That's an interesting point. I'm currently reading a book called The Play Ethic that essentially attempts to formulate an alternative to the structured, Puritan-derived "work ethic" that permeates parts of the formerly colonial world. The book addresses the origins and various meanings of the word "play" in great detail -- it's fascinating reading.gregking said:
65: "Fun" is a Four-Letter Word
- Thread starter The Escapist Staff
- Start date
Shiroi Danmaku-kun. It's a game I've been playing recently, mostly because I have a Mac and there aren't that many games to play on it. In any case, the game is anything but fun, but I still play it often. Why? I have no idea really. It's not fun, it has no story, its graphics are minimalistic, the difficulty is totally unfair, and well, it's got nearly everything going against it. I think, though, that's it's an example of a game that didn't make "fun" a priority.
http://narcissu.insani.org/
This is also a game that's not fun. It's not supposed to be, it's suppposed to tell a story. That's basically it. I don't like the story, so I don't like playing it, but it's not a bad story at all. Maybe somebody else would like playing it.
http://narcissu.insani.org/
This is also a game that's not fun. It's not supposed to be, it's suppposed to tell a story. That's basically it. I don't like the story, so I don't like playing it, but it's not a bad story at all. Maybe somebody else would like playing it.
The problem is that people are seeking different things from the same games. Some are perfectly happy with the state of videogames... some are not.
I like drama. I like games that make me question my own morals with a good story... I like it when a game gives me something to ponder on an intellectual level. Adult drama is very different than drama for kids. Videogames are currently designed to appeal to kids. It's that simple.
Some adults are not into drama or don't seek that when they play videogames and these are the ones who can't understand the validity of this article. It doesn't apply to them. It's like when people say that [insert action movie title] was a good movie and the other people say that they didn't like it. There is nothing wrong with the movie, it's just impossible to appeal to everyone... which is why there are drama movies and action movies. Right now, the videogame market is focused on "action movies". There are hardly any "drama movies" for videogamers... and even fewer "adult drama movies" (if any).
This article (and others like it) is simply the product of an evolving (growing) videogamer demographic.
Imagine if 99% of the books and movies out there were rated "E for everyone".
I'm tired of the young boy who embarks on an epic quest to save the world... could I have some stories that appeal to people over 30, please?
I like drama. I like games that make me question my own morals with a good story... I like it when a game gives me something to ponder on an intellectual level. Adult drama is very different than drama for kids. Videogames are currently designed to appeal to kids. It's that simple.
Some adults are not into drama or don't seek that when they play videogames and these are the ones who can't understand the validity of this article. It doesn't apply to them. It's like when people say that [insert action movie title] was a good movie and the other people say that they didn't like it. There is nothing wrong with the movie, it's just impossible to appeal to everyone... which is why there are drama movies and action movies. Right now, the videogame market is focused on "action movies". There are hardly any "drama movies" for videogamers... and even fewer "adult drama movies" (if any).
This article (and others like it) is simply the product of an evolving (growing) videogamer demographic.
Imagine if 99% of the books and movies out there were rated "E for everyone".
I'm tired of the young boy who embarks on an epic quest to save the world... could I have some stories that appeal to people over 30, please?
I read the original article and this follow-up. A very similiar premise to the one in Warren's article.gregking said:
The more I think about this whole issue of "fun" versus "highbrow" I just think it boils down to taste. Although I think both authors are being a bit snobish about the whole thing, despite their proclamations to the opposite, it seems that as gamers grow up and move into their thirties they begin to desire games that mimic the more adult and cerebral themes they have come to appreciate in other forms of media.
The problem with that is that videogames are not all that conducive to "highbrow" themes. It seems to me that to recreate the experiences of "high culture" in videogames would create a somewhat restrictive type of game play, so that the experience could be tailored to and consistent with the vision of the designer. Books and movies are completely contrived and and relatively static. Videogames, on the other hand, are a more open-ended and user determined experience.
It's a problem, but it may not be a limitation. I think we will see more "highbrow" games in the future, based on the simple fact that gamers are getting a little longer in tooth and want to see videogames mature along with them.
I dunno, Max Payne does a pretty good job at tackling adult themes while keeping gameplay innovative and fun. Same goes for Indigo Prophecy and the plethora if interacive fiction games out there.heavyfeul said:
Like other entertainment media, games can be highbrow, but many choose not to be. Just like action movies or romance novels cater to a different audience, so do many games.
Why do you say that the videogame medium is not conducive to "highbrow" themes? Does this have anything to do with Roger Ebert? Don't get me started on Roger. ;-)heavyfeul said:
I agree with Joe, it's really just a choice made by the either the developer or the publisher... and it all boils down to the risks involved in making money. Personally, I really enjoyed Halo and Knights of the Old Republic (best twist ever, by the way). Why can't we see games like that, but with stories and dialog that are impressive and interesting to the grownup gamer?
It's not a matter of restricting how games are designed... I don't understand that argument at all.
