Why You Should Be a Bit Disappointed With Ori and the Blind Forest

[Silence]

I feel like I must've been the only player who wasn't emotionally hit by the opening. I simply assumed with prior knowledge of all the acclaim that the game had heaped on it for its story that there was a catch. I was pretty convinced that Naru was an evil creature showing its sensitive side or Ori some sort of unwilling elemental embodiment of nastiness. By the time I realised it was just a benign plot setup, I was already at the tree.

Nah, I felt the same way.

But I like the game. For very good gameplay. It's nothing new, but it is a very good ... and hard ... Metroidvania. And I love Metroidvania.
Story is forgettable though, that is true. And the artstyle kind of bites itself with the difficulty. Like "look how cute we are, it is a real fun kids story NOW DIE A THOUSAND DEATHS IN SPIKES".

 

[Grahav]

To all those nitpicking the title of the article, read the url on the article. The original title is "Ori-and-the-Blind-Forest-Is-More-Style-Over-Substance". It gets edited by someone else after Yahtzee finishes it.

Ew, you're right, that's horrible.

You know, this is kind of interesting. Changing something as simple as the title from an objective and uncompromising summary to something more akin to buzzfeed-level clickbait changed the whole perspective of the article for the reader, and if the first few comments are anything to go from, really changed the intended message.

Whoever thought of the title is giving Yahtzee and the Escapist a bad name.

Related:

Basically, it is not a bad game, but it is an overhyped one with an already used formula.

Like the Last of Us. It is very easy to care for Ellie, specially considering the AI almost never attacks her.

I may still buy it. But... Eh.

 

[Darth_Payn]

To all those nitpicking the title of the article, read the url on the article. The original title is "Ori-and-the-Blind-Forest-Is-More-Style-Over-Substance". It gets edited by someone else after Yahtzee finishes it.

Ew, you're right, that's horrible.

You know, this is kind of interesting. Changing something as simple as the title from an objective and uncompromising summary to something more akin to buzzfeed-level clickbait changed the whole perspective of the article for the reader, and if the first few comments are anything to go from, really changed the intended message.

Oh goddammit, it's the same problem CRACKED has; they change article titles in the middle of the day, to something LESS accurate to the articles' content and tone. Besides, telling us why our opinion on something WRONG was MovieBob's thing. Remember when he did that for Sucker Punch?

 

[Evonisia]

I think Yahztee is going to have to eventually accept that people LIKE the "indie game formula" he decries.

Given that he declared Limbo the 5th Best video game of 2010 and praised Braid, I'd say that he's suggesting that that indie game formula is just as generic as any other formula that gets overused, and developers are probably only using it in order to gather critical acclaim, like all rip-off games do. People also like the Call of Duty style of gameplay in first person shooters and the WoW model for MMOs, it doesn't make the decision to make a game like that any less uninspired.

Not that Braid was the first in the formula, obviously, but chances are it played a big part in this formula becoming a thing.

Oh goddammit, it's the same problem CRACKED has; they change article titles in the middle of the day, to something LESS accurate to the articles' content and tone. Besides, telling us why our opinion on something WRONG was MovieBob's thing. Remember when he did that for Sucker Punch?

And people still act as if MovieBob was telling them that Sucker Punch was a good film (which wasn't the case outside of his original review), though that didn't make it any less pretentious.

Same with Spider-Man 3 which definitely was a "it's not as bad as you think it is" video.

 

[Callate]

I think Yahtzee makes some good points. (Caveat: I haven't played Ori; given the various complaints I've heard about bugs, overly-exacting controls, unavoidable ambushes, and the plot, I'm not in a rush to do so. Maybe when it's $5 on Steam...)

Naturally, not every game- AAA or "indie"- is going to be a groundbreaking innovator that sets the world on fire. Not even the indies that break from the pack and get enough press coverage to ensure some degree of success when they reach daylight. But I think it's perfectly understandable to feel disappointed by the feeling that one of those "breakaways" fails on a story level, especially when there were few reasons it had to do so. There isn't some marketing Uberboss scowling at these small teams that the consumer test showed that 47% of players were going to take to Twitter and threaten to burn someone's house down unless they got a SuperMegsUltraHappy Ending, so failure to understand the story they're telling on a basic mechanical level is grounds for disappointment.

In fairness, though, I also have to confess I've grown a little tired of games whose unavoidable story mechanic boils down to the idea that everyone involved would have been better off if the player had never started playing. I don't need saccharine, but it's nice to occasionally feel that the protagonist made a positive difference, even if only in his or her own life.

 

[rgrekejin]

Even if it's just a phrasing thing, don't start an article with HERE'S WHY YOU SHOULD DO THIS or HERE'S WHY YOU SHOULDN'T LIKE THAT.

As someone else pointed out upthread, it seems that Yahtzee doesn't actually write the final titles for the articles.

