Blueberry Garden (PC)

No, I do not want that rock.
6/19/2009 11:42 AM | 17 Comments | Page 2 of 2

What's Hot: Unexpected sandbox moments; Haunting music that makes you think about your lost childhood.

What's Not: Birds are frisky; A struggle to play.
Fry It!
Ryan Kuo
Ryan Kuo
Status: ('______') -- blorp blorp I'm a DJ blorp blorp blorp
But isn't it significant that Blueberry Garden is better observed over someone's shoulder than it is played? As an art object, it's full of atmosphere and events: Trees sprout, the earth quakes, big things fall down. You might collide in mid-air with a bird, or drown by accident, after which you'll reappear at the beginning with a pop.

As happenings in a strange world, these events exude a mythic aura. But for all their aesthetic style, they feel inconsequential as gameplay. I think it's because Blueberry Garden -- the game -- feels like work. To its credit, the 2-D world is surprisingly freeform within its narrow margins. No two playthroughs are quite the same -- you'll use items differently, reach different areas, find different objects, and end up with a different world each time.

Blueberry Garden
Some Mayo and Bread Would Go Nice With That Garden.
Nonetheless, Blueberry Garden seems reluctant to have you interact with it, as if it'd rather be admired from a distance. You walk on surfaces. You jump, awkwardly, over chasms and animals. You fly in straight lines, weaving left and right to go higher (think wall jump with no walls). And you get stuck a lot -- on rocks, between surfaces, amidst flocks of birds. You never feel physically integrated into the world, and emotionally invested in the game by extension. As a result, your actions don't feel empowering; they feel somewhat desperate. The question I most often asked myself was, "Will this get me out of here?"

As an indie game without the mandate of selling millions, Blueberry Garden clearly enjoys a nonconformist stance. However, it still doesn't work. If games were like blenders or vacuum cleaners, I'd note that Blueberry Garden costs $5, offers about an hour of gameplay, and will hold up to at least one replay; and let you make the informed-consumer decision. But this is a perfect example of why aesthetics and emotions matter most in games: They're so often a missed opportunity.

This review is based on a downloadable copy of the game provided by the publisher.
« Prev  1  2  Next »

Share This

  • Stumbleupon Share Button
  • Delicious Share Button
  • Reddit Share Button
  • Slashdot Share Button
  • Fark Share Button
  • Yahoo Buzz Share Button

Comments

  • RyanKuo

    6/23/2009 1:19:02 PM

    It makes perfect sense to me why Blueberry Garden was nominated for the prize. It's ambitious and it has a nice look. I tried to say as much in the review. The fact that it won the award creates certain expectations for it that weren't met. But it's not that I disagree with the judges' decision. Judging is just part of an ongoing process of interpreting and understanding new ideas.

    I have a fundamentally different angle because I'm completely focused on the "final" game that I am playing on my own time and not amidst dozens of other games, some probably quite unremarkable, as a judge. And I'm completely open to the possibility that someone can change my mind.

    Reply »
  • JasonMcMaster

    6/23/2009 12:25:02 PM

    @CG-Prophet:

    Heh, I hear you. I don't always agree with the winner, but it's a big group process.

    Reply »
  • JasonMcMaster

    6/23/2009 12:23:31 PM

    @CG-Prophet:

    Again, I can't speak for the GDC or IGF.

    I say proof of concept as in demo, and I'm talking about every part of the IGF, not just the jury prize. I've spent quite a while working on the Student Judging competition, so you have to forgive me if I confuse terms a bit.

    While judging, you run into games that just do not work, but a game like that wouldn't have won. I personally didn't judge Blueberry Garden, so I can't speak to what state it was in when awarded the prize, but I can guarantee you that it worked and was playable. Usually the changes between submission and the games release are added levels, added effects, etc... That may be where the disconnect comes between the judging process and the reviewed game. What works in your initial game and concept might not work out when fully developed.

    I believe this is my 4th year

    Reply »
  • CG-Prophet

    6/23/2009 12:22:56 PM

    @CG-Prophet:

    On second thought scratch that, Jason. I'm just going to agree to disagree with everyone here. I've felt this way about the IGF for years, but don't get me wrong - I am thankful there is an IGF in the first place and people willing to take the time to pick indie games to be celebrated.

    Reply »
  • CG-Prophet

    6/23/2009 11:56:14 AM

    @JasonMcMaster:

    So the IGF does go by "proof of concepts" as I indicated earlier?

    And how many years, if you feel comfortable answering, have you been a judge?





    Reply »
  • JasonMcMaster

    6/23/2009 11:38:44 AM

    @CG-Prophet:

    First, I don't speak for the IGF or GDC, but I'm an IGF judge and have been for a few years now. The process is to try to find talent in design and creativity. We choose games based on playable code and concept. Are the games finished and polished? No, not usually. These are demos or proof of concepts.

    I'm not sure how the process could improve - it's an indie game festival. We accept entries and judge them on what we have access to and what we play. Because the winner takes the prize and DOESN'T make a great game isn't the judges fault.

    Reply »
  • CG-Prophet

    6/23/2009 10:53:08 AM

    @johnteti:

    Yeah, I agree that you don't know where i'm coming from with this. I find it amazing that the game they gave $30k to just got fried. I'm a little concerned that everyone else doesn't have a problem with that.

    My name calling is out of frustration and I acknowledge the point you made about the rules.


