There’s a section of the acclaimed Windows adventure game The Neverhood entitled “The Hall of Records”. It’s essentially a (very) long gag – screen after screen of rooms, full to the brim with quite bizarre text. It takes what feels like hours to make it through with main character Klaymen’s agonisingly slow walk speed, but you have to do it. Waiting at the end of this absolute meandering torture – which takes forever even if you completely ignore the lore hung on the walls – is a single collectable token, essential to completion. It’s a sick joke, and one with a double punchline; you’ve now got to walk back. No shortcuts.
You want to really laugh? The Longing is that same principle, applied to a full game. Everything takes forever to do. And it’s all by design, which makes it something of a tricky prospect to review. Do you reward the game for evoking an atmosphere that it very much intended to evoke? Do you criticise the game for said atmosphere being phenomenally dull even though it’s absolutely meant to make you feel that way? There’s really no way to win. Thankfully, as we all know, winning isn’t everything. So let’s get very cross with The Longing and call it names.
Playing as a “Shade”, you’re tasked with waking up the nebulous, mysterious King after he’s finished sleeping, left to while away 400 days of real time, kept track of by a countdown clock perpetually visible at the top of the screen. This counts down whether or not you’re playing, which presents you with the compelling option of playing something else considering it doesn’t actually matter what you do in-game, but no – apparently one of the main criteria of reviewing a game is actually having to play it. Pfft!
So “play it” we did, for some value of “play”. We walked around the near-empty, enormous and confusing network of caves at the slowest speed imaginable, occasionally picking up bits of coal from the floor or enacting boring activities (such as drawing a picture) in (again) real time, with a sloth-like pace. There are books to read, too – full books, free from the rigours of copyright law – so you can have your little Shade sit and read them from cover to cover, if you please. Or, alternatively, you could read them on your phone or something. For free. Because they’re free.
That’s a little reductive, we know, but The Longing pushed us into frustration very quickly. Getting around takes so long and there’s so little of note worth seeing. It’s pitched as an exercise in patience, almost a test, and while that does theoretically raise interesting questions about our relationship with games (are they all, ultimately, a waste of time!?), in practice it just doesn’t bear out as a compelling experience.
It’d be remiss of us to claim that there hasn’t been passion and thought put into this. Clever ideas abound – you’re ordered not to leave by The King at the start, but will you listen to him? There are multiple endings to find and plenty of locations to explore, should the desire take you. The visuals and sound are quite atmospheric throughout and, quite frankly, you’ve got to applaud the audacity of it and the commitment to the 'bit'.
Unfortunately, The Longing is supposed to be a game, and it is vying for your cash. That’s not some lazy dismissal of the experience as “not a game” because it doesn’t fit a narrow criteria of what this medium 'should' be, incidentally – we just feel that at its core a game has to be compelling, whether arcade action, walking simulator or anything in between. And The Longing pushes its 'waiting' gimmick so hard that while it unambiguously succeeds at what it’s trying to do, we found it almost impossible to care.
Similarly bleak indie title A Dark Room offers perhaps the closest comparison – another idle game with a borderline nihilistic feel – but even without graphics to speak of, A Dark Room was a thoroughly enjoyable plunge into the abyss. The Longing feels like a punchline in search of a joke, like hearing the tail end of a comedy routine that requires a context that it never provides. This is the central problem; there is content here. There is more to it than it appears. Events that only occur at certain intervals, or take a full in-game week to occur. There are conditions that will change the nature of the way time flows, there are ideas here that are worth thinking about. It's definitely an interesting game, but only in an abstract sense.
The Longing is incredibly difficult to review. Taken in the terms it presents itself within, for what it's clearly meant to be, the experience it wants to offer? It's a ten-out-of-ten unqualified success. This mediation on loneliness, repetition and boredom is, indeed, an effective mediation on loneliness, repetition and boredom: but that means that it really is lonely, repetitive and boring. There's something to be said for deliberately frustrating the player, as arthouse films can deliberately frustrate the viewer - for example, in the case of Derek Jarman's Blue. And it's remarkable in itself to compare a video game to that film.
Do we recommend The Longing? No. We wouldn't recommend Blue, either. That doesn't mean neither have merit; it just means that neither of them are very fun. No, games don't necessarily need to be fun. We're sure that even writing that sentence has irritated some people, but it's true; the art form has come a long way.
Conclusion
We can't lie — we hated The Longing. We hated every second of playing it for review. Is it a resounding success at presenting all of its themes? Is it thought-provoking in a way that few games manage? Is it an exhausting slog we wouldn't wish on our worst enemies? The answer to all these questions is yes. But, with all that said, you cannot help but respect the developer's audacity and unwavering commitment to their principles. What the game sets out to do it accomplishes with flying colours, and it's filled with clever ideas and meditations.
Ultimately, The Longing is one of those video games that defies traditional scoring metrics. What kind of score would you give a game that succeeds so triumphantly at being utterly, utterly tedious? A one? A ten? It feels inadequate and somewhat trite to split the difference, but here we are.
