So true.ZeroMachine post=6.74602.840320 said:Eh... as intelligent as this was, and althought it brought up some interesting thoughts, I think you're digging to deep. And trust me, I LOVE to dig deep.
Yes, the Mario games never acknowledge that there is some god controlling them. But does it deny the idea of a god at all? No. In fact, it makes it seem more like my personal view on whatever created us. Some powerful being put one thing in motion and then sat back, got some popcorn, and watched the show.
As for your insight on GLaDOS and the guy from BioShock (still haven't played that, sadly, so I don't know exactly what you were talking about), that doesn't scream "you're being controlled by a god, and therefore god is bad" at all like you made it sound. The story wasn't about fighting against a "god" at all. It was about fighting for freedom from someone with power. That doesn't mean god. Of course, you were right about God of Warbut that's a given.
So like I said, interesting, but felt a bit like you were grasping at straws to me.
172: Heathens by Design
- Thread starter Anthony Burch
- Start date
I think the author started with a deterministic understanding of godly intervention, and applied it to videogames, such as Mario, Metal Gear, etc. Clearly, there are religious people who accept the absence of divine intervention. The absence of divine intervention does not dictate the absence of divinity. The absence of explicit theism does not dictate atheism.
Even accepting this unspoken presence, one could consider the continue/save features as divine support. This is certainly one explanation for the hero that keeps getting up.
In reality most games are made without an intended statement one way or another regarding divinity. The fact that these worlds are programmed and created, means that literally, Mario has a creator. Miyamoto thankfully does not call himself God, but he is certainly a master of Mario's fate.
This kind of conversation doesn't get us anywhere in regards to God or videogames. It's just a sort of self pleasing thought process, a masturbatory kind of reasoning.
Even accepting this unspoken presence, one could consider the continue/save features as divine support. This is certainly one explanation for the hero that keeps getting up.
In reality most games are made without an intended statement one way or another regarding divinity. The fact that these worlds are programmed and created, means that literally, Mario has a creator. Miyamoto thankfully does not call himself God, but he is certainly a master of Mario's fate.
This kind of conversation doesn't get us anywhere in regards to God or videogames. It's just a sort of self pleasing thought process, a masturbatory kind of reasoning.
mnimmny is clearly onto something. There are two distinct comparisons in this article: the amount of power the player is given, and the presence/absense of gods in games. While both are appropriate for discussing god games, the later comparison falls apart when we talk about Mario. Does having a god in a game make it a better game or a worse game? Well, unless we're talking about power dynamics, I'm not sure it makes much of a difference.
Also, if the author is trying to make the argument that Mario's universe is atheistic, he is overlooking the question of how that universe came to be. The intelligent (level) design of Miyamoto is too distractingly obvious to the player for him to suspended his disbelief long enough to see an atheistic Mushroom Kingdom. I mean, would nature really create a series of synchronized floating platforms that lead out to an extra life?
Also, if the author is trying to make the argument that Mario's universe is atheistic, he is overlooking the question of how that universe came to be. The intelligent (level) design of Miyamoto is too distractingly obvious to the player for him to suspended his disbelief long enough to see an atheistic Mushroom Kingdom. I mean, would nature really create a series of synchronized floating platforms that lead out to an extra life?
Why does it MATTER? You are discussing video games. They are made for entertainment. This is the same type of BS which people dig for in classic novels. If this is what you think about when you play a video game, you are missing the point entirely. This is all a load of irrelevant crap; the comments have more substance than the article itself, which reads like a crappy 10th grade essay. The verb this most brings to mind is "reaching." More Zero Punctuation, less baseless tripe.
hmm... I'd have thought that this site being what it is and what it stands for that we were exploring the potential of video games as an artistic medium. Its clear that every other artistic medium has gradations of what people like that range from merely entertaining to profoundly moving. Example: movies: summer blockbusters to The Shawshank Redemption, music: "Love Me Do" by the Beatles or "I kissed a Girl" to "Atlantic City" by Springsteen or "Raglan Road" by Luke Kelly, or porn or Saturday morning cartoon stills to Guernica. The same in fact is true with video games: Halo to Planescape:Torment.barrinmb post=6.74602.848007 said:
Like you said people search for this stuff in classic novels because it is part of what can make something more than simply entertaining it can make it profound and worthwhile. When a medium is used to profoundly address human condition it makes the experience more rewarding and in many ways more entertaining and engaging. This is why classics are classics: they endure the test of time because they intelligently engage the timeless questions.
