater to.

I'd be good with late title card of the year right now.

I'm sold. I love weird, abstract and kinda atmospheric games like this.

@sofakingcool said:

This is an example of falling up your own ass. There is nothing inherently beautiful about this game from an artistic or technological viewpoint. This is boring, its not stimulating to the senses. its an attempt to legitimize games as art which there is no need to do. Video games are art, by definition. This is an exercise in masturbation and I am really disappointed that so many at giantbomb cant see through the thin vale.

I disagree. While it's perhaps not technologically impressive, I think it is a beautiful game from an design perspective. I don't think it is boring at all, it intrigues me and it seems to stimulate my senses. Also, I don't understand the need to call it out as an attempt at legitimizing games as art while thatgamecompany has never, to my knowledge, made such a claim with regard to this game. Why do you feel the need to use such harsh words regarding a game that's not even out yet? If people don't like it, they won't buy it, so what are you afraid of?

Vinny is gonna bring a bucket of sand in the office to troll Brad when the game comes out.

The way games press falls over these half assed "artsy" games is pretty pathetic.

Random free animated screen saver > Flower

why do I watch these quick looks even though I don't have a ps3. something must be wrong with me

The way games press falls over these half assed "artsy" games is pretty pathetic.

Random free animated screen saver > Flower

"Oh noo, I don't own a ps3, what ever shall I do?!"

Well I got a 360 for Limbo, you can get a PS3 for Journey.

Now of course I learn Limbo is being released on Steam & PS3 but I have a feeling thatgamecompany are not going multiplatform.

Stunning. 

So it's an artsy game that looks good and has weak gameplay. Stop the press!

I'm loving it. Wow.

I don't get why people complain about thatganecompany's games being too artsy. When I sat down and played Flower I wasn't enjoying it because it was "art" I was enjoying it because it was different and I did not know what was going to happen next. This game seems to cover the same ground in a different way. I can see myself enjoying this as both exploring and discovering new things will be interesting and seeing a random person in my game that has no opportunity to grief or yell at me will be fun.

This game makes me wish I had a PS3.

Exploring the art of immersion by getting rid of traditional game elements is a worthy goal. I'm very interested in these attempts. Sure they might not work, but how will we know until we try?

This looks so great. So chill and meditative. Games like this are what will push gaming into the future. Not for exactly what it is doing but because it is doing it. That Game Company completely ignores gaming conventions, and even if you don't like their games, you will see the benefits from their willingness to branch out into new territory in the gaming industry as a whole.

@just_nonplussed: By art of immersion I mean giving the player a feeling of being in a seamless world, evoking emotions etc. Doing these things can be hard when you had HUD elements, xp popping up on screen, or the variety of other traditional game elements. I'm not saying these "art" games have perfected it, but i'm curious to see people try. I'm not saying I want traditional games to go away either. I would be very angry if they did as they are my favorite type of games. It's just that no matter how much I enjoyed Bioshock and Red Dead Redemption's immersion there are areas where I wonder if lessons could be learned from games like Journey. I think for example Shadow of the Colossus is an interesting hybrid.

So I'll type this as I watch. So far it looks pretty pretentious. Ok so you have no arms and the majority of the game is walking? Really? Of couse the game reviewers are gonna eat this shit up. It has a nice look to it, I'll give it that. It looks good. However it just seems like there is very little to do expect walk and rarely jump. Is this even a game or more of a interactive movie? Is it just me or they really overlooking or forgiving anything wrong with this game and just "sucking it off". So they didn't put feet so they didn't have t model anything, so they are really lazy, haha I'm kidding with that one. Seems like it'll be short, like 4 hours short. 

Sleepless nights

Losing ground

I'm reaching for you, you, you

@NoelVeiga said:

@High_Nunez said:

@just_nonplussed said:

@teekomeeko said:

@bkbroiler said:

@supercubedude said:

@Rocospi said:

Please get other people other than Brad to do these before he blows his load all over the QLs.

I wish Jeff had been on this. I think it would be more useful to have one person who's clearly into it and someone who's skeptical.

I was just gonna say, I'm glad its Patrick and Brad in this QL. Glad to have a lack of cynicism.

Pretty much my thoughts. It's okay to be into a game, it's okay to praise it, and it's definitely okay to be objectively critical, but Jeff shits on everything artistic 100% of the time, so his opinion on Journey or any game like Journey is automatically moot to me.

Yeah, Jeff's 'opinion' would be him making fun of the game. He's willfully ignorant of anything that is even a tiny bit artistic.

I disagree. I think he's just skeptical of video games that go too far out of its way to arrogate itself as a work of art.