Comments (129)
Note: you can cheat and move the switch internal clock forward to see a few more things
It’s absolutely fantastic. It’s also hideously boring. I kinda love it for its audacity.
Quarantine: The Game!
An... entertaining review, no less. Can't say I blame you for how you chose to go about rating it.
A game I will be staying well away from, but I both know this game has some kind of audience, and I respect those people.
But I prefer video games to, you know.... have gameplay.
i love it. it's brilliant. but yeah it's really boring. I cn't play it for more than 10 min
Dang. I never thought I'd see The Neverhood referenced here let alone Blue!
This also remind me of some of the (entirely optional) unlockable films in The Witness.
Waiting on that any% speedrun from Alex now...
So, it's a deliberately boring game with nothing to do, and it rubs your nose in it every second you play. And this is the 'point,' so somehow it gets excused for this.
lol how pretentious.
You know the review scale is broken when a game with literally nothing to do, and that makes an exercise out of being boring as hell, gets a 5/10
Not that I'm against the selective use of boredom for artistic effect, but, as the review states, this is a "punchline in search of a joke."
Not had a good OK Computer memory session for a while.
Nice Radiohead reference!
I think it's a given that you should rate the game after how well it accomplishes what it sets out to do. It shouldn't be that difficult. Giving this game a bad score because you find it too boring and tedious is like giving a Kirby game a bad score because you think it's too cute. And you didn't even mention mechanics that let's you speed up time... I give this review a 1/10.
I suppose that waiting for a sale doesn't count as waiting in the game...
Phew, for a minute there…
Thank you for the review. While the premise of this game intrigued me, I am certain the reality of this game will frustrate me.
And there is o so little time for o so many games.
One thing I’ll say about the review is that it’s a complete disservice to Derek Jarman to say that Blue is intended to frustrate the viewer or that it ‘isn’t fun’. It really, really isn’t. Jarman was dying of AIDS-related complications and Blue was his last work. The man was so horrifically ill that all he could see was in shades of the colour blue. That’s why the film is one single shot of International Klein Blue. And it’s not like that’s the entire film, it’s essentially an audio essay ruminating on his life, death, random musings and such. An audio track plays the entire time which is the point of the movie. I totally recommend people see it on a big projector that does it justice. It’s just a bit gross to compare it to something like this game when the lack of visuals has such a heartbreaking and personal meaning. It would be a lot more fitting to compare it to 4’33”, John Cage’s composition of silence. It’s like saying Shoah isn’t as fun as Transformers: Age of Extinction. No, but AIDS and the Holocaust aren’t exactly fun subjects. They’re still important.
Sure this game is undeniably slow, but I myself (assumingly in the minority) really enjoy that premise. After all, this isn't a game meant for long bursts at all; I can just quickly ask Shade to do something or go somewhere, play something else in the meantime, and come back once he's done.
Also, @Strumpan is correct with the speed up mechanic; the comfier Shade's home is, the faster time goes whilst you're in there. More so if he's reading a book (which can be done whilst the game's closed, too).
This seems like a game that is designed to frustrate REVIEWERS, but not necessarily players. I'm guessing I can easily play this in the background here and there while doing real work at my job every weekday. I don't necessarily have to think about the game, or ponder why it exists or what it's doing. I don't have to review it or rate it or explain it to anyone. I can kind of just live with it as an ambient, nearly subliminal experience (that nonetheless has some progression and long-term stuff going on). As a player that seems to have some merit. But it's not what reviewers do, fundamentally. You need to play for at least a few hours or so, intentionally, with critical lenses on, then write X amount of words on it and judge the experience. That seems antithetical to the experience of the game, inherently! No one is to blame, of course, but it means that any single review is not going to be an indicator of what this game is actually like to people who intend to be in for the long haul, for varying values of "in".
I appreciate this review
I know that this game is unique and interesting, but, well, it doesn't fit under my criteria of 'game'. Games, in general, are fun, if played the right way. Whether its a board game, golf, or a video game, it should be fun. If it isn't fun, then don't call it a game! Unfortunately we never came up with a name for electronic software similar to games, but with one easily spottable difference being that, well, it isn't fun! Instead we decided to be mean and call certain things walking simulators.
I just see Mr Burns
If I ever get that bored, I will buy the game.
@nessisonett I was coming here to make the exact same point you just have about Jarman's Blue, though I shall now refrain, for you have explained it with much more eloquence than I could have, thanks.
@nessisonett Was talking about my personal reaction to Blue when I originally saw it. I had no experience of much in the way of experimental cinema and I was furious at how I'd just spent my time. It took me a few hours to start to "get it" at all, and I made the comparison because there's a similar disconnect between the expectations of a game and the expectations I had of a film at the time I saw it. I didn't have the space to be more nuanced because I was reviewing The Longing, not Blue. Sorry that you felt I was undermining Blue; not my intention. I would have used the word "challenge" rather than "frustrate", but the meaning of the former is more distinctive when it comes to video games.
