Game Shame

[Zhukov]

snip

But since I already know where this is going I'll stop now. It's going to be a flame against "artsy games" (which are the ones actually exploring possibilities of this medium), a flame agains anything modern because "LOOK AT PLANESCAPE TORMENT" (where the narrative sucked ass compared to Portal 2) and the stupid assumption that only popular games can be taken as an example for advancement in this media.

Whoa, whoa. Ye be making a great many assumptions there matey.

I think games have generally improved over the years, I am not particularly enamoured with Planescape Torment and I think most old games are lousy (y'know, like most new games).

Admittedly, the jury is still out on "art games". A lot of them are rather pretentious, vague and/or meaningless. However, my socks were recently rocked by Journey, so they're not all bad.

 

[Kintobor92]

While I want to see games that are super-sophisticated and artistic very much, I think we're also underselling what we have. No, I'm not saying Bethesda=Dostoyevsky-in fact, that's exactly what I'm not saying. Bethesda or Bioware or whatever studio you love produces things that are very much worth it on their own, even if they're not "high art". Games provide something different. I recently read Graham Greene's The Quiet American, and it was serious, great literature. I enjoyed it, but my point is it didn't grab me in the same way Skyrim or Portal or-insert favorite game here-does. We enjoy games in a different way, because they are interactive. While I can get really involved in a great novel, no great novel could draw me in like some games do, even if those games aren't terribly scholastic.

 

[Kahunaburger]

I mean, much as I love hearing J.K. Simmons talking about armies of mantis-men, I'm not convinced Portal 2 did anything interesting with its narrative. Sure, the writing was good, but it was basically window-dressing.

Narrative in old video games suffered most through limitations in technology or genre that we already expanded upon. Textboxes of doom = bad narrative today.

I'm not sure about that - it's sort of an industry assumption that text is bad, but considering that I haven't seen a CRPG match PS:T in terms of storytelling, I'm a little skeptical about that. I don't think I would have preferred PS:T if the pseudo-literary style were ditched in favor of Bioware-style voiced dialogue. I tend to classify PS:T's problem as a UI problem, not a design problem - the problem isn't the text, but the tiny boxes the text is put in.

Portal 2 on the other hand has the same thing going for it like all Valve games: They build the story around the fact that they never take control from you. Yes, the games are linear as fuck and full of scripted sequences but alone the control of camera allows you to expirience stuff in a way old games could never do (and most modern games still fail to do).

I agree that Valve is about as good as it gets re: ambient storytelling, but I don't think this is necessarily a triumph of modern technology. Super Metroid and Metroid Prime have ambient storytelling of comparable quality, for instance.

The thing is: I don't call Planescape Torment bad in any regard. In the same way as I don't call books by Goethe bad. Just if you compare the narrative methods used in those things compared to modern day aequivalents they only hold up if we keep my first paragraph in mind (I enjoy Don Karlos and PS:T but the Song of Ice and Fire and Portal 2 are still the games where the story is "easier" memorable).

I don't really agree with that - a wider array of available techniques does not necessarily translate to better use of those techniques. Take Rashomon - it's not only one of the greatest movies of all time, but it is head and shoulders above all Rashomon-style movies done since then, despite the fact that literally every one of those movies was made by directors with more toys to play with. If a Rashomon-style movie that is in Rashomon's cinematic league is eventually made, it won't be good because of the things it had that Rashomon didn't (camera control/cgi/color/post-production techniques/etc.) but because of the things it did right that Rashomon also did right - photography, script, pacing, and so on.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

I completely agree with this article; I've been saying for /years/ that the "games as art" malarky was the product of people being ashamed of their hobby. Games are games; if you want to make them arty, fine, but don't let it detract from the quality of the gameplay -- you know, the thing that separates games from movies?

 

[keithburgun]

Hi guys! I'm the author of this article. I just wanted to clear one thing up that a few people, for whatever reason, didn't pick up on. Some of you seemed to think that I was saying that games aren't art. Actually, my opinion is that they are ALL art (I define art as products of creativity), and I'm only complaining about those who are trying to say that "just some games" are art.

 

[ElPatron]

Good job, OP. This has become another "games are/aren't art".

"LOOK AT PLANESCAPE TORMENT" (where the narrative sucked ass compared to Portal 2)

Well, that's like... your opinion, man.

 

[Calcium]

What I wonder is does "game shame" exist compared to other areas of media or knowledge? Just thinking of the pople in a group I recently worked in; one was a huge fan of anime but didn't talk about it to anyone that I heard, whilst another was talking a lot about eastern european superstitions, but only because they were talking to someone from the same area - just as in the same way I'd only talk about games to someone I knew enoyed games, or how I'd imagine the anime fan would only go deeper into it with someone who had an interest in it themself.

What I'm talking about is more in terms of acceptability. In terms of artisicness I'm not so concerned: for me the primary purpose of a game is fun. Being art or not doesn't change my purchase, though I do see that games can be used to impart a message to varying degrees of success, much like many other forms of accepted art. Of course it's hard to even define what art is. I'd say how I play Shadowrun is artful, but that would be very subjective for anyone else.

 

[PrinceOfShapeir]

He says that Total War's real time combat mode is a concession to look movie like. What makes you think that? The real-time nature of the combat makes it far more challenging than making it turn based. You have to constantly be aware of the situation. It's more like actually being a General, where you don't get to take five every round to check over your guys.

Also, apparently the Top 5 are actually only 4.

 

[xshadowscreamx]

i could not finish the article..it felt like was being epically trolled

 

[OldDirtyCrusty]

Hi guys! I'm the author of this article. I just wanted to clear one thing up that a few people, for whatever reason, didn't pick up on. Some of you seemed to think that I was saying that games aren't art. Actually, my opinion is that they are ALL art (I define art as products of creativity), and I'm only complaining about those who are trying to say that "just some games" are art.

Maybe my englisch is a bit to limited but this doesn´t came through with your writing (at least to me). Everything created can be viewed as art, sure that`s it, agreed. I just don`t think gamers use this as an excuse for gaming, considering they are ashamed of it. People who are this way normally hide/just don`t tell. I don`t seem to get the point of this article. People who are ashamed won`t read this (and if they do they won`t comment- they`re gonna hide), the others will come down on it.

The average gamer is over thirty, people with lifes, i`ve been a gamer for over 2 decades now. This is a bit to long for being ashamed of something or hiding. I don`t need to wear "i`m a gamer" shirts but i have no problems in telling people what i do when they are asking.

In the end it´s just one of my favorite hobbies and i still don`t get the "not fun" point. You can make up your own goals/rules in every game. This was the birth of achivements/trophies.
If you aren`t having fun you`re just doing it - wrong, to often, it isn`t YOUR game, the game could be no fun at all (try another/better), you aren`t into gaming at all.
For something without the winning money factor (e-sports excluded) games do pretty well in my opinion (Texas hold`em without money isn`t fun at all).

 

[Lucem712]

I'm glad that it is becoming more common. I think at least 80% of my friends have played games or are even serious games themselves. If not they'll end up at least being introduced.Though, I did have a friend that came over and I introduced her to Sonic.

It was nice getting to see something like that, especially her moving slowly through-out the level, saying it was going too fast.