I don't think you're disagreeing. He's automatically skeptical of videogames that try to become works of art, so he's cynical about games that actually are a work of art. Which in turn makes him one of those nerdy guys that don't want other people getting their dirty hands on entertainment he thinks he owns. Which is a pity, because in many other ways Jeff is one of the good critics out there. It's just that his commitment to keeping videogames being exclusively a male teenager's playground is extremely frustrating to me. You may be disinterested in Flower if your tastes require a person with a gun to star in your videogame, I get that, but even then, if you have a vested interest in gaming as a whole, there is no way you can seriously see what thatgamecompany does as anything but a great thing for the gaming world.

I think any game that does something different is great for the gaming world, and I'm not hating on thatgamecompany. I do, however feel that this game is being grossly mis-hyped. Every single time a game comes out that's like this, it becomes a rallying point for the games-as-art crowd, to wit, Braid, Limbo, Flower, etc. With the exception of Flower - which I admit I never played since I only have an X-Box - I enjoyed all those games for there entertainment value, not any artistic value which I felt were overblown. This hype is due in no small part to the often vocal figures behind these games who always make it seem like their game is an artistic oasis in the desert of action game ubiquity.

If it's an entertaining game, then I'd love to play it. From the twenty minutes I've seen - which I'll admit isn't enough to draw conclusions - Journey looks okay so far; not a masterpiece. As for all the self-aggrandizing, and posturing about high art aspirations, I'm not interested. Your point about Jeff, whether your right or wrong about him specifically, probably does represent a lot of detractors out there, and your frustration is understandable. With respect, you take your video games more seriously than I do, which is fine. It goes to show that the hype machine either attracts or repels. As for me, a video games biggest appeal is its ability to entertain,whether it's puzzles, storytelling, friendly competition, and yes sometimes machine guns. If this game favors it's atmosphere, and it's high art pretension over actually entertaining me, then I'm unsold (which I'll be anyway now that I think about it, since I doubt it'll come to X-Box).

BTW, sorry for the long reply, I was feeling verbose at the moment.

@High_Nunez said:

@just_nonplussed said:

@teekomeeko said:

@bkbroiler said:

@supercubedude said:

@Rocospi said:

Please get other people other than Brad to do these before he blows his load all over the QLs.

I wish Jeff had been on this. I think it would be more useful to have one person who's clearly into it and someone who's skeptical.

I was just gonna say, I'm glad its Patrick and Brad in this QL. Glad to have a lack of cynicism.

Pretty much my thoughts. It's okay to be into a game, it's okay to praise it, and it's definitely okay to be objectively critical, but Jeff shits on everything artistic 100% of the time, so his opinion on Journey or any game like Journey is automatically moot to me.

Yeah, Jeff's 'opinion' would be him making fun of the game. He's willfully ignorant of anything that is even a tiny bit artistic.

I disagree. I think he's just skeptical of video games that go too far out of its way to arrogate itself as a work of art.

I don't think you're disagreeing. He's automatically skeptical of videogames that try to become works of art, so he's cynical about games that actually are a work of art. Which in turn makes him one of those nerdy guys that don't want other people getting their dirty hands on entertainment he thinks he owns.   Which is a pity, because in many other ways Jeff is one of the good critics out there. It's just that his commitment to keeping videogames being exclusively a male teenager's playground is extremely frustrating to me. You may be disinterested in Flower if your tastes require a person with a gun to star in your videogame, I get that, but even then, if you have a vested interest in gaming as a whole, there is no way you can seriously see what thatgamecompany does as anything but a great thing for the gaming world.

@High_Nunez said:

@NoelVeiga said:

@High_Nunez said:

@just_nonplussed said:

@teekomeeko said:

@bkbroiler said:

@supercubedude said:

@Rocospi said:

Please get other people other than Brad to do these before he blows his load all over the QLs.

I wish Jeff had been on this. I think it would be more useful to have one person who's clearly into it and someone who's skeptical.

I was just gonna say, I'm glad its Patrick and Brad in this QL. Glad to have a lack of cynicism.

Pretty much my thoughts. It's okay to be into a game, it's okay to praise it, and it's definitely okay to be objectively critical, but Jeff shits on everything artistic 100% of the time, so his opinion on Journey or any game like Journey is automatically moot to me.

Yeah, Jeff's 'opinion' would be him making fun of the game. He's willfully ignorant of anything that is even a tiny bit artistic.

I disagree. I think he's just skeptical of video games that go too far out of its way to arrogate itself as a work of art.