I’m honestly excited to play this. Looks awesome
@Strumpan I did, in fact, mention that you can alter the flow of time. I just didn't go into detail on the specifics of how because it felt like something more pleasurable to notice/discover organically.
It has multiple endings? Does it take 400 days for each one?
It’s an Idle game. Perfect for people who work mundane, boring jobs. Great mobile type game, offline and requires very little skill. It’s refreshing for a game on a console to have these mechanics.
Reminds me of a little version of Myst:Riven.
Giving the game a 5 just because you think it succeeds in what it sets out to do is just nonsense. If you think the game is totally rubbish you should give a totally rubbish score. And what is there against giving a game a big fat Zero? Ok maybe not this game, but if a game is rubbish and I feel the developers didn't care then I would give a big fat zero.
@StuartGipp is that a Radiohead reference???
So I'm assuming in order to get this game to actually have 400 real days worth of content, that means they have to limit your progression fairly often right? If you could just play non-stop, you'd probably see all there is to see in no time. So doesn't that mean this would be sort of a pick up and play for a few minutes a day type of game before quitting and going on to something else? That doesn't seem like it would get too boring unless I'm not understanding...
@Strumpan Erm... No that doesn't hold any water. Giving a game a bad score because its boring is justifiable, giving a game a bad score because its cute isn't.
While I can see that you struggled with how to even consider rating this game, and I appreciate that transparency, I respectfully strongly disagree with your conclusion.
There's one thing we agree on, a traditional metric is a disservice to this game, but I have to assert that, given how important numerical values are to small, independent, and deeply ambitious games, a 5 from a major site such as yours is irresponsible.
For some gamers, myself among them, The Longing is nothing short of extraordinary.
The Longing rewards patience with an incredible and moving gameplay experience. You are constantly instructed to wait, and if you follow this simple prompt, you discover deeply rewarding gameplay that ties fundamentally into characterization unlike anything that's been put into a game.
There is no doubt that it will frustrate many gamers, and that fact should be explicit. But simply trying something new doesn't make it pretentious, nor even audacious – it's simply authentic.
Each frame and moment and secret is beautifully drawn, and for the right gamer, The Longing is a revelation.
Maybe it's because I played the PC games of old, when a single screen might take 5 or 6 minutes to load, but I have the patience to play this game. It's aggravatingly slow, but if you resign yourself to it, it's a lovely chance for meditation. The thoughts that pop into your head are fascinating. Reflections on what video games are, existential quandaries, comparisons to other tedious things we do in life. It's all very Zen if you let it just flow.
I love the concept of the game and exploring for the first few hours was a delight but it did fall away a little bit - I love what was being attempted though. I feel like this review wants to have its cake and eat it a little bit unfortunately - landing on a score of 5 for a game you say you hated is definitely a weird choice, and the pontificating on what a game has to be (compelling, according to the review), while also playing the other side of the fence and giving it leeway for what it attempted to do. I think you kind of have to pick one as based on your reaction to it, it's either a 9 or 10 for fulfilling the brief exactly, or a 0 or 1 for being something you say you despised.
Anyway, I'm actually more disappointed that the game is too short and is over too soon, especially since it's whole idea is playing the waiting game over 400 days. Could have done with more areas, pathways or endings being timelocked really.
@StuartGipp I'd also like to add that when Blue premiered in the UK it was simultaneously broadcast on both TV and radio. So I know we all see it presented as a film but like @nessisonett said you could just take it as an audio drama.
@StuartGipp Oh, you're right. So I give my reading of your review a 2/10. And it makes the review really close to a 2/10 as well.
@doodlewhizz I think that's a solid point, I could definitely see room for more time-locked content, as it's so fun to watch unveil initially.
I do not understand the reviewers dilemma. They thought the game was boring but accomplished the developers goals so they didn't know how to score it. If I play a game, I make my determination on how much I enjoy playing it. Sure graphics, music, controls, etc are important and play into the enjoyment, but at the end of the day how much I like or dislike a game comes to my own enjoyment as I played. Games are made for entertainment, so if they are not entertaining to you they have failed in their purpose. Other people may get some enjoyment out of the game and that is fine, their reviews will reflect that, but your review should reflect your interaction with the game. If you don't like a game the score should reflect that. Perhaps admitting this is not a type of game you enjoy would be fair, but when you interacted with the game what did you get out of it? That's how I analyze each game I play and I'm not sure why you would take into account what others intended or got out of the experience into your review.
@Gavintendo Haha now thanks to you that's all I see!
This review brings to mind an old Insert Credit article by Brandon Lee, about why videogames will never have their Citizen Kane:
"And here then, is the sticking point; the reason that gaming as is will never have its Kane: Those industry jokes I mentioned --Takeshi, Desert Bus — are not fun games. If they were, they'd be entirely above any type of criticism. This has always been the deciding factor; if a game is fun, it's a good game. If it's not fun, it's bad. This, though, is an almost farcically bad way to judge art. Art is as expressive as language itself — more, even."
