Not So Massively: Haven is a noble but failed experiment in couples’ gaming

    
12

This is purely anecdotal, but it has been my experience that most people who play games with other people tend to spend most of their time in groups of just two or three players. Very often, people play with their significant others. Despite that, games designed specifically for couples aren’t something you see a lot of.

Enter Haven, a game built from the ground up to be played by romantic partners. Players take on the role of Yu and Kay, a couple who fled to an alien world to escape a dystopic society where “mates” are assigned by an indifferent Matchmaker, and in this case both were assigned to people they did not love.

Now, I don’t have a partner (foreveralone.jpg), but I still like the idea behind this game. Thankfully, Haven does allow solo play, with the AI taking over one partner while exploring and the player handling both in combat. Combat’s very simple (more on that in a few paragraphs), so that’s not as taxing as you’d expect.

Putting aside the couple-friendly gameplay, I also like the idea of a story that pushes an established couple front and center. It has been long-time pet peeve of mine — not just in gaming, but the media in general — that most romantic fiction focuses on infatuation and the start of relationships. We rarely give much attention to established couples, and when we do, it’s usually in the context of abuse, cheating, or some other dysfunction. Our media landscape is absolutely starving for more depictions of established, healthy couples.

So I genuinely appreciate everything that Haven is trying to do. This makes it especially sad that I have to say I like almost nothing about what it’s actually doing.

First of all I need to say that Haven is one of the few games I’ve ever tried that is actually, literally painful to play. You spend most of your time just exploring the world, so you’d hope movement would feel good in this game, but it really doesn’t.

Your main way to move around in Haven is by a sort of gliding hover. It looks really cool, but it doesn’t feel cool. Turning is a bit clumsy, but the worst thing is you need to keep holding down a key in addition to the movement keys to maintain the glide. Why it wasn’t made a toggle I’ll never understand. By the end of a long session, my finger hurt from constantly holding the key down.

Why would you design a mechanic so bad even the game’s characters have to complain about it?
The alternative is walking, but the walking speed is so painfully slow even the game’s characters will almost immediately begin to complain about how slow it is if you start walking any distance. Why would you design a mechanic so bad even the game’s characters have to complain about it?

Combat’s better, but not by much. At first I thought it was turn-based, but there doesn’t seem to be a discrete turn order, so I guess it’s just really slow? I’d have investigated further, but frankly by the time I finally got to any combat, my patience was already running thin.

I really want to be able to say that the story or the characters redeem the game, but that just isn’t the case.

Again, I think the idea of a game putting a loving couple front and center is great, but the execution is rough. Better than the gameplay, to be sure, but still not really up to snuff.

Haven seems to want to straddle the line between very cartoony, over the top characterizations and a realistic depiction of a romantic partnership, but it ends up doing neither particularly well.

There are a few moments when things come together in a good way. There’s an early scene when Kay comforts Yu after she wakes up from a nightmare, and it’s really tender and real, and exactly what we need more of in our media. But most of the time the dialogue is varying shades of cringe, ranging from awkward phrasing to moments when things take a sudden and bizarrely over the top turn towards the sexual.

A particular low point is a scene when Yu (jokingly?) seems to neither know nor care what kind of scientist Kay is. How long have these two actually been together?

At least the voice actors do a pretty good job, considering what they have to work with. They add a lot of personality to the characters.

The game maybe tries too hard to remind us they’re a couple, too. The characters spontaneously holding hands as they glide across the landscape is cute, but it gets old when any pause almost immediately leads into an idle animation where they kiss. It happens so often it feels more like compulsive behavior than genuine affection.

I am probably the last person who should be commenting on what is and isn’t a healthy relationship, but to me, Kay and Yu don’t feel like a mature, loving couple so much as they seem like a pair of horny teenagers who ran away from home after developing a mutual obsession.

One other odd choice around this game is that Haven currently supports only local co-op. Given the focus on couples, who likely live together, I agree that prioritizing local co-op makes sense, but partners aren’t always in the same physical space as each other, so leaving out online co-op seems like a major oversight.

So is it all bad news? Well, no. One strong mark of Haven is its graphics. Similar to Drake Hollow, also recently covered in this column, Haven has a very bright and stylized art style that is incredibly soothing and inviting. The music is also kind of fun in an over the top sugar-sweet sort of way.

But beyond that, I really struggle to find things to appreciate about it, unfortunately.

I didn’t enjoy writing this column. Haven has a lot of great ideas, and clearly a lot of love went into it. It doesn’t feel good to spend so much time dunking on it, and it’s different enough that some people might still get some fun out of it. But it’s something I really have a hard time recommending to a wide audience.

I would really like to see other teams produce games on a similar line, though. Both in terms of gameplay made for couples and in terms of portraying loving, stable relationships in the media. Both are under-served niches.

The world of online gaming is changing. As the gray area between single-player and MMO becomes ever wider, Massively OP’s Tyler Edwards delves into this new and expanding frontier biweekly in Not So Massively, our column on battle royales, OARPGs, looter-shooters, and other multiplayer online titles that aren’t quite MMORPGs.
Advertisement

No posts to display

newest oldest most liked
Subscribe to:
Mewmew
Reader
Mewmew

I play so many games where I wonder why running movement wasn’t made a toggle. Especially since so many of them mean I have to hold an extra key down with my little weak pinky the entire time.