No one will argue that religion is not a major part of human existence, further most people (including atheists( accept that the questions that religion tries to address are questions that are central to the human condition (i.e. why am i here? what should i do? what does life mean?). Being able to address and explore some set of these questions in or through a video game makes the video game more entertaining engaging by making video games more relevant to us as humans, individuals, and societies. Take Turano's editorial on scary video games (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/op-ed/5400-The-Only-Thing-We-Have-to-Fear) as an example. When you can use the videogame medium to explore what scares you the videogame medium becomes a useful tool for personal introspection and growth.
An experience is valuable when its intrinsic value transcends mere endurance and entertains. But experiences are most valuable when they help you grow. I think that's why art is so valuable and why we should want video games that can be true classics and not simply nostalgic.
I just wish that this article hadn't oversimplified its observations about freewill in games and overstated the implications.
I'm going to try and avoid argument and just point out that Xenogears could've been a better example for the "game in which you fight to destroy God" motif
Arg. You're totally right. Xenogears would be a perfect example, AceDiamond.
Also, I'd like to recommend Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne as a good study of god defiance in games. In Nocturne, the player can choose to align himself with or against God and ultimately must confront the fundamental forces of his rapidly changing universe.
Also, I'd like to recommend Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne as a good study of god defiance in games. In Nocturne, the player can choose to align himself with or against God and ultimately must confront the fundamental forces of his rapidly changing universe.
Sadly this article didn't deploy a quirky angle which revealed a different perspective. It was simply and purposely grasping at air for a pay check.
EVERYONE is painfully aware of the common "God exists" arguments. He works in mysterious ways, perhaps this curse is a blessing, your life may be just part of a bigger plan, his help is subtle, ect. This is the primary belief otherwise it'd be nae impossible to prove his benevolent existence when Timmy dies at 2 from misc birth defects and all the other horrific matters which happen daily.
So arguing that God doesn't exist because he doesn't chuck power ups at Mario every minute or wipe Bowser off the face of the earth to make things easier is ridiculous and unfounded if you bat 1/2 an eye lid at the consensus of belief. For Mario to actually promote anti-theism it'd take one hell of a plot change unless your part of some amazing minority that believes God actually fixes everything directly post haste in which case you should have sited it. Now please refer back to the first paragraph for the conclusion, please try harder this is as sloppy as it gets.
EVERYONE is painfully aware of the common "God exists" arguments. He works in mysterious ways, perhaps this curse is a blessing, your life may be just part of a bigger plan, his help is subtle, ect. This is the primary belief otherwise it'd be nae impossible to prove his benevolent existence when Timmy dies at 2 from misc birth defects and all the other horrific matters which happen daily.
So arguing that God doesn't exist because he doesn't chuck power ups at Mario every minute or wipe Bowser off the face of the earth to make things easier is ridiculous and unfounded if you bat 1/2 an eye lid at the consensus of belief. For Mario to actually promote anti-theism it'd take one hell of a plot change unless your part of some amazing minority that believes God actually fixes everything directly post haste in which case you should have sited it. Now please refer back to the first paragraph for the conclusion, please try harder this is as sloppy as it gets.
Perhaps the author was pulling a ZP, and was using a crappy argument just to get the fanboystheists in an uproar?
Funny, it even fails at that, as even atheists can see the flaws in the arguments. But at least the above hypothesis gives me a reason to actually read one of the author's articles again.
Funny, it even fails at that, as even atheists can see the flaws in the arguments. But at least the above hypothesis gives me a reason to actually read one of the author's articles again.
Hey, interesting read. And although I don't think games like Mario or MGS are necessarily anti-theistic (or 'pro-theistic') I do think the author made some valid arguments regarding God-games, Portal and Bioshock.
I mean, if you think about it, an anti-theistic interpretation definately holds up to scrutiny concerning Portal. You might say this is reading into things much too deeply but literary circles do a similar thing to novels. Why shouldn't we - as gamers - interpret our games in a way that isn't immediately obvious?
I mean, if you think about it, an anti-theistic interpretation definately holds up to scrutiny concerning Portal. You might say this is reading into things much too deeply but literary circles do a similar thing to novels. Why shouldn't we - as gamers - interpret our games in a way that isn't immediately obvious?
While I do think that it might be a little over-thinking on the author's part, it makes for interesting over-thinking nonetheless.