Personally, I categorically do not think the purpose of videogames is to be fun. The purpose of videogames, like the purpose of all art, is to be interesting and meaningful. Being fun is one way to accomplish this, but there are many other ways.
Is there truly an ending that would merit seeing this through?
@Ralizah Seems like one of those experimental games that kind of didn't hit all the right marks in execution. Hope the devs address some of the issues in some patches if they choose to do so.
I think the game is brilliant. Based on how the game is "played", it's the perfect example of an indie.
If I had to play this game for a review I would probably hate it too. But playing it on my own pace I find it to be brilliant.
@Screen Get this, it has multiple endings!
@CBordo,
Its a complex topic and I read different opinions that all have a truth in it to a certain extent. But in the end I think a review should be informative and a matter of opinion. So if the reviewer didn't like it, it should be reflected in the score. The information still might be enough to judge whether a game might be something for you or not. Sometimes a reviewer flame-grills a game to the ground, a game that interested you. And that might piss you off, but keep in mind that in the end its just a opinion. Its always usefull to read some other reviews too.
But taken from this review (and a video-review that I saw) I think there might still be some "merit" for me in it. As a artsy title, as a zen title. Maybe someday at a discount?
Honestly... WHY ?!?
@nessisonett Wow, just ticked Shoah off my NintendoLife bingo card. Did not see that coming.
Great review. I think it's spot on. I wouldn't give the game a 10 under any circumstances but it's functional and is doing what it set out to do, so giving it a 1 or a 0 wouldn't make sense. It's one of those games that demands the potential consumer look beyond the score and find out what the game is really all about... as we all should when researching a potential purchase.
I just can't comprehend the logic of producing a game like this and expecting people to pay for it, people who have things to do...there are even more effective ways to 'waste' time. 400 real days? Could have at least made it a more reasonable number like, I don't know, 90.
@TryToBeHopeful To be fair, I’m not sure there are many instances on this site when it’s particularly relevant 😅
Beat it. Played sessions between MHR. I found it to be compelling enough. It does not have to take 400 days. Folks sure like to hone in on the idea that it "must" take that long and ridicule the game for such an unusual premise. Dislike it for other reasons if you must!
I love the little shade. He's a gloomy little thing in his isolation, I wanted to find him a happy ending.
@Crockin in 10 minutes you can go from a room to another. ahahahah. i played a lot first 2 days. well....i have 1 year to play it
For anyone reading who’s not satisfied with the score for one reason or another, know that everyone on the NL team understands the inelegance of the outcome we arrived at in this particular case.
Stuart makes it clear that he wasn’t a fan, but he’s also clear that the game has something to offer and was crafted with precision, care and intent. To give a very low score, or no score at all, would risk dismissal of the game entirely without digesting the full context of the review— something that’s important for any game, but especially here.
As Stu conveys, The Longing is not for everybody, but bearing in mind the very specific intention of the developer, it would be irresponsible to suggest it’s not for ANYBODY.
So, given the restrictions of the review format and an industry that revolves around attaching a number to every opinion, hopefully it makes sense.
@nessisonett
Just want to point out that 4'33'' was meant to explore ambiance and other sounds as music. It wasn't actually meant to be complete silence, but that is what it is generally thought of since there is no "proper music" from the performer(s).
@Shard1 Well yes, the composition is the environmental sounds surrounding the ‘silence’. Which honestly describes this game pretty well.
@YagaMaki why? If he does not like cute then it is justified. Remember reviews are opinions and not fact.
I dunno, from checking out this game on Steam and reading a bunch of the reviews, I think you may have under-scored it based on your own personal taste rather than the game's actual merits outside of purely your personal preference. I don't think you, as a professional journalist, should be scoring games based on what you personally like only but rather based on what the audience out there might get from them as well as the standard stuff like Presentation, Graphics, Music/Sound FX, Gameplay/Controls, Story, Lastability, Replayability. I would likely give up on this game after a few minutes of play myself based on what I've seen and read, which means it's likely not my cup of tea at the end of the day, but I also gave up on Super Metroid after an hour or so--every single one of the many times I've tried to play it.
@Ralizah I think getting more than just this reviewer's opinion is probably a good idea in a case like this. So why not check out the game's Steam page and watch some of the trailers on there, as well as look at a bunch of the literally thousands of user reviews (which have collectively rated it Very Positive) and maybe your opinion might shift just a little--I know mine did (and more than just a little): https://store.steampowered.com/app/893850/THE_LONGING/
There is no other way to review a game but on your own personal preference. You can break that down into categories like "presentation" or "graphics" but ultimately even those are judged by the reviewer's preference.
@Purgatorium I wanted to just not reply and avoid wasting my breath, but I decided to reply and waste my breath, except I'm not actually going to say something specific to debate your point either way--so hopefully you get my point and intention here.