As a side note, I find that for some reason I tend to be slightly more wary of games that receive overwhelming praise than I am of ones that just get mostly positive press. For games that generally get a good but not ecstatic reception, I feel like I can still find reviews that point out whatever small-but-real flaws or annoyances the games have, in gameplay or in story. But for games that get this sort of overwhelmingly positive response, I feel like at some point groupthink sets in and no one wants to be the one to point out whatever flaws it may have, effectively making reviews little more than "it's awesome go play it" repeated over and over again.

Sure, sometimes games with the super-positive buzz work out. I loved Shadow of the Colossus, Portal, and Arkham City. Sometimes, though, I end up playing a game I don't enjoy very much that I would have been able to tell I probably wouldn't enjoy if I had been able to get a few reviews about it that weren't covered in little heart-shaped stickers (I'm looking at you, Bioshock Infinite. You too, Borderlands and Ocarina of Time.)

 

[Zombie Badger]

a

 

[Redryhno]

I can't see why you're surprised by gamers mistaking surface for incredible artistic depth. They're the same bunch who held up The Last of Us, the most generically generic zombie action adventure story as the pinnacle of artistic accomplishment, and it's protagonist, a brooding middle-aged short-haired white guy with a tortured past involving a dead relative, as a triumph of original characterisation.

To be fair, nobody gave a crap about Joel and all about Ellie, the minor white girl with a dead parent past, no idea of how to not get eaten/screwed by the world apparently, and is continually makes stupid decisions in cutscenes with a mysterious genetic immunity to the zombie stuff that people want ot do experiments on to mass produce into a cure/vaccine/it's not ever exactly all that well explained...also isn't there something about being gay in it too? Or is that Beyond? Or that other Ellen Paige game? I'm not that good at keeping track of game names anymore, they all just sorta blend together.

 

[Raesvelg]

Am I the only one taking a certain perverse joy in Yahtzee doing to an indie game what indie game enthusiasts have been doing to AAA games for years now?

 

[theuprising]

Am I the only one taking a certain perverse joy in Yahtzee doing to an indie game what indie game enthusiasts have been doing to AAA games for years now?

Calling ori an indie title would be stretching it a bit.

Also making an indie game is actually a pretty financially sound idea compared to making an AAA game, so at the start you had a bunch of art and passion projects, but now those projects are mixed in with blatant cash grabs.


Look at Rogue Legacy, those guys had a shoestring budget and cut tons of features b/c they just didn't have the budget for it, and made a KILLING. They say their next game they are going to have a similar budget, even though they definitely have the funding to do better.

 

[Guilen-]

I'm sure Yahtzee remains unsurprised at the comments here (although I feel bad about the title edit). I commend him for sticking to his guns. Video games deserve to be looked at so unerringly - it isn't a sign of pessimism, but that the medium is worth taking seriously enough to say "oh, come on". He's absolutely right about the crowd-pandering heartfelt angle... people eat it up, but it is definitely manipulative. But hey. People like to be manipulated. Sometimes it's what they pay for. He knows that. His job is to ask for more out of a medium that needs to be pushed higher and higher, and more often than not I think he's dead on. Good work!

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

Mind you, you DO have to be careful about "going all the way" with something. Sometimes, it's too much, and it'll just feel really unsatisfying.

Freedom Planet could have had a really sad ending, but they pull a bit of BS to avoid it, and honestly, I think that was the better choice.

If they had gone all the way through with it, it would have felt really wrong, and I'd remember the ending as something bad.

Spoiler: Spoilers for the end if you're curious

SPOILERS FOR ENDING OF FREEDOM PLANET

Ok, so after already showing us earlier in the game that the villain means serious freakin' business and is an amoral monster (no, seriously, it's kinda hard to watch one scene in particular), in the pre-final level, he ambushes whichever character you're using and is holding a knife to the neck of the youngest member of the team. Clearly, he WILL kill her unless the main character removes the device that will de-power his space vessel. He even makes the usual *cut throat* gesture, but actually HURTS the kid with it.

Your character removes the device, he breaks it, and leaves the kid. Who then is promptly mutated into a gross monstrosity like the previous boss (a minor antagonist) was, because the dagger is coated in some kind of virus. You then have to kill said monster version of the kid member, whereupon it explodes and leaves the body of the kid behind, and it's highly implied they died (the Dragon character who has kinda been like a surrogate older sister to the kid has a total breakdown before screaming at the top of her lungs and going after the final boss).

After beating he final boss and escaping, we get a scene at a medical tent of "SHES ALIVE SHES ALIVE", and indeed, the kid is alive, although rather traumatized.

Honestly, if it had ended with the kid dying...It might have been a BIT too much. Either way, I was fine with her making it, even though my mind was screaming "BULLSHIT" that whole "she's alive" scene.

 

[visiblenoise]

Am I the only one taking a certain perverse joy in Yahtzee doing to an indie game what indie game enthusiasts have been doing to AAA games for years now?

Nope, high five buddy!