I don't think you're disagreeing. He's automatically skeptical of videogames that try to become works of art, so he's cynical about games that actually are a work of art. Which in turn makes him one of those nerdy guys that don't want other people getting their dirty hands on entertainment he thinks he owns. Which is a pity, because in many other ways Jeff is one of the good critics out there. It's just that his commitment to keeping videogames being exclusively a male teenager's playground is extremely frustrating to me. You may be disinterested in Flower if your tastes require a person with a gun to star in your videogame, I get that, but even then, if you have a vested interest in gaming as a whole, there is no way you can seriously see what thatgamecompany does as anything but a great thing for the gaming world.

I think any game that does something different is great for the gaming world, and I'm not hating on thatgamecompany. I do, however feel that this game is being grossly mis-hyped. Every single time a game comes out that's like this, it becomes a rallying point for the games-as-art crowd, to wit, Braid, Limbo, Flower, etc. With the exception of Flower - which I admit I never played since I only have an X-Box - I enjoyed all those games for there entertainment value, not any artistic value which I felt were overblown. This hype is due in no small part to the often vocal figures behind these games who always make it seem like their game is an artistic oasis in the desert of action game ubiquity.

If it's an entertaining game, then I'd love to play it. From the twenty minutes I've seen - which I'll admit isn't enough to draw conclusions - Journey looks okay so far; not a masterpiece. As for all the self-aggrandizing, and posturing about high art aspirations, I'm not interested. Your point about Jeff, whether your right or wrong about him specifically, probably does represent a lot of detractors out there, and your frustration is understandable. With respect, you take your video games more seriously than I do, which is fine. It goes to show that the hype machine either attracts or repels. As for me, a video games biggest appeal is its ability to entertain,whether it's puzzles, storytelling, friendly competition, and yes sometimes machine guns. If this game favors it's atmosphere, and it's high art pretension over actually entertaining me, then I'm unsold (which I'll be anyway now that I think about it, since I doubt it'll come to X-Box).

BTW, sorry for the long reply, I was feeling verbose at the moment.

Sorry to butt into your argument - but I think the problem comes when people start to think that a certain artistic medium is for one sort of expression only, which Jeff (as much as I love him) seems to think. This stops him being able to view games like this (of who's quality I have no idea) with an open mind as he can only conceive of games as one thing.  Games like this are important because they demonstrate the ability of the medium to step outside the narrow constraints it is normally imprisoned in, and this brings it closer to artforms such as film, music and art in which there can be an accepted mainstream but also a distinctive leftfield and more conceptual arena.   I understand that some people just want to have "fun," but other people want to have both "fun" and see games develop as a medium so we can both be entertained and intellectually stimulated. This doesn't have to happen at the same time but when it does it is great. The problem with Jeff's cynisism is that he is an major arbiter of taste in this industry and it would be better if he didn't just dismiss games because of what he believes their artistic ambitions to be. If something is rubbish, call it out, but don't go in predjudiced and try to understand things in their own terms.  

Perfect game for Brad. You can't die, and you don't have to learn how to play it. You just run around and look at stuff.

@phantomzxro said:

@leebmx said:

@High_Nunez said:

@NoelVeiga said:

@High_Nunez said:

@just_nonplussed said:

@teekomeeko said:

@bkbroiler said:

@supercubedude said:

@Rocospi said:

Please get other people other than Brad to do these before he blows his load all over the QLs.

I wish Jeff had been on this. I think it would be more useful to have one person who's clearly into it and someone who's skeptical.

I was just gonna say, I'm glad its Patrick and Brad in this QL. Glad to have a lack of cynicism.

Pretty much my thoughts. It's okay to be into a game, it's okay to praise it, and it's definitely okay to be objectively critical, but Jeff shits on everything artistic 100% of the time, so his opinion on Journey or any game like Journey is automatically moot to me.

Yeah, Jeff's 'opinion' would be him making fun of the game. He's willfully ignorant of anything that is even a tiny bit artistic.

I disagree. I think he's just skeptical of video games that go too far out of its way to arrogate itself as a work of art.

I don't think you're disagreeing. He's automatically skeptical of videogames that try to become works of art, so he's cynical about games that actually are a work of art. Which in turn makes him one of those nerdy guys that don't want other people getting their dirty hands on entertainment he thinks he owns. Which is a pity, because in many other ways Jeff is one of the good critics out there. It's just that his commitment to keeping videogames being exclusively a male teenager's playground is extremely frustrating to me. You may be disinterested in Flower if your tastes require a person with a gun to star in your videogame, I get that, but even then, if you have a vested interest in gaming as a whole, there is no way you can seriously see what thatgamecompany does as anything but a great thing for the gaming world.