I got this game and have probably played 2 hours, did a bit of reading a bit of walking found some moss! But even if I dont play again until the 400 th day I will feel happy. Can’t wait to find out what happens! Xx
7 years ago I was on metacritic to check scores before buying my games and the reviews that corresponded the best with my opinion were those of nintendolife so I started to follow this site but since around 1 year this is not the case anymore with the reviews objectivity and facts left away leaving opinions and feelings take over leaving us with 10/10 for games with mario in it and 5/10 on games that plays well but are not in the taste of the reviewer sorry but watch « switch up » on YouTube and learn how to make a review because you don’t have it anymore!
Well over 3000 user reviews have collectively rated it Very Positive on Steam:
https://store.steampowered.com/app/893850/THE_LONGING/
So there's that....
@impurekind tbh I trust Steam reviews less than even Metacritic user reviews. I've seen complete, unmitigated garbage get an "overwhelmingly positive reception" on Steam.
@dartmonkey My comment about the score was mostly just banter. Having not played the game, I'm in no position to seriously argue about it with someone who has.
@Ralizah I trust those 3000+ Steam users collectively far more than I do one reviewer at NintendoLife (or one reviewer on any site for that matter).
Also, for the record, the game has a 79 critic score and 7.4 user score on Metacritic.
@TryToBeHopeful How dare you! one must lose himself for a minute there, now and then.
I find scores in general useless. Aggregate scores are even more useless. Why would I trust the average opinion for something that is a personal preference for me? I do what munstahunta above described: find reviews with similar taste to you and follow them. If, over time, you find yourself moving away from their position, move on.
@Purgatorium Over how much time?
@impurekind Up to you.
@Purgatorium 400 days.
Could get boring, lonely and repetitive.
@impurekind So, pulled fifty reviews from this game on Steam that were listed in the "most helpful" section, and I singled out some of my favorites. These are all postive, btw
"I Wait"
"I grew a beard."
"It gets real lonely being in these caves. I have a few things to look forward to such as moss growing, and a little spider making a web. Looking forward to these small events keeps me going. I finally have a purpose."
"sad tamagotchi"
"THE GOOD:
THE BAD:
"This game fixed my insomnia and gives me another reason to stay alive for 400 more days"
"Lonely and depressing. Try to fill the void with material goods and media.
Just like real life."
"My spider friend will be done spinning me a web in a few days and it's all I have to look forward to in my life. 20/20"
"it was long."
"Buy the game. Build a fire. Sit on the chair. Read Moby ♥♥♥♥."
"fast paced, riveting gamplay."
"Got this game beginning of March 2020. Spending 400 days in cave doing random things seemed like an interesting concept. I'm now stuck at home with an order to shelter in place for the next several weeks. This game has become too real. 10/10"
"its like a depression tamagachi"
"I named my shade Eric and I love Eric so much. I spent so much time with him to make sure he wouldn't be bored and even tho I'm glad his longing is over I miss him already ;-;"
"Review coming in 400 days. You just have to wait to see it.
Edit: Getting closer to it."
So, out of fifty reviews, that's 15 you can flush down the toilet right away, and I left out a few less creative ones that were just whining about stay-at-home orders.
Now, I'm not going to pretend there aren't any eloquent or well-thought-out reviews on this game, but let's be clear: Steam reviews, collectively, are a joke. Quite literally: the site has struggled for years with reviews getting upvoted because they're trying to be funny, and, based on what I've pulled, that problem hasn't gone away.
Incidentally, "Shower With Your Dad Simulator 2015" has a collective 10/10 on Steam.
Ah, what I like to call an "artsy fartsy" game.
@munstahunta Whaaaat? A reviewer has...feelings on a game they played? Why, I was expecting them to be TAS playing robots that algorithmically decide how they feel about a game via various maths and sciences. I mean, how could someone not give a review absolutely free of what they liked and didn't like! Ridiculous.
How utterly bizarre... a game that the reviewers wish they didn’t have to slap a number from 1-10 on...
Not my cup of tea, but respect to the devs for trying it. Just proves video games can be an art form, because only an artist would make something like this.
I think people have forgotten Tamagotchi existed. Your minds are completely blown that anyone would make this, let alone want it. It's art, it's philosophy, it's a political statement, anything but a "true game", which is the only thing we will ever spend time on.
@somebread I didn’t say a review free of feeling but the major part of the review must be factual , graphics, audio ,gameplay ,controls, stability ,value,story and a part of the review about how they enjoyed playing the game maybe 15% but you can’t valve a score based on you feelings.
People are asking the impossible. You can't objectively quantify something like "controls" or "story" and translate it into a score.
@Purgatorium i mean i think the dude you're talking about is asking the impossible, but controls and story are both things that can easily be translated into at least a lower score--some stories are objectively bad (ridiculous number of plotholes/empty/predicatable) as are some controls (ridiculously slippery/unresponsive/etc.)
on the other hand, i don't see many instances where people laud a game for having good controls (maybe celeste and racers?) because it's kind of supposed to be a given
"Obligatory score here."
And with that, the debate over the value of review scores is laid to rest.
@somebread
While I agree that you could make statements about controls that approach objectivity I have seen people disagree on these things based seemingly on preference.