I mean, who knows? It's kind of fun to imagine that every game ever made sent subliminal messages into the player persuading him/her that "God is bad".
Of course, that wouldn't be a good thing at all.
I'm also kind of disappointed that whenever there's an article on religion, there is absolutely no mention of Buddhism, Hinduism, or other major religions. It wouldn't fit in this particular article, but just something I noticed (all by myself).
I mean, who knows? It's kind of fun to imagine that every game ever made sent subliminal messages into the player persuading him/her that "God is bad".
Of course, that wouldn't be a good thing at all.
I'm also kind of disappointed that whenever there's an article on religion, there is absolutely no mention of Buddhism, Hinduism, or other major religions. It wouldn't fit in this particular article, but just something I noticed (all by myself).
The Mario universe, at least, HAS a God. And it's not the player.
It's Rosalina.
Think about it. She lives in space (the Comet Observatory), the people of the Mushroom Kingdom associate her return with a celestial holy day, she appears to be immortal (the comet returns "every 100 years," so she's at least a few hundred years old and yet she still looks even younger than Peach), and she raises the components of the universe (the Lumas, which when grown up become planets, stars and entire galaxies) to adulthood, and they all call her their "mama." Entire galaxies call her their "mama."
She's the mother figure to the entire universe.
So no, the Mario universe is not anti-theistic, it's exactly the opposite. It confirms that there IS a God, a God we can see and talk to, if we can get there.
(anyone who can identify where this theory comes from wins... um, I'll think of a prize later)
In regards to this article: I agree with the consensus that it's grasping at straws. This anti-theistic message of these universes won't be found unless you're really determined to find it.
It's Rosalina.
Think about it. She lives in space (the Comet Observatory), the people of the Mushroom Kingdom associate her return with a celestial holy day, she appears to be immortal (the comet returns "every 100 years," so she's at least a few hundred years old and yet she still looks even younger than Peach), and she raises the components of the universe (the Lumas, which when grown up become planets, stars and entire galaxies) to adulthood, and they all call her their "mama." Entire galaxies call her their "mama."
She's the mother figure to the entire universe.
So no, the Mario universe is not anti-theistic, it's exactly the opposite. It confirms that there IS a God, a God we can see and talk to, if we can get there.
(anyone who can identify where this theory comes from wins... um, I'll think of a prize later)
In regards to this article: I agree with the consensus that it's grasping at straws. This anti-theistic message of these universes won't be found unless you're really determined to find it.
thats like saying we live in an atheist world, how often does god interfere with our puny lives? well i guess i see ur point on rts's but on shooters you are in a mortal body, god isnt a thought, he could be there or not, he simply doesnt control the parameters of the game itself...
The author makes a few very good points about game design, when you think about it and don't wank each other about imagined slights to your chosen opiate of the masses. It really more about two very basic design concepts every game developer really needs to keep in mind:
1. The player must not be invincible (it's called God-mode for a reason). Most developers get that, because it's really a natural thing. The feeling of accomplishment in games comes directly and in large part from overcoming adversity and reaching your goal. Whether that it solving a really difficult puzzle, making that one extra level in your favourite MMORPG or defeating the boss enemy of Generic Doom Clone 2000, it comes down to playing by the game's rules and beating it anyway. The abilities of the player MUST be limited in the context of the game, or it is simply not fun to play. While cheating and experimenting can be fun, in the long run it is always the sense of accomplishment that keeps a player going for more.
2. There mustn't be an external force dictating arbitrary rules. The player must always have the feeling of being in control of his own actions, not that he is at the mercy of plot devices. If there are limitations to the players abilities, they should be consistent and predictable without feeling forced. This is something many developers do not get (Oblivion's level adjustment comes to mind). Whenever a game forces the player to do something he would rather not do, or prevents him from doing something that common sense dictates his character SHOULD be able to do - sometimes known as the "Cutscene Stupidity Syndrome" - the player gets frustrated. Frustrating the player is a very bad idea, because a frustrated player will want to move on and do something that's actually fun.
Whether you agree with the authors view on religion or not, both of these are very astute observations. A game must tread a thin line between limiting a player too much and making him feel too powerful. A "theistic" game world, with a literal omnipotent God that could actively intervene and randomly make you win or lose the game would be seriously boring to play.
Sure, you can have gods (with a lower-case "g") in games, but they would have to be just as impotent as the player - actually even more so, because everything that's really important NEEDS to be done by the player, to keep up the feeling of accomplishment. In this sense, all (fun) games are implicitly atheist, or at least have non-interventionist deities.
