Braid Creator on Games as "Sh**ty Action Movies"

[Danzavare]

I'm tired of this false dichotomy of art and fun. Being artistic doesn't mean being sterile or inaccessible. You can present something deep and meaningful while having it be fun. Part of me wants to be reasonable in this debate, the other part wants to bludgeon people with my first year philosophy textbook. There is no universally accepted definition of art yet we have people arbitrarily classifying games as art or not art. (Not to say that there can't be objective standards of art)

I played Braid after hearing about it but I have to say, outside of the final level there really isn't much of a creative integration of gameplay and story. I was drawn into the writing but

Spoiler

I thought the Atom bomb ending was a cheap cop-out. I preferred the game when I thought I was playing through a metaphor of an abusive relationship and/or obsession. Then I felt some conflict between my drive to win as a gamer and my moral inclination to not want to harass a woman. That contrast led me to ponder. The ending just felt like a cheap M.Night Shamalon twist that undid a lot of the artistic credit I would've given the game.

I think the creative toolbox that is Skyrim could provide an excellent grounds for analysis. I think game's like Mirror's Edge produce meaning. I think games like Eternal Sonata are rich with metaphor and allusions. Honestly, given that a player makes a fair attempt at trying to play through a game, I think we could academically study and find some artistic merit in quite a lot of player experiences. (Some games would fair better than others) I don't know why either of these people think a game so limited in its scope that basically tells you its intended meaning warrants artistic exploration.

I was thinking about making a thread where we'd do a simple analysis of a cutscene, some gameplay and maybe even a loading screen to show how they could lend themselves to communicating some underlying meaning. Too many people confuse artistic with something that's overtly strange or foreign to us. I believe there's art to be found in a lot of games we already have, it's just not enough people have given time to deconstructing them the way we would a film, performance or book.

Captcha: run the gauntlet

 

[snave]

Err, Braid did none of that. It was a repetitive puzzle game with some vague text based story plopped on the end as its artistry. That is not a good example of "taking advantage of the medium".

By his reasoning though, survival horror is probably the best the medium has achieved.

 

[Strazdas]

It's not so much the games themselves that I have a problem with; If they're good, they're good.

It's just the constant yammering by indy developers and everyone else that games should be so much more then what they are now, and that to be taken seriously as a art form, yadda yadda yadda...

For a billion dollar industry, the games world has such a low self esteem.

All industries do that. Indy movie makers scream how blockbusters are crap and how thier 5000 dollar budget gorefest is the next citizen kane. Underground music artists base thie entire careers around "mainstream music is crap". There i will always be people who think they are better than others, and if not given enough attention start screaming how everyone is stupid for not looking at them.

Oh I agree, gaming is in a good shape as it is, it's the biggest entertainment market in the world these days for a reason.

Actually it hasnt beaten movie industry yet, or has it now?

 

[Char-Nobyl]

Since releasing Braid back in 2006, Blow has been dividing his time between work on The Witness and vocal criticism of the gaming industry. Blow's comments are usually relentlessly self assured, vitriolic and dryly funny; his recent comments to The Atlantic are no exception.

In a profile piece entitled The Most Dangerous Gamer [http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/05/the-most-dangerous-gamer/8928/?single_page=true], Taylor Clark paints Blow as your typical grumpy genius, and Braid as the sole beacon of intelligent gaming in an ocean of mindless shooter sludge. Framed with a picture of Blow looking all austere (though the picture's effect is diminished somewhat by his uncanny resemblance to New Radicals frontman, Gregg Alexander [http://youtu.be/DL7-CKirWZE]), the piece is hilariously dismissive of gaming as a medium - my favorite line: "the form remains an artistic backwater, plagued by cartoonish murderfests and endless revenue-friendly sequels," - but that's down to Clark, rather than Blow himself. Filtered out from the smug, Blow's comments are quite insightful.

Wow. Clark is kind of a dick. Then again, I suppose it helps put Blow in a much more positive light.

"If the video game is going to be used for art purposes, then it has to take advantage of its form in some way particular to that medium, right?" he told me. "A film and a novel can both do linear storytelling, but novels are very strong at internal mental machinations - which movies suck at - and movies are great at doing certain visual things. So the question is: Where are games on that same map?"

...hang on a second. "Very strong at internal mental machinations"? Doesn't that just mean "They make you come up with the visuals in your head"? And of course "movies are great at doing certain visual things." They're a visual medium. If they didn't have a visual aspect, they'd be audiobooks.