But I really have to disagree when you say some stories are objectively bad. People still like stories with plot holes and predictable plot lines. Calling predictability objectively bad is a preference. Personally, I don't care if something is predictable.
@Purgatorium
A story can always be objectively bad, just like pretty much everything can be objectively bad.
Predictability is objectively a problem, If the story ist supposed to have a certain complexity.
But just because something is objectively an issue does not mean that you need to care about it.
In short: There can be an objective problem, that you subjectively don't care about.
And of course just having an issue doesn't automatically make a product bad either as it could have other strengths to make up for it. But the product would be better without that issue, even if just a little.
Products with a lot of objective problems tend to be less liked by the masses, which means there is value in measuring it (though that can be hard, depending in the case, as you can't ignore personal opinions that easily).
@impurekind didn't they do the same thing to Balan?
@Strumpan you should rate a game on how fun it is, how good it's graphics, sound & gameplay are (maybe add how it controls, but that can be part of gameplay), IMHO. That's the only reason most people read reviews, to see if it's fun enough to buy for themselves. Saying i should get a perfect score on life if i commit suicide, as long as that's what i set out to do makes zero sense to me.
@Dr_Corndog then u may as well through out reviews altogether, lol. I'm not reading every review on the internet & scores are the only way to weed out which are best to read.
A terrible game purposely made that way is still a terrible game irregardless of intent. It clearly deserves a score of 1.
@Strumpan But cuteness is subjective in its appeal, whereas becoming bored and frustrated is objectively and universally a bad thing.
Just give it a 3 and move on with your day!
@Low_ink Technically, the definition of a "game" requires it to have an objective and at least one of either a winning or losing scenario. Even some walking simulators technically qualify as games.
However, I understand where you're going with this, and there are also lame "video games" that don't even qualify as "games" under my definition. I also don't understand the appeal of games whose only purpose is to undertake boring and/or tedious activities, actual work that you would get paid to perform in real life, or stuff that would work just as well released on a non-interactive format.
It's almost like critiquing a piece of art and numerically scoring the proficiency of consumer entertainment aren't necessarily compatible goals.
But they do both matter, so thanks for giving both a shot, here.
@nessisonett
That seems to be the case, yes.
@Kirgo
"Predictability is objectively a problem, If the story ist supposed to have a certain complexity."
Why?
@Purgatorium
Wanting to know how it progresses and how it will end is generally a major drive for experiencing a story.
If a story is predictable, you take that part away.
On the contrary, there is no advantage in writing a predicatble story (at least not for the story itself), so there is a reason to avoid predictability when writing a story, but not a reason to deliberatley make it predictable.
Therefore, when writing a story, you should try to avoid being too predictable.
@munstahunta The main problem here is that there are different kinds of reviews. Some are buyer's guides, others are more focused on experience while a handful look at the game on what it has to say artistically.
None of these approaches are wrong, but it means they're all prioritising different things, so there's no things a review 'must' include. Additionally, the things you mention as factual (graphics, audio, gameplay, controls, stability, value, story) are all subjective - and even then, using all of those metrics is less useful in an experience review, while an artistic one might focus on a single element of these (if any)
@Strumpan that’s absurd. A low opinion of a game is a low opinion, regardless of what was intended to be created. Something should not be praised if the recipient simply hated the experience, only because the creator of said experience intended for the experience to be hated. Then surely they should be expecting gleefully the low scores? Either way, if someone thinks a game is bad, then that’s what it is to that person, and so deserves the score intended by the reviewer - which brings me to the stupid hypocrisy and the utter inane review of the review
@Banksie Yeah, you can't really fault the reviewer for not liking it. I don't agree with it personally but a lot of the review is fine, the only issue I have is the slapped on obligatory score that must have splinters for how resolutely it's sitting on that fence, especially after the person playing this game said they absolutely hated it.
But then that's one of the many problems with review scores in general really.
@Kirgo
Where did you get the idea that wanting to know how a story ends is generally a major drive for experiencing a story? How did you determine this was true?
From the looks of this comment thread, maybe Marmite should consider doing a promotional deal with The Longing.
@Purgatorium
Common knowledge? I am not sure how to answer that, since we are kinda arguing about obvious things right now.
Why do you think people get mad about spoilers? Every single person who does not want to get spoiled for a story proves this point already.
And even if that is not a majority, it would still be irrelevant to what I am saying. As long as you have two factions, one which does care and one which does not care, it will be objectively better to avoid too much predictability as then both factions are happy instead of just one.
@doodlewhizz we could argue for days about this subject but my reality is that reviews on this site doesn’t fit with me anymore , they once were a reference and it’s not the case anymore is it me , is it them that changed I don’t know conclusion : nintendolife
Joy: news
Feature
Community
Cons: reviews
8/10
@Low_ink Super Mario Sunshine is one of the most frustrating games ever created. (To me this is the reason it’s been polarizing to most players.) So no, not even mainstream games are always fun. Think about times you get stuck in game. Is that fun? I will say this about The Longing, it’s not frustrating just a relaxed experience. Definitely not for everyone to be sure, but then neither is Mario Sunshine.
@Ralizah So, to sum up, they all liked it enough to give it a positive rating, as did over 3000 more people who also played and rated the game on Steam--like I said.
@impurekind lol
OK. If that's what you're taking away from this, I don't think our discussion is going to go anywhere productive from here on out.
I wish you well in your future endeavors!
@BulbasaurusRex The problem I have is that the spectrum for what qualifies as a game is far too broad for everyone to know, 'hey if I buy this I'll have a fun time!' (Ignoring shovelware of course.) In reality the entire industry calls any interactive software that isn't for work or something a 'game'. It's pretty strange. But that's specifically looking at video games, which is the medium that's messed up categorizing things.
So I'll look to board games. (This encompasses card games too) What makes a board game popular? Generally, its because its fun. (And easy to learn, but that can be ignored here) But things don't have to be fun to be good.
So look at tabletop games. (Aka DnD) I wouldn't necessarily call them fun, but they are very creative, both on design, and playing parts. They offer a unique experience that both video games and board games can't itch, thus proving their worth.
See where I'm going here? Board and tabletop games, while similar on the outside, are completely different to someone playing them. It would be insane to have a board game reviewer review a tabletop game. They wouldn't be able to score it properly! They may like it, but it still isn't their job to do things like that.
So I believe that The Longing has merit, probably a lot, in fact. The only thing holding it back is people calling it a game. And it's a unique experience, one that many love, but if you can't give it a score like you can other video games, is it really a video game? No, no it isn't, and anyone going into it expecting it to be like one, may very well get disappointed.
(Side note, when walking simulators first came out, that was a perfect time to make a distinction between videogames and other software, {which is a completely different medium} but we didn't, and instead just insulted the experience. Because we did that we now have to live with the term walking simulator, with the experiences clouding our digital storefronts)
@thinkhector I am moreso arguing that The Longing isn't a game, and that because we categorize it as such, we hurt it and experiences like it. As for games that aren't fun, say Sunshine, it was intended to be fun, they just messed up somewhere along the way. Should it still be considered a game? Yes, just a bad one.
From what I've seen from The Longing, (outside of this review) it seems to be a great and unique experience, which is what it was trying to do. Calling it a videogame, in my opinion, is a disservice to both it, and consumers.
(Of course if you want to hear more just read my message to BulbasaurusRex)
@chardir no. You can complete all the other endings far quicker than the "main goal" given to you by the king at the start of the game. Even the 400 day wait isn't actually that long if you play the game properly.
@Dualmask you've entirely missed the point of the game if all you're doing is sitting and waiting for 400 days.
@BulbasaurusRex The Longing absolutely isn't a terrible game though, it may defy traditional videogame classification but the experiences within it are worthwhile and entertaining.
I have a real problem with this review, the reviewer seems to have entirely failed to engage with the game on its own terms in any meaningful way. Is it boring to sit and wait 2 hours for a door to open so you can explore more of the caves? Yes. Do you have to sit and wait for those two hours to pass while patiently watching the door lest it snap back shut again should your gaze ever falter? Of course not. The basic theme of this game is that time passes faster when you don't think about it, fill your life with enjoyable activities and time flies; there's a reason we have so many expressions surrounding the concept.
I have greatly enjoyed my time with the shade, I found him to be full of dour humour whilst I've explored the caves with him and the timelocked barriers have disappeared quickly as I've progressed through the game.
Basically this is a bad review and the game is absolutely worth your time, and you won't need to give it 400 days.
@Kirgo
"As long as you have two factions, one which does care and one which does not care, it will be objectively better to avoid too much predictability as then both factions are happy instead of just one."
This is an interesting argument because you are saying that an objectively good story makes the most people happy. But what makes people happy? That is specific to the individual. And here we are, right back at preference.
@Ralizah
@Strumpan
You just both proved the point of how hard it is to review this thing.
You're both right. You're both wrong.
Congratulations.
@Purgatorium
Yes, but if you have something you could implement, that can only be seen as a positive, but never as a negative, then there is never an objective reason not to implement that, unless you are not capable of doing it, in which case you would not be a good writer, since you are incapable of implementing something that would make your story better for the average consumer.
Your argument only works on single individuals. What you, as an individual, like and wether you care about something, is entirely subjective, of course.
It still would not hurt to avoid i.e. plottholes, which are the easiest example of an objective fault in a story.
I'm legitimately, enthusiastically happy that this game exists. I love games and this is a bold release which pushes the medium to new frontiers.
Not gonna play it though.
@Low_ink Great follow up. I think your additional thoughts bring more clarity to the issue. It actually got me thinking of other non-game games. One of the earliest ones I can think of is ElectroPlankton on the DS. A more popular one would be NintenDogs. I’m sure there are other good examples. At the time, I remember people arguing weather FlappyBird was even technically a game. ShuffleHead on iOS/Android is not really a game either. These non-games actually function more like toys then games.
@Kirgo
"Yes, but if you have something you could implement, that can only be seen as a positive, but never as a negative, then there is never an objective reason not to implement that"
How do we determine what "can only be seen as positive?"