    To slightly change the subject - Ryan did a Crispy Minute that everyone should check out!








    Reply »
  • johnteti
    johnteti

    6/23/2009 10:18:31 AM

    @CG-Prophet:

    They already do have to supply playable code for nomination.

    http://www.igf.com/rules.html

    Re: "maybe one or two of them have a set of balls" -- this is out of line -- maybe you're kidding? I talked to a bunch of the IGF 2008 judges at GDC this year. They were thoughtful about the awards and took them seriously, coming from a range of perspectives. I don't even know where you're coming from with this, but they don't deserve schoolyard taunts simply because Ryan gave Blueberry Garden a bad review.

    Reply »
  • CG-Prophet

    6/23/2009 9:28:34 AM

    @GusMastrapa:

    I never said unfinished games, Gus - I said "concepts." Have some playable code at the time of nomination.


    I disagree that it won't change anything - in fact having some fresh thinkers will change the games we see because we'd have some judges that view indie games in a different light and maybe one or two of them will have a set of balls.

    Reply »
  • GusMastrapa
    GusMastrapa

    6/23/2009 4:04:25 AM

    @CG-Prophet:

    None of those will change what I expect is the determining factor -- the entrants. I've programmed for film festivals and while there's volume, there's not a lot of quality. Sure, some entrants really stand out, but after a while you start looking for worthwhile traits.

    Also, your point about unfinished games disregards the fact that these kinds of prizes are meant, much like the Xeric grant in comics, to give indie creators the funds to finish. That's, I'm assuming, one of the points of the IGF -- to find a deserving creator and give them the help they need to make their art. The end result won't always be earth-shattering, but that's the nature of art, not the fault of the selection process.

    Reply »
  • CG-Prophet

    6/23/2009 3:16:46 AM

    @johnteti:

    The one thing they can do better is to nominate games that are beyond the conceptual phase.

    The second thing they can do is to replace the judges every year and diverify them a little better - we need more Greg Costikyans and Jeff Vogels, and less rockstar journalists in there.

    Lastly remove anyone from the panel that organizes the event to avoid any influence on judging.


    Reply »
  • johnteti
    johnteti

    6/23/2009 2:43:39 AM

    @CG-Prophet:

    How would you improve it? I'm not asking that to be provocative, it's a genuine question.

    No awards show is not going to be perfect, but I think the IGF does a better job than most at showcasing interesting indie games that are worthy of people's attention. And given that the Seumas McNally grand prize comes with $30,000 attached, it makes some practical sense to award it to a promising work-in-progress a la Aquaria and Crayon Physics Deluxe.

    For my part, I agree with Ryan that this game is no great shakes, but I'll also say that at the time of GDC, it looked like the most promising game of the nominees. So I can at the same time understand the rationale of the judges.

    Reply »
  • CG-Prophet

    6/23/2009 2:16:04 AM

    @GusMastrapa:

    Gus, I get what you are saying and I agree for the most part. I don't want to be too hard on the IGF's nomination process, but they do need to do a better job of picking nominees and finalists in the first place.

    Reply »
  • GusMastrapa
    GusMastrapa

    6/22/2009 8:52:27 PM

    Or it simply calls into question the notion that one critic's (or judging panel's) opinion can be the final word. Obviously the judges were moved, in some way, by the game.

    The fact that opinions can be so divisive proves that games are moving past being mere products that can be weighed or measured as good or bad and into something that is more personal and experiential.

    It is a good thing when people disagree. Because from this argument we can learn.

    Reply »
  • CG-Prophet

    6/22/2009 6:23:20 PM

    This review calls into question the whole process of picking games for the IGF. I've complained about the way they choose games (some are conceptual, half-done and finished when they are selected).

    If this game really is a Fry as Ryan claims, than how does it end up being the big winner at the IGF?

    Reply »
  • bkrohnin
    bkrohnin

    6/19/2009 5:59:41 PM

    ps. this is brian

    Reply »
  • bkrohnin
    bkrohnin

    6/19/2009 5:58:44 PM

    oh this game was so annoying

    Reply »

Want a new look on the discussion?
» Take It to the Forums

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post.
0 / 2000 used

Log In and Post

Log In and Post

The Chatter Box

  • Recent
  • Active
  • Status
ChknKitty

ChknKitty Says

Wow, people win every day in the Chicken Out contest! Sign up and win.

Xbox 360 | PS3 | Wii | PSP | DS | PC
The Games That Time Forgot

The Games That Time Forgot


The games we're pulling together in this feature won't appear on any of those best-of lists and get confused looks when you mention them in conversation. Just because time has forgotten these titles, though, doesn't mean you should forget them, too.

» Read On

Expand Box

© Crispy Gamer, Inc. All rights reserved.

By continuing past this page, and by your continued use of this site,
you agree to be bound by and abide by the User Agreement.

Log In or Register with Crispy Gamer

  • Register
  • Log In
  • Facebook
Register
Log In

Use your Facebook account to log in to Crispy Gamer

You'll also be able to add your Facebook friends to Crispy Gamer and post your Crispy Gamer activity in your Facebook feed.

Reasons to Join Crispy Gamer

  • It's Free
  • Leave Comments on Crispy Articles and Blogs
  • Enter Contests and Win Great Prizes
  • Converse With Other Gamers in Our Forums
  • Share What’s Up With Custom Status Text
  • Track Your Activity on Your Personal User Page
  • Chat with Friends in Real-Time