Reader
treskatay

I already get enough of people rubbing their relationships in my face on social media, but I was willing to give it a shot anyways because it looks so very pretty.

Yangers
Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Yangers

I’ve played the game (enjoyed it a decent amount as it happens with my SO), and two immediate thoughts.

1. Not using a controller is a disastrous option. Using a keyboard and mouse, this game steers like a three legged hippo. As a steam PC game that’s a bit yikes, but they do warn you.

2. The relationship stuff? My wife and I really enjoyed it. I dunno, the humour didn’t seem that crazy to us. We laughed quite a bit. Overall we enjoyed it.

It’s also a fantasy. I can cut the cheesy, shmaltz a little slack.

EmberStar
Reader
EmberStar

1. Not using a controller is a disastrous option. Using a keyboard and mouse, this game steers like a three legged hippo. As a steam PC game that’s a bit yikes, but they do warn you.

That’s unfortunate. I had been thinking about putting this one on my wishlist. But I don’t own a controller, and won’t be getting one. The reasons don’t matter, beyond the TLDR that I hate basically everything about controllers as in input option.

Reader
Bereman99

ranging from awkward phrasing to moments when things take a sudden and bizarrely over the top turn towards the sexual.

Sounds like how private conversations between me and my wife go from time to time.

Yeah, suddenly sexual innuendo or conversation topics in a private setting between two people who are both in love with each other and physically intimate is not really that weird.

Also, the part where she goofs on what kind of scientist isn’t so much forgetting what kind of scientist he is and more goofing on what kinds of things fall under that umbrella of expertise. A more nuanced mistake…and as a person who is a teacher whose wife works in IT, it’s legitimately the kind of mistake either I could make or she could make in real life…so again, not weird or unrealistic.

And finally, you mentioned having to hold down a key?

The game plays a TON better on a controller.

I absolutely do recommend this game.

Reader
Hikari Kenzaki

I don’t really agree with the assessment of the gameplay in general. I enjoyed it during the demo.

As for the local co-op only, this is simply factually untrue. This game supports Remote Play Together on Steam which is used by indie developers to enable co-op play online.

I can agree that the pair feel more like a couple of kids who barely know each other, not a tragically separated one true love. I’d need to play it some more to say it didn’t have something though.

I would really like to see other teams produce games on a similar line, though. Both in terms of gameplay made for couples and in terms of portraying loving, stable relationships in the media. Both are under-served niches.

The only way to achieve this is to support the games that try to do so. If we say “I’d love more games that are ____” but never support any of those developers who take a risk because the game isn’t perfect, then no one else will do so.

EmberStar
Reader
EmberStar

It’s sort of the same problem as the one facing games with a female protagonist. The “Common wisdom” is that such games don’t sell well, except the ones that do like Tomb Raider. And those must be doing well because Lara is a 48 inch chest, rather than an interesting character. It ends up turning into a self-fulfilling doom.

Publishers don’t want to fund games starring women. If they *do* fund such a game, they don’t want to advertise it unless the main bullet point is that she’s wearing about six square inches of costume. Then, when the game sells poorly because it was funded and advertised a fraction as much as “Grimdark Shooter Number Nine Billion, starring Grimdark Stubble Dude with Gravelly Voice (variant B, because this one was blonde,)” they turn around and say “See? SEE?! No one wants games starring women.” And when games like Horizon: Zero Dawn happen, everyone in charge acts completely shocked about how the game starring a well written and likable character in an interesting setting preformed “above expectations.”

EmberStar
Reader
EmberStar

Missing “Remote Play Together” is kind of a problem though. It’s not a really obvious feature for people that aren’t already using it. Not helped at all by Valve shoving it live and then basically ignoring it. In fact other than Markiplier and Jack Septiceye doing a couple of videos where they used it to online-play a couple of goofy local-only games, I can’t honestly say I’ve even remembered the feature existed until now.

If that’s what the game is going to depend on for online play, they need to do a better job of highlighting it as an available option. The fact that it *can* be missed is kind of an issue.

Reader
Rodrigo Dias Costa

Also, it doesn’t help anyone that’s not using Steam. For example, those playing on Game Pass for PC or consoles (although I’m not sure if those versions are also locked on local co-op only).

Reader
Kickstarter Donor
Louie

I know how difficult it is to develop online co-op (especially as a smaller developer), so I don’t fault the devs of Haven for this, but as someone in a LDR myself, Remote Play Together is a terrible feature that barely functions. My boyfriend and I are across the country (I’m west coast USA, he’s east coast USA), and it’s never once worked properly even though we both have very good upload and download speeds. We’ve tried it so many times and it’s just a mess, which is why we’re avoiding this game unfortunately.

Totally agree on supporting developers who are making games like this though. We really want to play it, but the online implementation is keeping us from doing that.

PlasmaJohn
Reader
Patreon Donor
Loyal Patron
PlasmaJohn

The only way to achieve this is to support the games that try to do so. If we say “I’d love more games that are ____” but never support any of those developers who take a risk because the game isn’t perfect, then no one else will do so.

As a customer I have a few hard and fast rules. It must be a functional game. If the game requires servers then whoever operates the game must know how to manage a highly available enterprise level service. Finally the studio and publishers must not dip into slimeball monetization practices.

I’m not asking for perfection just a solid product. I’m done chasing “potential” and I suspect I’m not alone.

Reader
Sarah Cushaway

Sounds boring AF to be honest.