 

[Zombie Badger]

a

 

[Redryhno]

I can't see why you're surprised by gamers mistaking surface for incredible artistic depth. They're the same bunch who held up The Last of Us, the most generically generic zombie action adventure story as the pinnacle of artistic accomplishment, and it's protagonist, a brooding middle-aged short-haired white guy with a tortured past involving a dead relative, as a triumph of original characterisation.

To be fair, nobody gave a crap about Joel and all about Ellie, the minor white girl with a dead parent past, no idea of how to not get eaten/screwed by the world apparently, and is continually makes stupid decisions in cutscenes with a mysterious genetic immunity to the zombie stuff that people want ot do experiments on to mass produce into a cure/vaccine/it's not ever exactly all that well explained...also isn't there something about being gay in it too? Or is that Beyond? Or that other Ellen Paige game? I'm not that good at keeping track of game names anymore, they all just sorta blend together.

I can't think of any reason for TLoU focusing on Joel beyond him being an author surrogate. Everything interesting happens to Ellie, who's actually a decent character but she's forced into a far more boring character's story.

Ehh....I wouldn't say that, she's honestly a pretty generic character, the only thing differentiating her from the others is that she's in a videogame and not a book, film, or even board game where her archetype is just as prevalent as the middle-aged white guy with violent tendencies to the recently undeceased.

Honestly Ori though could've done with following through on the dead mother being dead, or even just focusing the entire story on getting the mother back and make it a more personal story instead of the global threat you end up thrown into.

 

[IamLEAM1983]

I wasn't even mildly attracted to Ori's formula. I enjoyed it with The Last of Us because it's adequately furnished and fleshed out, but in Ori's case - it's just there. "Oooh, here's a cute lil' ragamuffin who's suffering in the great big world, EMPATHIZE WITH IT NOW, PLAYER! HAVE SOME WEEPY MUSIC BECAUSE WEEPY MUSIC EQUALS PERSONAL INVESTMENT!"

The same feeling got me when I played Journey. The game was going "LOOK AT ALL THE FEELS YOU COULD BE HAVING!" and all I felt was that it was competently and interestingly put together.

Dear indies, there's other emotional registries out there. Not every game needs to be an exercise in trying to get to the nearest rooftop and scream that gaming can be an art form.

 

[Zombie Badger]

I can't think of any reason for TLoU focusing on Joel beyond him being an author surrogate. Everything interesting happens to Ellie, who's actually a decent character but she's forced into a far more boring character's story.

Ehh....I wouldn't say that, she's honestly a pretty generic character, the only thing differentiating her from the others is that she's in a videogame and not a book, film, or even board game where her archetype is just as prevalent as the middle-aged white guy with violent tendencies to the recently undeceased.[/quote]

Can you name me some examples of the Ellie archetype? I'm struggling to think of any off the top of my head.

 

[SKBPinkie]

I wasn't even mildly attracted to Ori's formula. I enjoyed it with The Last of Us because it's adequately furnished and fleshed out, but in Ori's case - it's just there. "Oooh, here's a cute lil' ragamuffin who's suffering in the great big world, EMPATHIZE WITH IT NOW, PLAYER! HAVE SOME WEEPY MUSIC BECAUSE WEEPY MUSIC EQUALS PERSONAL INVESTMENT!"

The same feeling got me when I played Journey. The game was going "LOOK AT ALL THE FEELS YOU COULD BE HAVING!" and all I felt was that it was competently and interestingly put together.

Dear indies, there's other emotional registries out there. Not every game needs to be an exercise in trying to get to the nearest rooftop and scream that gaming can be an art form.

What about the gameplay? You know, the part of the game that matters the most?

You haven't even mentioned anything about that in your rant here.

 

[CaitSeith]

To all those nitpicking the title of the article, read the url on the article. The original title is "Ori-and-the-Blind-Forest-Is-More-Style-Over-Substance". It gets edited by someone else after Yahtzee finishes it.

Now that's screwed up. Although the second title kinda makes sense. The game tells you that you should feel sympathy towards the cute character (at least that's what Yahtzee wrote). And the title tells you that you should feel some disappointment towards the game. Did you let the game make you feel sympathy? Did you let the article make you feel disappointment? Is it a funny coincidence that both tell you to feel something? Or maybe it wasn't coincidence, and it was the editor's intention. Or maybe I'm just reading too deep into this and now I'm just making things up to this point...

 

[major_chaos]

I'm probably in a very small minority here, but finding out how Ori ends actually made me more likely to play it. There seems to be a large part of the gaming audience that basically despises joy. They make much ado about games like The Witcher, Bloodborne, TLoU, Spec Ops, ect., games that mire you neck deep in grime then stand on your head. The ideal seems to be as much darkness and despair as possible, a minimum of likable or heroic charterers, and the light at the end of the tunnel being reachable only from the top of a pile of innocent bodies.

I on the other hand am sick of the industry's angsty teen phase and relish the chance to just bask in the warm D'aaaawwwww of a good happy ending. Quite frankly if I want a story where a lot of people die the bad guys win and everything is just generally shit I'll watch the news. I like some escapism in my games thank you very much.