The thing that distinguishes games from other forms of media is the ability to interact with the environemnt and to participate in gameplay. Thus, much of the experience a user has is determined by how they decide to experience the game. To ensure that the game fully realizes its desire to be "highbrow" would require a certain amount of restrictions in how the gamer goes about playing the game. Otherwise, the experience would be completely different for every user.Echolocating said:
Just adding particular stories and dialog would not make the game highbrow. There a several games that already touch on highbrow issues, but do they quilify as icons of high culture?
For any game there has to be a certain amount of play involved. That play has to fun in some fashion or another. Would forcing the user to play in a specific "highbrow" way make for a good viable game? I am not really sure, but I am skeptical.
It just seems to me that anytime we try to elevate videogames into the realm of art or high culture, we inevitabley fail, at least in an objective sense. This may be related to the nature of the medium itself. If we make a videogame that most people would consider high culture, would it still be a videogame, or would it be interactive art, or an electronic graphic novel?
Movies and books have the ability to completely contrive the viewers' or readers' experience. Videogames do not have that luxury.
Disagree. You don't have to make the experience the exact same, you just need to convey the same themes, which is the important part in art anyway. In fact, no one experiences "real" art in the same way anyone else does, either. Ask 10 people what the Mona Lisa's smile means, and you'll get 10 different answers, assuming they didn't read The Da Vinci Code.heavyfeul said:
I think you're looking at sandbox games and MMOGs rather than games as a whole. Sure, GTA by very definition has to be an open-ended experince. Same with WoW. But look at all the single player games that put people on rails, whether they know it or not. Metal Gear Solid and Kojima's themes on violence definitely brush up against art, despite the fact there's little to no wiggle room in the way you play the game. You're still being guided by the creator's hand; there's just an illusion of choice. And it's still a fun game.
Personally, I think people in the industry put too much stock into agency, especially when they say it's what separates games from books, movies and other forms of art. Literature and cinema engage the audience in a dialog, which can be just as interactive as games, or more so, mainly because that dialog occurs between other members of the audience rather than an AI.
I think it could be quite possible to make a game that forces people to think about the world, like movies such as Fight Club did (or even Inconvenient Truth, but let's start climbing before we leap mountains). There's even some ways to introduce interactivity. I know some people in F.E.A.R. felt sort of wierd being able to kill Fettel themselves, unrestrained. He's talking to you, and he stops, and you're sitting there, and you think "WAIT. I HAVE A PISTOL. HE HASN'T DISAPPEARED." Will Wright said there's a big difference between seeing a burly hitman tie someone up and let them bleed to death, and BEING a burly hitman...
It's like nobody believes in layered gameplay anymore.
Shakespeare got it right; build your story with layers, with the low-brow stuff up-front (there's sex and booze humour in Shakespeare, regular Farelly Brothers stuff for the era, and lots of fighting), social commentary behind that, literary themes behind that, and wrap it up in poetry. Appeals to a broad market of differing demographics with the same product.
Games have ventured there too; Shadow of the Colossus and BioShock, for two. Arguably Portal and Marathon. There's no reason to think that we won't see more of the same ilk... and who knows, maybe we're still waiting for the digital era's Shakespeare to blow the doors off all the conventions.
-- Steve
(PS: I hate the false dichotomy raised by Spectre, that stories are either fun or thought-provoking. They can be both.)
Shakespeare got it right; build your story with layers, with the low-brow stuff up-front (there's sex and booze humour in Shakespeare, regular Farelly Brothers stuff for the era, and lots of fighting), social commentary behind that, literary themes behind that, and wrap it up in poetry. Appeals to a broad market of differing demographics with the same product.
Games have ventured there too; Shadow of the Colossus and BioShock, for two. Arguably Portal and Marathon. There's no reason to think that we won't see more of the same ilk... and who knows, maybe we're still waiting for the digital era's Shakespeare to blow the doors off all the conventions.
-- Steve
(PS: I hate the false dichotomy raised by Spectre, that stories are either fun or thought-provoking. They can be both.)
I like articles like this, because I think they tend to look at games with a different perspective. This particular subject is something I've thought a little about, because I don't really buy the "games have to be fun" sort of mindset, as it doesn't seem to mesh with other activities very well. I think the best example that comes to mind at the moment is climbing Mount Everest. I haven't done it, but there was recently a commercial on the Discovery Channel for a new show about some people making the trek to the top. I just remember part of the commercial being a person saying something like (and I grossly paraphrase), "This is hard, it isn't fun. Don't do this expecting to enjoy it." Yet, people do it. I can only imagine that people want to do this sort of thing because, despite misery and pain, it is a valued experience. That, then, is what I'd like to see games trying to create: valued experiences. Being fun is okay, but it often gets forgotten, and you just need to get the next bit of fun to keep you going. If you create an experience (in a book, lecture, film, sport, game, or anything) that goes beyond simple fun to give you something you really value, then I think that is always going to be more laudable.