1. The player must not be invincible (it's called God-mode for a reason). Most developers get that, because it's really a natural thing. The feeling of accomplishment in games comes directly and in large part from overcoming adversity and reaching your goal. Whether that it solving a really difficult puzzle, making that one extra level in your favourite MMORPG or defeating the boss enemy of Generic Doom Clone 2000, it comes down to playing by the game's rules and beating it anyway. The abilities of the player MUST be limited in the context of the game, or it is simply not fun to play. While cheating and experimenting can be fun, in the long run it is always the sense of accomplishment that keeps a player going for more.
2. There mustn't be an external force dictating arbitrary rules. The player must always have the feeling of being in control of his own actions, not that he is at the mercy of plot devices. If there are limitations to the players abilities, they should be consistent and predictable without feeling forced. This is something many developers do not get (Oblivion's level adjustment comes to mind). Whenever a game forces the player to do something he would rather not do, or prevents him from doing something that common sense dictates his character SHOULD be able to do - sometimes known as the "Cutscene Stupidity Syndrome" - the player gets frustrated. Frustrating the player is a very bad idea, because a frustrated player will want to move on and do something that's actually fun.
Whether you agree with the authors view on religion or not, both of these are very astute observations. A game must tread a thin line between limiting a player too much and making him feel too powerful. A "theistic" game world, with a literal omnipotent God that could actively intervene and randomly make you win or lose the game would be seriously boring to play.
Sure, you can have gods (with a lower-case "g") in games, but they would have to be just as impotent as the player - actually even more so, because everything that's really important NEEDS to be done by the player, to keep up the feeling of accomplishment. In this sense, all (fun) games are implicitly atheist, or at least have non-interventionist deities.
games like mario and metal gear do not state that there is a god, but do not give any statment of non existance. and it could be argued that lives,continues,save points,new game,etc. are god's intervention.
as for other "god" games they rarely intend to simulate the effects of the christian/jewish/muslim god. most are based off of roman,greek, and norse gods.
all had inhuman power but were hardly omnipresent and omnipotent. infact many of the gods (especially in norse mythology) died,were affected by sins and pleasures like humans.
god does not only refer to a specific being, but someone who holds power that is beyond human potential.
>.> and athiesm is the belief that there is no god. if your playing a game where you fight gods, u have to admit they exist otherwise the game would be empty by your reasoning. (plus athiesm was really more directed to the one god theory anyhow)
i wouldn't call myself religious, but having you call a game that does or doesn't shout "god exists!" athiest goes too far. "the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence".
however i wont tell u to stop, cuz its part of free choice =P
as for other "god" games they rarely intend to simulate the effects of the christian/jewish/muslim god. most are based off of roman,greek, and norse gods.
all had inhuman power but were hardly omnipresent and omnipotent. infact many of the gods (especially in norse mythology) died,were affected by sins and pleasures like humans.
god does not only refer to a specific being, but someone who holds power that is beyond human potential.
>.> and athiesm is the belief that there is no god. if your playing a game where you fight gods, u have to admit they exist otherwise the game would be empty by your reasoning. (plus athiesm was really more directed to the one god theory anyhow)
i wouldn't call myself religious, but having you call a game that does or doesn't shout "god exists!" athiest goes too far. "the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence".
however i wont tell u to stop, cuz its part of free choice =P
Well first of all, God would not step in and beat metal gear...he'd let them run over the earth and destory it. And when the human being that got off his ass did the gear kicking Snake failed to the Sheeple will praise god for being saved...not that god allowed the metal gear to be made, rampage over the earth and kill billions.
That's right, Religion doesn't work in games because God doesn't work outside of FAITH.
God is only praised when good things happen, but hes also the one that allows the bad to happen.
If god didn't like magic and witches and other religions to exist he would put a end to them, Why we don't lob fireballs and magic missiles at each other.
Kill god...Ok, let touch on this. Why not kill a lazy god that demands butt kissing, but never even stops the evil of the world. His followers turn into insaine murders for his will, he don't care.
Look at let's say Disgea there are minor gods. Order and Chaos...and of course the almighty lets the good guy get stomped as normal. Could he have save trillions of lives across countless worlds? Did he need a army of heroes to balls up because he couldn't after those deaths?
