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

[lord.jeff]

I agree with Blow in part I do think games spend to much time with action, now i don't want action games to disappear I love them but for every Sims or puzzle game there are 50 different games that focus on shooting, slashing, or stomping your problems away. I think gaming could use a little more variety in that department.

 

[KindlySpastic]

Hi, God of War. Hi, GTA IV. Hi, Mass Effect.

Oh, sorry, what was I thinking, these games have been disowned art credibility because the lead in one is an asshole (because Travis Bickle was so likeable), the game is not as zany as ypou want in another (because the Godfather was a laugh a minute) and the third decided to strip out boring crap while keeping the human emotion strong.

Hi Metal Gear Solid 4. Hi Assassins Creed. Hi Skyrim. Hi Deus Ex Human Revolution. Hi endless list I could keep going on with id you want me to, but I believe I made my point.

We're in the fucking golden era. Unfortunately, assholes like Blow prefer to focus on the negatives, be hyperbolic, and then crown himself the genius savior, because he has a massive ego and a messiah complex.

So what you're citing as gamings big art pieces is a game which has nothing remotely interesting about it beyond the fact that it doesn't attempt to make excuses for the main character's reprehensible behaviour, a game that is trying to be every American crime film in the last 40 years so hard that it forgets to do anything interesting with the premise, and a pretty good self-aware throwback to older sci-fi series followed by two sequels taking themselves way too seriously?

I think the point you managed to make with that list is that different people have different standards when it comes to what constitutes "good art" and the like, a point which I agree with wholeheartedly. That doesn't change the fact that even the best video games have to offer in terms of writing seem to fall short of some people's standards.

As for Jonathan Blow, maybe people should redirect their ire towards the article writer? His writing is this incredible mess of sensationalistic hyperbole and gushing adolescent admiration. The quotes are less offensive if you disregard the rest.

 

[DugMachine]

So he makes one decent "artsy" game and he thinks he's the greatest fucking thing since sliced bread? Everybody can have an opinion sure, but this guy is just too fucking pretentious over his one 2d platformer game that sort of had a message.

 

[Kahunaburger]

The magnum opus that is filled with ham-fisted symbolism and juvenile attempts at philosophical analysis? Don't get me wrong, I like most of Bioshock's plot, but its attempt at philosophical criticism is based on strawmen and is hardly intellectual (as Shamus Young pointed out in the Spoiler Warning season for Bioshock, political theorists and even Objectivists don't even take it seriously its analysis is so laughable).

Yeah, I'm not a fan of the way Bioshock took on Objectivism, either. I mean, there are a variety of crippling flaws in that philosophy that the game could have used to poke holes in the concept of an Objectivist society, but instead it opted to show the society as falling apart essentially because everyone involved threw their ethics out of the window. It's a complicated philosophy that arguably shafted the global economy, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Greenspan] and deserves better than that.

Alternatively, see Bioshock 2's attempt to criticize collectivism, which was even worse.

The most decent analysis of political themes in a game I can think of is probably the original Deus Ex. The arguments of a lot of the characters throughout the game are based on 18th century Enlightenment concepts based on what role the government should take in society. Concepts like Helios as 'benevolent dictator' of the people comes from Hobbes' Leviathan, Thomas Aquinas' City on the Hill plays a major role in Bob Page's justification for his actions, even libertarian and anarchist themes emerge from NSF conversations. Deus Ex manages to portray a complex political and philosophical question intellectually and I think that's a product of an well-informed writing team that knew what they wanted to convey but didn't take shortcuts.

That game was so good for so many reasons. I recall really enjoying the fact that you can have an argument about the viability of democracy with a bartender in China. The voice-acting and facial animations date it a little, but the actual game writing was very good at making political philosophy a core aspect of the story without coming off as pretentious or forced. And then it made that aspect of the writing work with the paranoia/conspiracy theory aspect of the writing.

Spoiler: I guess I should consider myself lucky that my Deus Ex disc is currently in another time zone, or else I'd be kissing the rest of my free time goodbye haha.

 

[anthony87]

Why is it that guys with 1, and i repeat, 1 game under their belt that happens to be critically acclaimed thinks they can be smug towards an entire industry? First Tyrone Rodriguez calling Hideo Kojima a shitty dev, now Jon Blow being the millionth person to hate on action games.

Because they're more artistic than everone else OBVIOUSLY!
/smug pretentious arseholeness.

Seriously though, why can't games be games? Why do they have to be something more all and a sudden? Why is it bad for a game to be...y'know, just plain old fun?

 

[Yopaz]

I get Jo-Blo's message (if people don't already call him Jo-Blo they totally should) but the way he comes across when conveying that message makes me want to kick his pretentious teeth down his throat give him a stern talking to. Then I see this and laugh:

Second time I see this today and I still love it.