"The de facto reference for a video game is a shitty action movie," Blow said during a conversation in Chris Hecker's dining room one sunny afternoon. "You're not trying to make a game like Citizen Kane; you're trying to make Bad Boys 2." But questions of movie taste notwithstanding, the notion that gaming would even attempt to ape film troubles Blow. As Hecker explained it: "Look, film didn't get to be film by trying to be theater. First, they had to figure out the things they could do that theater couldn't, like moving the camera around and editing out of sequence-and only then did film come into its own."
Actually, film can contribute a lot of its early success, seeing as so many early actors got their start in theater. Even now, some of the biggest names in acting first made names for themselves on stage. Isn't it better to find a healthy middle-ground between the two rather than declaring that they have to be independent of one another?

Personally, though I agree with Blow in theory, I've aways found his criticism really only applies to mainstream titles, and even then, only partially. I don't mean to diminish Blow's accomplishments, but independent developers (and even some non-independent ones) were making intelligent games with strong authorial voices long before Braid was released, and they've continued to make them since.

I've always been baffled by the casual dismissal of pretty much any game that involves action from being in the 'art' category.

It might be a dead horse at this point, but the nuke scene in MW1 was one of the best marriages of gameplay and story that I've ever seen. You rescue the downed pilot, beating the clock, only for a force far beyond what you'd planned for to be your undoing. It wasn't like fighting a boss, beating him, and then getting sucker-punched as soon as the cutscene kicks in (and your character becomes a moron when out of your control). It gave a genuine feeling of helplessness, which is damned hard to do when you were basically a Terminator in regular combat.

 

[Lectori Salutem]

Can you get through without moving? No? Then there's interactivity and gameplay, and thats a goddamn retarded thing to try and counter my argument with.

No offense, but... Interactivity and gameplay? Barely. That mission is pretty much a movie where the only thing you do is moving the camera, while the actors wait for you till you dragged it to the right spot. (Though of course the level was designed expecting the player would actually do something)
Fortunately, it is pretty much the most extreme and over-the-top example there is, so I don't know if it's truly relevant.


OT: While I appreciate his love for the medium, he makes himself sound like a douche.

 

[remnant_phoenix]

I like Braid, and I like what indie developers like Blow are contributing to the video game medium, but that doesn't change the fact that guys like Jonathan Blow and Phil Fish come off as pretentious douche-nozzles when they share their insights.

 

[Aeshi]

Oh hey look, another stuck-up indie developer who thinks he's superior because he created "Colourful Gimmicky 'Meaningful' Platformer 5" instead of "Brown Modern Shooter 6"

 

[Scow2]

"If the video game is going to be used for art purposes, then it has to take advantage of its form in some way particular to that medium, right?" he told me. "A film and a novel can both do linear storytelling, but novels are very strong at internal mental machinations - which movies suck at - and movies are great at doing certain visual things. So the question is: Where are games on that same map?"

...hang on a second. "Very strong at internal mental machinations"? Doesn't that just mean "They make you come up with the visuals in your head"? And of course "movies are great at doing certain visual things." They're a visual medium. If they didn't have a visual aspect, they'd be audiobooks.

No, it doesn't. "Very strong at internal mental machinations" means they enable you to identify with the characters more, and see inside their heads and read their thoughts - It takes very little effort for a book to make a single detail stand out, while it's impossible to accurately portray clutter. Even great descriptions cannot convey the same amount of detail as an actual image, nor emphasize all the right things.

 

[CrazyCapnMorgan]

I think the word 'art' should be abolished, at least when it comes to talking about videogames. I've never been more sick of hearing about the "games are art" discussion then I am right now.

At this point I'm honestly getting more annoyed with all the people claiming that mainstream games are just "shitty action movies" than with with the actual shitty action movie games themselves.

The thing people (especially those in the gaming industry) have to come to realize is - anything can be considered art. It depends on the person. Deficating in a toilet can be considered art; especially if it resembles Jesus at any particular angle.

Also, [insert here] is art is NOT, and will never be, a defense of any sort. If he hadn't committed suicide then and was subsequently tried, Hitler could've contended that the Holocaust was art - it still wouldn't have saved him from execution, much less criticism.

 

[Ragsnstitches]

I can't get over how many people on here are, essentially, telling this guy to stuff his opinions (or at the very least blanking them) because his contributions are minimal.

Does no one see the hypocrisy in this? We're on a forum where many individuals are encroaching on ludicrously high post counts (mostly opinionated), a vast majority demanding their opinions be considered on equal terms based on no merits, qualification or experience AND constantly weighing in on "what's wrong with the industry" despite not being familiar with it (or even the dynamics of industry altogether). This guy has a far greater foundation to make these claims then (and this is just a wild estimate) 80-90% of the riff-raff on this site.

Not to mention this guy is just echoing a very common notion. He's hardly being controversial. It's not like EVERYDAY we have people telling other people "NOT THIS THREAD AGAIN", completely oblivious to the irony of bashing repetitive topics with repetitive comments. Opinions are a dime a dozen here.

Just so you know, I never played braid, never heard of this guy.... and I giggled cause he's called blow. Still doesn't change the fact he's done more for the industry in one game from 6 years ago then most folks here have done in their entire lives. That being, HE MADE A GOD DAMN GAME. And it was successful-ish, if I recall correctly. Will I change my view of things based on his opnion? No, I'm not willing to close off other avenues of thought based on one opinion... but I'd rather sit down and listen to this guy rant about the industry, then some armchair analyst.

 

[SanguineSymphony]

I can't get over how many people on here are, essentially, telling this guy to stuff his opinions (or at the very least blanking them) because his contributions are minimal.

Does no one see the hypocrisy in this? We're on a forum where many individuals are encroaching on ludicrously high post counts (mostly opinionated), a vast majority demanding their opinions be considered on equal terms based on no merits, qualification or experience AND constantly weighing in on "what's wrong with the industry" despite not being familiar with it (or even the dynamics of industry altogether). This guy has a far greater foundation to make these claims then (and this is just a wild estimate) 80-90% of the riff-raff on this site.

Not to mention this guy is just echoing a very common notion. He's hardly being controversial. It's not like EVERYDAY we have people telling other people "NOT THIS THREAD AGAIN", completely oblivious to the irony of bashing repetitive topics with repetitive comments. Opinions are a dime a dozen here.

Just so you know, I never played braid, never heard of this guy.... and I giggled cause he's called blow. Still doesn't change the fact he's done more for the industry in one game from 6 years ago then most folks here have done in their entire lives. That being, HE MADE A GOD DAMN GAME. And it was successful-ish, if I recall correctly. Will I change my view of things based on his opnion? No, I'm not willing to close off other avenues of thought based on one opinion... but I'd rather sit down and listen to this guy rant about the industry, then some armchair analyst.

He's the one being close minded in his assessment of the Media. Its not surprising people are similarly close minded to his "opinion".

I'm tired of this false dichotomy of art and fun. Being artistic doesn't mean being sterile or inaccessible. You can present something deep and meaningful while having it be fun. Part of me wants to be reasonable in this debate, the other part wants to bludgeon people with my first year philosophy textbook. There is no universally accepted definition of art yet we have people arbitrarily classifying games as art or not art. (Not to say that there can't be objective standards of art)

I played Braid after hearing about it but I have to say, outside of the final level there really isn't much of a creative integration of gameplay and story. I was drawn into the writing but

Spoiler

I thought the Atom bomb ending was a cheap cop-out. I preferred the game when I thought I was playing through a metaphor of an abusive relationship and/or obsession. Then I felt some conflict between my drive to win as a gamer and my moral inclination to not want to harass a woman. That contrast led me to ponder. The ending just felt like a cheap M.Night Shamalon twist that undid a lot of the artistic credit I would've given the game.

I think the creative toolbox that is Skyrim could provide an excellent grounds for analysis. I think game's like Mirror's Edge produce meaning. I think games like Eternal Sonata are rich with metaphor and allusions. Honestly, given that a player makes a fair attempt at trying to play through a game, I think we could academically study and find some artistic merit in quite a lot of player experiences. (Some games would fair better than others) I don't know why either of these people think a game so limited in its scope that basically tells you its intended meaning warrants artistic exploration.

I was thinking about making a thread where we'd do a simple analysis of a cutscene, some gameplay and maybe even a loading screen to show how they could lend themselves to communicating some underlying meaning. Too many people confuse artistic with something that's overtly strange or foreign to us. I believe there's art to be found in a lot of games we already have, it's just not enough people have given time to deconstructing them the way we would a film, performance or book.

Captcha: run the gauntlet

I actually do agree with most of that. MGS2 has been hailed for its post modernism message. My earlier comments were more based on Blow's assessment of what passes for art and stupidity in the medium. I'd be surprised if others weren't commenting in like fashion. The games that call themselves art games aren't exactly anything I like to play. I however find a lot of great cohesive expressions of theme in the Persona games (as a quick example).

 

[Freechoice]

Jesus Christ, would you people get the fuck over yourselves and admit Blow has a point?

"Ooh, let's pick over the semantics and make ourselves sound smart."

No, he's making a coherent argument. Why do think you the word "cinematic" has become a buzzword in recent years? You see less focus on variation in gameplay and more focus on the visual appeal of animations, particle effects, overblown cutscenes and various other pieces of eye candy as opposed to actual depth of story or play.