Seriously most gods are hateful, vengeful, murderous, just like people. And then all of a sudden they take a angel with no free will force it to rebel. Make it challenge god (guess who made the angel and manipulates all) And ohh big surprise Angel loses, becomes devil to put the worlds blame on. While the puppet master God smiles as his approval rating soars. And still he let's the African death squads feed 3 year old girls to wood chippers.
Faith is nice... And it's good. But almost ever religion is so messed up in it's own preaching if it were a movie, it would fail and sell the props to "Power rangers in Biblical times" to recoup.
And If I'm wrong, god can show up next to me in the form of a pink Cochobo and tell me my wrongs. And big surpises for the 700,000th time he didn't show. Big surprise.
It's a game. And Civ isn't a god sim as if it were a god sim. The player would do nothing, watch the game. Watch his people praise him. Watch his people beg them to save them from evil... and not do a single thing about it. Maybe make a burning bush, give the civ's the players laws and watch them ignore your will anyway.
That's right, Religion doesn't work in games because God doesn't work outside of FAITH.
God is only praised when good things happen, but hes also the one that allows the bad to happen.
If god didn't like magic and witches and other religions to exist he would put a end to them, Why we don't lob fireballs and magic missiles at each other.
Kill god...Ok, let touch on this. Why not kill a lazy god that demands butt kissing, but never even stops the evil of the world. His followers turn into insaine murders for his will, he don't care.
Look at let's say Disgea there are minor gods. Order and Chaos...and of course the almighty lets the good guy get stomped as normal. Could he have save trillions of lives across countless worlds? Did he need a army of heroes to balls up because he couldn't after those deaths?
Seriously most gods are hateful, vengeful, murderous, just like people. And then all of a sudden they take a angel with no free will force it to rebel. Make it challenge god (guess who made the angel and manipulates all) And ohh big surprise Angel loses, becomes devil to put the worlds blame on. While the puppet master God smiles as his approval rating soars. And still he let's the African death squads feed 3 year old girls to wood chippers.
Faith is nice... And it's good. But almost ever religion is so messed up in it's own preaching if it were a movie, it would fail and sell the props to "Power rangers in Biblical times" to recoup.
And If I'm wrong, god can show up next to me in the form of a pink Cochobo and tell me my wrongs. And big surpises for the 700,000th time he didn't show. Big surprise.
It's a game. And Civ isn't a god sim as if it were a god sim. The player would do nothing, watch the game. Watch his people praise him. Watch his people beg them to save them from evil... and not do a single thing about it. Maybe make a burning bush, give the civ's the players laws and watch them ignore your will anyway.
I disagree that just because "you are the only who can kill that Metal Gear or save the princess" that this shows that games "don't believe in God." First of all, if games tried to believe in God like you say they have to in order to really believe, the game would be broken becase the player could just run to a bottomless pit and jump off, and then God would step in and save the day. Do you really believe that? I'm a Christian and I have made of plenty of mistakes and lost plenty of fights or games in my life and God didn't come running down from heaven to fix it. Personally I don't think of games as believing in God or not. There are very few games where He's mentioned at all, because games are about telling stories. When a game is telling a story it isn't an accurate representation of the universe we live in any more than a book or TV show. Characters in books or on TV fail all the time and no miracle saves them. They are stories that don't mention a God or deity for the same reason they don't delve into insanely deep backstory for every minor character or backstory, it isn't relevant to the story. Just like God has allowed a ton of real people to die in tragedies that were not natural causes and hasn't come down to save them, but many still believe in him, he doesn't save mario every time he dies, that doesn't mean mario is an atheist...
I don't see how God never riding down on a chariot and blasting Bowser into oblivion means that there is no God in Mario...
I'm pretty sure God never smote Hitler during WWII or gave a super magical power up to the men and women who died trying to save others from the falling twin towers. People, even extraordinarily religious people, act of their own volition all the time in their "God filled" universes and never once does he throw them an upgrade to their shields or lay waste to their enemies for them.
Though your opinion is valid (I can neither prove nor disprove God's involvement with Mario) your argument is incredibly flawed.
I'm pretty sure God never smote Hitler during WWII or gave a super magical power up to the men and women who died trying to save others from the falling twin towers. People, even extraordinarily religious people, act of their own volition all the time in their "God filled" universes and never once does he throw them an upgrade to their shields or lay waste to their enemies for them.
Though your opinion is valid (I can neither prove nor disprove God's involvement with Mario) your argument is incredibly flawed.
I know I'm way late to the party on this but don't you think your grasping at straws here, most of this makes no sense at all.