Seriously he dismisses the entire game industry as shitty and he's only got one game that is close to 6 years old by now. Also more importantly the game isn't that great. There are games that have good stories out there even though many are generic and clichéd. That's not exclusive to games. There are books and movies too that are clichéd, heck almost every young adult book is one and almost every romantic comedy.

 

[Tipsy Giant]

Maybe the real trick is to embrace the one thing our medium does better than any other, interactivity. Maybe the actual game mechanics are what make them art, the fun they can bring through tight controls and well thought out level design.

I vote Mario Bros 1 on the NES as the first game worthy of high art status

 

[Blind Sight]

Why is it that guys with 1, and i repeat, 1 game under their belt that happens to be critically acclaimed thinks they can be smug towards an entire industry? First Tyrone Rodriguez calling Hideo Kojima a shitty dev, now Jon Blow being the millionth person to hate on action games.

Because they're more artistic than everone else OBVIOUSLY!
/smug pretentious arseholeness.

Seriously though, why can't games be games? Why do they have to be something more all and a sudden? Why is it bad for a game to be...y'know, just plain old fun?

I don't have a problem with games being 'just plain old fun' if that's their goal. This is why I don't criticize Borderlands for poorly portraying an anarchist society or anything like that. However, if they're attempting to present some kind of moral argument, theme or concept in an attempt to appear 'deep' and 'meaningful' then I'm going to criticize the hell out of them for it (see Rainbow Six Patriots and its populist bullshit). Also games that take modern issues or events and oversimplify them into mindless jingoistic propaganda fully deserve to be criticized on their merit (I'm looking at you, every American vs. Russian game except for World in Conflict).

 

[Phuctifyno]

why does everyone spell kane wrong good lord.it isn't cain or cane.its KANE any way he makes a good point when he says film didn't become great by trying to be like theatre and therefore gaming wont become great by trying to be like films.that is probably the reason I disagree with the people who say that we are in the golden age of gaming.to me the golden age is when games are games living on game rules and telling game stories or not any stories at all rather than the Indiana Jones worship of uncharted or tomb raider or lord of the rings worship of dragon age or any other generic fantasy game.

The problem is that this already happened, people just don't remember it because of the modern "next gen" trend of games trying to look like movies just because they can and because people buy it. Video games evolved from pure game, not from cinema.

Name one movie Super Mario 3 was ripping off? Or Pac-Man? Or Tetris?

Within the gaming community, these are already regarded as classics, so why do we need somebody outside of the community to confirm it for us? SNES was a golden age of sorts. So was PS2. 2011 as a whole was also pretty great.

Gaming is already legit, cultured, and fucking-art-why-not; no more or less than any other media. I have no idea what some people think we're waiting for.

 

[mfeff]

I don't know. This is a little harsh and overly focused on Call of duty and it's clones (C'mon, we all know what he was talking about). When he says citizen Kane, I think of videogaming's anti-capitalism magnum opus, "bioshock", but the thing is that in the cinemas, bioshock would essentially be a "s***ty action movie", only one with a message, and a unique stylised setting. Point is, games can be those action movies whilst still being works of art.

Great post guy. Rare gem.

There really is nothing more useless than a neophyte student of philosophy. That being said an old(ish) story was brought up once with T.V. producers in the states. Why is T.V. so dumb?

The response:

We tried PBS(like) material... and over time the ratings fell. We produce shows that people watch... thus the trend is now in and around a 5th or 6th grade reading level. Success!

As it has been my experience:

Many liberal arts (degree holding) people whom I have met, never get much out of the western classics and some modern philosophy. (by modern Renaissance, maybe a brush with Sartre and existentialism, but a close examination of Mulla Sadra is saying the same thing).

Political Science folk get into modern (some) and political commentary... which is hardly philosophy... more of a study of Socratic and linguistic bullying.

Hard science, philosophy of engineering; post modern with a healthy bathing in the waters of the mathematicians.

If we are to talk "philosophy" in this medium, which one? How deep? Do the people writing the narrative have a clue as to what they are talking about?

-Gnostic themes are very common
-Baby pool
-No

Thing is they don't have to, as the audience is really only but "pamphlet" familiar with "Gnostic Themes", have very little working knowledge with "big words, and big concepts", thus receiving the message in the most disingenuous way possible... ham-fisted dialog delivery in a for-profit video game.

I "think" as time marches on we may yet see some real quality indie stuff (that achieves some real depth - laughably I believe in no such thing)... however, in the mainstream... more "theme park" experiences of themes, rather than getting far off on the branch of the particular philosophical division being explored.


It's not only that I question the development, and ability to deliver, but the audience and the ability to understand.

I also question the medium, as it is difficult to use in many respects. Difficult to plan scenes, integrate various technologies, and have the "feel" come off "just so". It is a distinct lack of an "editing room", and it cripples games as a medium to explore complex themes.

Hey, that's ok though... if people "got it" anime like "Texhnolyze" and "SE: Lain" would be more popular outside of their cult status.

