Right before writing this review, I wanted to quickly play “A Short Hike” again. I had already played and completed the game’s primary storylines over the work week, and immensely enjoyed both embarking on the main hike of Hawk Peak Trail and engaging in some of the game’s multiple side quests. But I felt that it was necessary to play the game again, for around twenty-to-thirty minutes, and try to think critically about what exactly I had enjoyed so much about this game. I ended up playing “A Short Hike” for another hour and a half.
One of the main appeals of a game like “A Short Hike” is how it allows its player to explore a large, diversified island of various scenery and animals. While the player is immediately directed to embark on the Hawk Peak Trail hike, the game almost directs its player to not focus on this main task because of how it requires the player to progress to the island’s peak. Rather than forcing the player to go through a sequence of predetermined, linear events to reach the end of Hawk Peak Trail, “A Short Hike” simply requires the player to collect seven golden feathers. These feathers can either be found through searching for them, buying them, or participating in activities around the island.
Whether the player holds vibrant conversations with the island’s other inhabitants, engages in a variety of activities or tasks presented to them, or simply explores the various destinations on the island, the player is almost constantly making progress in the game. The player can’t take any “wrong” steps in “A Short Hike” either: there’s no way to lose progress or forfeit money or feathers involuntarily, so there is little fear accompanying the actions a player takes. The player can confidently aim to complete “A Short Hike” in the quickest manner possible, or they could take their time and explore every nook and cranny on the island; the structure of the game accommodates both of these approaches. By allowing the player to embark on a “choose your own journey” type of experience, “A Short Hike” grants its player a refreshing, stress-free liberty in how they play the game, and a truly “cozy” experience.
I believe that it was this “coziness” of “A Short Hike” got me to play longer than I initially anticipated. I may have finished the Hawk Peak Trail hike, but there were so many other places on the island I had yet to fully explore, and characters who I hadn’t finished interacting with. “A Short Hike” made it so easy for me to play the game at whatever pace I felt comfortable with, devoid of any danger of setbacks and overt frustration.
I didn’t end up playing this game for the week, but after reading this I might have to! I think the fact that players can approach the game in a number of different ways makes me feel more confident that I will enjoy playing. I always had thought of coziness as being more related to the atmosphere of the game, but thinking about it from a gameplay perspective is really smart. Though it now seems obvious that not having ways for the player to lose progress makes the game cozier, I had never even considered that angle before!
I enjoy your post and felt largely the same about “A Short Hike”, its a vastly different experience from any game I’ve ever played and was indeed very cozy.
That being said I want to push back against the “choose your own journey” phrase you used to describe the game. I assume this was your spin-off of the “choose your own adventure” genre of games however I don’t think “A Short Hike” can really be called one. While the player does choose where to go and what to do in the narrative, there are no consequences or impacts of your choices in “A Short Hike” unlike “choose your own adventure” games which usually focus pretty heavily on how your choices impact the game. “A Short Hike” is low stakes, the only differentiation between choice and non-choice is that sometimes you get items out of it.
Also “choose your own adventure” games, at least the mainstream ones, are extremely linear. Although there is narrative divergence with side quests or narratives, time always moves forward and there is no resisting past adventures/choices. “A Short Hike” is different in the sense that time doesn’t really pass at all. And many activities and conversations can be revised such as the race, conversation repeats, and open-world style exploration.
That all being said, I understand what you mean about being able to choose where you go and what you do without the game directing you. The player does indeed choose how to experience their adventure at whatever pace and completion they wish. I personally spent so much time wandering around and finding side-quests in “A Short Hike” that I never got to the peak.
Also, HOW DID YOU GET THAT MANY FEATHERS!?!?!!
Something interesting that I experienced when playing “A Short Hike” is that I started the game intending to complete it as fast as possible, but over the course of the game, I started slowing down and taking in the environment around me. The graphics look pretty and the dialogue is witty and entertaining. And as you stated, the game is very open-ended, and only forces the player to collect seven golden feathers in whichever way they can. The purpose of this requirement was almost as if to force me to stop and smell the roses, and part of what I think makes this game feel cozy is the sheer variety of mundane tasks, such as fishing, or parkour racing, or playing beachstickball. The limit of seven feathers is quite low compared to the total amount of feathers one can obtain, meaning that the player has room to not do the things they might find boring. So as much as the game’s coziness comes from the ability for the player to choose what they want to do, they also have choice in what they don’t want to do, and have the freedom to not do the boring stuff while still being able to complete the hike.