God, I hate that about this culture. People with valid input are shut down because they aren't big names with huge works under their belts. What's worse is they're put down by people who have less justification in talking because they've done fuck all themselves.

That means all of you.

 

[Danzavare]

I can't get over how many people on here are, essentially, telling this guy to stuff his opinions (or at the very least blanking them) because his contributions are minimal.

Does no one see the hypocrisy in this? We're on a forum where many individuals are encroaching on ludicrously high post counts (mostly opinionated), a vast majority demanding their opinions be considered on equal terms based on no merits, qualification or experience AND constantly weighing in on "what's wrong with the industry" despite not being familiar with it (or even the dynamics of industry altogether). This guy has a far greater foundation to make these claims then (and this is just a wild estimate) 80-90% of the riff-raff on this site.

Not to mention this guy is just echoing a very common notion. He's hardly being controversial. It's not like EVERYDAY we have people telling other people "NOT THIS THREAD AGAIN", completely oblivious to the irony of bashing repetitive topics with repetitive comments. Opinions are a dime a dozen here.

Just so you know, I never played braid, never heard of this guy.... and I giggled cause he's called blow. Still doesn't change the fact he's done more for the industry in one game from 6 years ago then most folks here have done in their entire lives. That being, HE MADE A GOD DAMN GAME. And it was successful-ish, if I recall correctly. Will I change my view of things based on his opnion? No, I'm not willing to close off other avenues of thought based on one opinion... but I'd rather sit down and listen to this guy rant about the industry, then some armchair analyst.

He's the one being close minded in his assessment of the Media. Its not surprising people are similarly close minded to his "opinion".

I'm tired of this false dichotomy of art and fun. Being artistic doesn't mean being sterile or inaccessible. You can present something deep and meaningful while having it be fun. Part of me wants to be reasonable in this debate, the other part wants to bludgeon people with my first year philosophy textbook. There is no universally accepted definition of art yet we have people arbitrarily classifying games as art or not art. (Not to say that there can't be objective standards of art)

I played Braid after hearing about it but I have to say, outside of the final level there really isn't much of a creative integration of gameplay and story. I was drawn into the writing but

Spoiler

I thought the Atom bomb ending was a cheap cop-out. I preferred the game when I thought I was playing through a metaphor of an abusive relationship and/or obsession. Then I felt some conflict between my drive to win as a gamer and my moral inclination to not want to harass a woman. That contrast led me to ponder. The ending just felt like a cheap M.Night Shamalon twist that undid a lot of the artistic credit I would've given the game.

I think the creative toolbox that is Skyrim could provide an excellent grounds for analysis. I think game's like Mirror's Edge produce meaning. I think games like Eternal Sonata are rich with metaphor and allusions. Honestly, given that a player makes a fair attempt at trying to play through a game, I think we could academically study and find some artistic merit in quite a lot of player experiences. (Some games would fair better than others) I don't know why either of these people think a game so limited in its scope that basically tells you its intended meaning warrants artistic exploration.

I was thinking about making a thread where we'd do a simple analysis of a cutscene, some gameplay and maybe even a loading screen to show how they could lend themselves to communicating some underlying meaning. Too many people confuse artistic with something that's overtly strange or foreign to us. I believe there's art to be found in a lot of games we already have, it's just not enough people have given time to deconstructing them the way we would a film, performance or book.

Captcha: run the gauntlet

I actually do agree with most of that. MGS2 has been hailed for its post modernism message. My earlier comments were more based on Blow's assessment of what passes for art and stupidity in the medium. I'd be surprised if others weren't commenting in like fashion. The games that call themselves art games aren't exactly anything I like to play. I however find a lot of great cohesive expressions of theme in the Persona games (as a quick example).

Which is how I think it should be. There's nothing wrong with small art-house games but I think we're selling the games industry short by ignoring the artistic merit found in games we already have. I just really dislike that people assume games don't have artistic merit just because they're not overtly labeled as 'art games'. Like with any other medium, most the art or meaning in something is only made apparent by delving deeper into it. Playing a game with a dismissive attitude towards its artistic capacity is like skim-reading a book, you'll get a vague idea of what's happening but most the meaning will be locked away from you.

 

[Chemical Alia]

Wow, did this guy go to art school or something? These revelations are mind-blowing and it's just amazing that no one's ever noticed this before about mainstream games.

 

[themilo504]

You know having played braid i have to say the story of that game was bad most of it was delivered trough long boring text dump that do not make use of the potential of video games as a way to tell Story?s.