I think any game that does something different is great for the gaming world, and I'm not hating on thatgamecompany. I do, however feel that this game is being grossly mis-hyped. Every single time a game comes out that's like this, it becomes a rallying point for the games-as-art crowd, to wit, Braid, Limbo, Flower, etc. With the exception of Flower - which I admit I never played since I only have an X-Box - I enjoyed all those games for there entertainment value, not any artistic value which I felt were overblown. This hype is due in no small part to the often vocal figures behind these games who always make it seem like their game is an artistic oasis in the desert of action game ubiquity.

If it's an entertaining game, then I'd love to play it. From the twenty minutes I've seen - which I'll admit isn't enough to draw conclusions - Journey looks okay so far; not a masterpiece. As for all the self-aggrandizing, and posturing about high art aspirations, I'm not interested. Your point about Jeff, whether your right or wrong about him specifically, probably does represent a lot of detractors out there, and your frustration is understandable. With respect, you take your video games more seriously than I do, which is fine. It goes to show that the hype machine either attracts or repels. As for me, a video games biggest appeal is its ability to entertain,whether it's puzzles, storytelling, friendly competition, and yes sometimes machine guns. If this game favors it's atmosphere, and it's high art pretension over actually entertaining me, then I'm unsold (which I'll be anyway now that I think about it, since I doubt it'll come to X-Box).

BTW, sorry for the long reply, I was feeling verbose at the moment.

Sorry to butt into your argument - but I think the problem comes when people start to think that a certain artistic medium is for one sort of expression only, which Jeff (as much as I love him) seems to think. This stops him being able to view games like this (of who's quality I have no idea) with an open mind as he can only conceive of games as one thing. Games like this are important because they demonstrate the ability of the medium to step outside the narrow constraints it is normally imprisoned in, and this brings it closer to artforms such as film, music and art in which there can be an accepted mainstream but also a distinctive leftfield and more conceptual arena. I understand that some people just want to have "fun," but other people want to have both "fun" and see games develop as a medium so we can both be entertained and intellectually stimulated. This doesn't have to happen at the same time but when it does it is great. The problem with Jeff's cynisism is that he is an major arbiter of taste in this industry and it would be better if he didn't just dismiss games because of what he believes their artistic ambitions to be. If something is rubbish, call it out, but don't go in predjudiced and try to understand things in their own terms.

Not to make this debate longer then it needs to be i would just like to add i agree with the last poster here. I think OP is focusing way to much in the idea that people are trying to pass this as art. So what, in my mind i don't get mad when people say games are not art or that games are art. Video games have every chance to be art but more impartantly we just need to be proud of our medium. Playing games like gears, halo and GTA are fun but its not the only way to play games so any game that tries something new or can build a game around not having a gun or killing anybody is needed sometimes. It's refreshing when games can break the mold and be unqiue and different, it's great showing a game that is unqiue to a non gamer who only think games are Gta or halo. So i just can't agree with hating on a game just because it has a high arty vibe. I don't think this game is over hyped because come on how much coverage will journey really get over MW3 which will be a fun game too. All i'm saying is let this game have its 15 minutes of fame. If we shit on every game that tries to be different then we will be playing the same games over and over. I feel quicklook should be natural and not try to build some kind of objective that's what a review is for. Even if the game is bad in their eyes i want them to still try to have fun with it or laugh about it. There can still be enjoyment in playing a bad game, but its no fun when some one is just hating on the game with no real reason why. If it comes to that they should not be in the quicklook or even do one.

TL;DR

@NoelVeiga said:

It is somewhat disheartening that Jeff doesn't appear to have a very progressive mind when dealing with video games. However, it's only really a big problem if he also gets a lot of followers who simply take that at face value without thinking for themselves. Jeff partly jokes I think...he has this duder bro persona, which is kind of entertaining at times, but I don't know - I think if I were in the position of having such a large audience I would rather try to educate and reason, than be completely ignorant. Anyway, when we know others' opinions, we know our own.  However, I maintain that Pac-Man or Double Dragon are just as valid as art if Journey is. All games tell stories, and tell players things about themselves. Not just pretty eye-candy like Flower.