@Purgatorium
Again, we are arguing about the obvious right now.
Who likes plottholes for example?
Avoiding a plotthole is, on an individual basis, either a good thing or irrelevant.
Or did you ever see a story where you thought "man, I really like how this didn't make any sense!" (apart from comedy, that genre is kind of an exception to everything).
The obvious conclusion for a writer should be to avoid plottholes as much as possible.
@Kirgo
Again, how do we determine what "can only be seen as positive?"
@Purgatorium
What are you even asking right now?
Are you really arguing that there might be people who specifically like plottholes?
I have never even heard of anyone thinking that and I have seen a whole ton of discussions about those matters. Whenever someone defends a plotthole in any story they always either argue that the plotthole didn't matter to them or they try to explain how that is not a plotthole.
And why would anyone like plottholes in the first place?
This is almost like me saying that "no one likes being involved in a car crash" and you asking "how did you determine that?". Only difference is that the "I don't care" faction should be a lot smaller in that case as well.
@thinkhector Something else of note is that many of these experiences people would call 'casual games,' myself included, however experiences like The Longing are not casual at all. (At least I don't think so) It would be hard for some people to invest such a large amount of time in it, unless they really want to enjoy the experience. But I'd agree that we should put them into the same category of experience. (But just like videogames there should be genres as well.)
Gaming is a fast growing medium, apparently it's even the most popular way of entertainment in America. As such, similar mediums should be given room to grow, instead of being looped together and ultimately both getting hurt in the process.
@Low_ink Oh you haven’t played The Longing! I actually own it, and it’s not as tedious as it seems on the surface. The only think really to do is decorate your room and explore the cavs. However, they have built some interesting mechanics into the game. For example, no matter how far you wander, you can just select GO HOME from the sub menu and you character will slowly walk home. Now that may sound tedious BUT you don’t actually have to be playing the game! You can exit the game and your character will keep walking without you even having to have the game on. Same with reading books in the game. (Reading books actually adages the time in the game faster for some reason.) However, you don’t have to stay in the game and watch this happen. Your character will auto read while your away from the game. Also, you have some REMEMBER save slots. You can just click on it and come back and your character will be at the location you wanted them to be in. It’s a game where you play for 15 to 30 minutes at a time really.
@thinkhector Don't worry, I know it isn't bad. Just that for some people it wouldn't make sense to them. I saw a video of a guy explaining how brilliant it is. And if you had to be there the whole time, then I would call it bad. It definitely has people that would enjoy it, which is why it's unfortunate that so many people call it a videogame, making people just call it bad. I know I personally wouldn't enjoy it, because the way I play most games is by sitting down for hours at a time until I feel done with it. And well I'm not really interested in it. Glad that you enjoy it though!
How interesting from an artistic POV and how utterly odd at the same time. Maybe one to download and mess around with for 10minutes daily in-between playing other games. Not for me though.
This is an interesting review... I honestly can't tell if I would enjoy this game or not, because it sounds like I would both enjoy it and be horribly frustrated by it. Well, I guess I'll put it on the list and wait for a sale to make up my mind.
This is, by far, by so very far, the best game to play before sleeping. I am really slowly, figuring out how to enjoy it. This isn't a pick up and play for an hour type of game. I would love the controller support be upgraded to enable a single joycon Support. It's also incredibly light on instructions and enabling the Idle play feature. Or I just haven't figured out how yet. Any single 'adventure' takes 10-15 minutes just to walk to. More options to idle walk to the area would help.
@Krysus If you want to "remember" a location you want to come back to later, you have to select one of the selectable squares on the left-hand side of the screen and click "remember" for the game to save a screenshot of the location and set up the ability to auto-return later. The game doesn't explain this at all (as far as I'm aware) but I'd read about the function and eventually figured it out. It's very handy for when you're waiting for puddles to form or stalactites to drop 😜
@Ogbert
Hohoho, watching the films in The Witness aren't optional. Not if you you're going for 100% completion at least. ^^
A game can be 'just not good' and if the starting point is a 5 the score should go up or down from there.
You have over thought the score, and given it an average score, but the review suggests any thing but average.
@Pod yeah but you can complete the game without doing any of those puzzles, so in that sense, entirely optional : )
I'm enjoying the game. I have zero regrets buying The Longing, it is worth the money. I love the fact that there are actual books that can be read like for real! It's a beautifully simplistic game with an art style that is dark, lonely-like and richly detailed. I like that everything and anything could be a potential puzzle, a secret door or message.
Yes the progression of the game is slow, tedious even...but the smart gamer will have figured out ways to pass the time.
Buying this game hopefully won't break the bank for anyone (it's reasonably priced)...but it is worth the money despite what the review concludes.
@Krysus exactly! I pay this game right before I go sleep for maybe 30-40 min.... It's dark anyway so doesn't interfere with my sleep etc and it is relaxing to play. Playing before bedtime is how I found my sweet spot for this game.
Tap here to load 129 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...