Nick Montfort, a professor at MIT and GrandTextAuto contributor, has declared (with a some analysis) Passage is a superior game to Portal. Now, if the goal of games at large was to make people think, I might agree. But I think stating that "there are really two big ideas in these two games: The passage of a person through life and the idea that takes control by default in the other, supposedly message-free game, the passage of SKUs through retail stores is going a little far. But like most provocative statements, I suspect it was intended to spur discussion as much as draw attention to a little game like Passage, and the comments section doesn't disappoint:

And I'm still trying to grasp some of the criticisms of Portal. The storyline, with its innovative delivery and interesting topic-letting what is essentially a character piece for GLaDOS take center stage-is reduced to "not philosphy-ish." The game is criticized for trying to sell copies-this is basically turning what should be praise (the game tries to appeal to people) into an empty, backhanded insult. How does the commercialization compromise Portal as a game? Detail that, instead of appealing to elitism.

... What [Passage] reminded me most of is a tricolour Mondrian: an exercise in laying bare the simplest semiotic structures of the journey through life. As a result, it can never tell us anything we don't already know: just like a Mondrian, it's a cold aesthetic exercise in the proportional relationships of reduced entities. There is no confusion, no chaos, ultimately little value as a critical text.

And to be honest, if you're looking for some deep meaning, you're missing the point of the work. Far be it from me to say you can't find such things in a game like portal. I am simply saying that's not it's purpose, and to look for deeper meaning is almost a pointless exercise. People can find deeper meaning in anything they want, even the intangible or completely non-existent. Existential is a made up word that usually acts as a sign that someone has gone beyond the original point, is currently B.S.ing, and you can stop listening to them. My pants are existential. If you ask me to defend that, I will gladly do so, from the top of my head, because I took a high school literature class, and no one could tell when I was lying, being honest, or just B.S.ing.

I don't agree with Montfort's original assertion, but the discussion in the comments below is pretty interesting — I'm not sure why we feel compelled to poke sticks at titles that may (gasp!) make money, and apparently a lot of other people don't, either. But this is why game criticism can be a good thing — it gets people thinking and discussing in a way that your average review won't.

PvP: Portal versus Passage [Grand Text Auto]