I totally agree with Brad, you should be able to control the camera:

@NoelVeiga said:

I don't think you're disagreeing. He's automatically skeptical of videogames that try to become works of art, so he's cynical about games that actually are a work of art. Which in turn makes him one of those nerdy guys that don't want other people getting their dirty hands on entertainment he thinks he owns. Which is a pity, because in many other ways Jeff is one of the good critics out there. It's just that his commitment to keeping videogames being exclusively a male teenager's playground is extremely frustrating to me. You may be disinterested in Flower if your tastes require a person with a gun to star in your videogame, I get that, but even then, if you have a vested interest in gaming as a whole, there is no way you can seriously see what thatgamecompany does as anything but a great thing for the gaming world.

I think any game that does something different is great for the gaming world, and I'm not hating on thatgamecompany. I do, however feel that this game is being grossly mis-hyped. Every single time a game comes out that's like this, it becomes a rallying point for the games-as-art crowd, to wit, Braid, Limbo, Flower, etc. With the exception of Flower - which I admit I never played since I only have an X-Box - I enjoyed all those games for there entertainment value, not any artistic value which I felt were overblown. This hype is due in no small part to the often vocal figures behind these games who always make it seem like their game is an artistic oasis in the desert of action game ubiquity.

If it's an entertaining game, then I'd love to play it. From the twenty minutes I've seen - which I'll admit isn't enough to draw conclusions - Journey looks okay so far; not a masterpiece. As for all the self-aggrandizing, and posturing about high art aspirations, I'm not interested. Your point about Jeff, whether your right or wrong about him specifically, probably does represent a lot of detractors out there, and your frustration is understandable. With respect, you take your video games more seriously than I do, which is fine. It goes to show that the hype machine either attracts or repels. As for me, a video games biggest appeal is its ability to entertain,whether it's puzzles, storytelling, friendly competition, and yes sometimes machine guns. If this game favors it's atmosphere, and it's high art pretension over actually entertaining me, then I'm unsold (which I'll be anyway now that I think about it, since I doubt it'll come to X-Box).

BTW, sorry for the long reply, I was feeling verbose at the moment.

Art game or not, Journey looks like it could be a fun game. I love exploration but I sometimes hate having to deal with annoying (but not necessarily difficult) enemies getting in the way. Enemies such as those damn tigers in Tomb Raider Underworld or those shadowy things in Ico that tries to grab onto Yorda; so annoying!
 
If I have a PS3, I'd get this in a heartbeat.

I know it's no longer okay to consider any videogames art, that if you dare think anything of the sort you're some kind of self-absorbed wanker etc. But I'm glad there's now someone else at Giant Bomb that can sit in with Brad on Quick Looks at games like this and appreciate them.

Journey has been on my radar for ages and I really hope it comes out this year. I just want to explore every nook and cranny and see how the online works as it sounds very interesting.

This is nothing new. Stop pretending it is.
 
Go play Sentinel or something.

Late title card doubles as a tutorial. Gotta love efficiency! 
 
I appreciate thatgamecompany's commitment to thinking outside the box. Been looking forward to this for a while, and it seems pretty much what I expected/wanted out of it.
 
Lasty: That shtick of Journey-induced confusion on the Bombcast was hilarious. But the whole "zitgotGUNS?" thing is doing diversity no favours. Jeff's oldschool-hater persona get's pretty frustrating at points. 
Guess I got trolled. But still. Seems a lot of easily-ipressionable folks are empowered by his self-induced (or feigned) ignorance. Not to say everyone's gotta enjoy TGC's games ('cause they won't). But they're still good for the industry, and the sooner we accept them, the sooner other members of the press will stop over-hyping anything they can have a "games-as-art" argument about, and the people who like chill games will check them out, and the people who don't simply won't. Then and only then will this shitty, circular conversation stop.

God this looks fucking fantastic

Mr Klepek, I shall heed your advice. I stopped watching around the location switch point when they mention the desire to have been able to go in fresh.

The QL to that point is the extent of my knowledge of Journey, I'm definitely on board.

Patrick should be careful with his "great experiences" with 12 year olds.

@drag said:

@High_Nunez: There's definitely a lot of emotion & excitement flowing around when something like this comes along. As one of the 'pro' guys if sides are gonna be drawn, I feel it too, and feel it slightly annoying sometimes also. Like, I love Braid to pieces - it's one of my favourite - but to see Limbo on plenty of GOTY lists really confused me. It's good but not that special. But hey, when games such as this - games that are just made with slightly different aims & emotions in mind - become more commonplace, they can be judged to appreciate what they are, not encourage what they represent.

At the end of the day there is certainly more than enough room in the video game world for games like this, and that's awesome. In a perfect world no one would have to proclaim this game as anything other than what it is, and let it speak for itself.

I think the problem is, there is very little game in this game.

won't be looking at the whole thing cause I don't want to spoil my experiancewith the game