Come to think of it... maybe the problem is, game developer's (laughs to self) are trying just a little to hard... relax, hang back, drop a little blues into the scene; rather than trying to tear the shirt to "explode a message" on my face. :/

 

[asacatman]

So, just to balance all the people calling him a pretensious asshole, I agree with him, to an extent. I still like big dumb action games, I just wish there were more 'arty' (god I hate that word) games.

 

[kyogen]

Judging by the comments under the original article, The Atlantic's readers are generally more open-minded and game-savvy than either Taylor Clark or Jonathan Blow. Good for them.

 

[Abedeus]

Glad to see so many people disliked Braid as much as I did.

It wasn't entertaining. Games, movies and books are supposed to be entertaining. If it isn't, it's a shitty game/movie/book.*

* Not talking about educational stuff. Though if that is fun AND educational, it gets double points.

 

[Elate]

Man makes well received game that's an alright puzzle platformer with some interesting time mechanics and suddenly becomes the judge and jury of what makes a good game? Yeah ok.

"Look, film didn't get to be film by trying to be theater."
Made me chuckle though, since other than the distinct lack of sound, the early movies were almost on par with theater, right down to the closing curtains.

The mans got an over inflated ego, I hope his next game blows just to teach him a lesson.

 

[Falseprophet]

Okay, having read the article here, I thought of Blow as some asshat, trying to validate himself by comparing his game to Citizan Kane, and other games to shitty Bay action movies. Having read about half of the article linked (I couldnt finish it due to the smell of shit), I now thinking its largely a equal distribution of asshat between Blow and Clark.

I get that too. Blow has a passionate stance on gaming, and I do agree with some of it, even if his ego is the size of Manhattan Island. That's not so bad in itself; some of humanity's greatest works have come from egomaniacs.

It's Clark who's just doing hagiography instead of actual journalism. "OMG, this Blow guy is like the Messiah of gaming! You totally have to hear him shit on Call of Duty!" This wasn't an interview so much as, "preach to the converted, O Wisest of Sages!"

Yes, because as we all know, COD doesn't let you actually play, ever. Nope, those buttons in front of you? Totally unresponsive.

You never saw the COD:Black Ops mission that you could get through never firing your weapon?

 

[Forgetitnow344]

Stupid games are /fine/. You know what game was stupid? Shadows of the Damned. You know what game was fun as hell? Braid. Just kidding! Shadows of the Damned. When put into the actual story itself, you know what's way more enjoyable than a subversive metaphor that undermines your actions in the game to give the game a deeper meaning than you would have given it in the first place? A goddamned enjoyable game. There's a reason things like Osmos and even fucking Brickbreaker are so massively popular on mobile devices. What makes a game fun is the gameplay, no matter how simple. If you want to tell a story with your game, you better drape it over an actual fun game. Kongregate and the like have dozens of free-to-play flash games that tell far better stories than Braid did, making you truly FEEL the themes of the game while having fun at the same time. Braid was not that fun. When a game gets too artistic and its creators' vision overshadows a gamer's perspective of a universe, the gamers go into an uproar and sign a petition and submit FTC complaints forcing you to actually release a revision DLC pack for your game.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

-

"Braid Creator: 'Games are Crappy Action Movies.'"

Could that be any more misleading? It doesn't say a lot for an article if you feel you need to mislead someone to get their attention.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

I'd rather play CoD or Halo than Braid any day. I play games to have fun, not to wank over "art".

You dismiss a game because people refer to it as art? That's the exact other side of the extreme you are arguing against. Why not simply take each individual game on it's own value? I think Braid is a fun platformer with great controls and a fun mechanic that is used in increasingly interesting ways. You might think it controls like shit, looks bad and tells a boring story and that would be valid. But to say "Hey, this game is art and I don't wanna be one of 'those guys,' so I'll play CoD instead," is exactly what people shouldn't do.

You are just as bad as what you argue against, only at the opposite end of the spectrum.

 

[irishda]

He's right in most regards. Yahtzee even wrote an article on this sometime back, about how many games are stuck on "Go from point A to point B and kill the bad guys on the way." I know people like to believe this only applies to shooters, but consider other games as well. Bioshock (something people claim is one of the greatest games ever) is still essentially "Go here, kill lots of splicers, do something, repeat". RPGs (Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Fallout 3, Skyrim) have "Go wherever you want, get quest to kill lots of things, complete quest, repeat."

Games have to walk a fine line between action and exposition, just like novels and movies. But whereas print and film can balance between the two, due to the audience's passive nature, games are pressured to keep the action going, otherwise their audience is likely to turn the game off. People don't play games to hear a story the same way they see a movie for a story, people play games as much for the mechanics as for the stories.

As a medium, games are good on their own merits, but when their stories are compared with things such as novels and movies, which can have more fleshed out characters and decent amounts of exposition, there's really nothing in games that have come close to those stories.

Also this: