Jaffe keeps on talking
- Thread starter Lightslei
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Been saying it for a while. Game writers want games that are interesting to write about using the rules of movie criticism. That's mostly not what people who play games are interested in. Most people who watch movies don't care if the movie is fun to write about.
I don't think it's too outlandish to glance at the retail shelves and see tons of the same generic crap, then announce "That's a lot of generic crap. I wish they'd try something different."
No, it isn't outlandish. But, if you want to shit on someone's work, at least have the courtesy to give them pointers where they went wrong. That is, more or less, the point he was making. It's quite easy to tell someone they're "doing it wrong", and a hell of a lot harder to tell them how to do it better.FieryTrainwreck said:
"Generic Crap" = Elements already done - probably better - by someone else.Eclectic Dreck said:
I love DICE for Mirror's Edge, Double Fine for Psychonauts, Konami for Silent Hill 1 and 2, and Ubisoft for Beyond Good and Evil, all because they did something that hadn't been done before.
So when someone declares "generic crap is doing it wrong", it does speak for itself.
I can agree with this guy. These journalists are pretty much just trashing on something yet giving no pointers on what to improve about the material they're discussing.
As much of an asshole as Jaffe might seem to be sometimes, I find him to be incredible wise and trustworthy as far as game development is concerned.
I think I also like him because every game series that he has created (God of War, Twisted Metal, etc.) devolved into utter shit without him at the helm.
Still, I don't know how much stock I put into the idea that journalists should somehow be giving developers specific ideas on how to write deeper characters or more cohesive stories - otherwise THEY would be the ones writing scripts and doing character design, right? Criticism can't always be constructive; sometimes we just know when something sucks ass. Like Twisted Metal 3.
I think I also like him because every game series that he has created (God of War, Twisted Metal, etc.) devolved into utter shit without him at the helm.
Still, I don't know how much stock I put into the idea that journalists should somehow be giving developers specific ideas on how to write deeper characters or more cohesive stories - otherwise THEY would be the ones writing scripts and doing character design, right? Criticism can't always be constructive; sometimes we just know when something sucks ass. Like Twisted Metal 3.
Hes got a point but if one in every 1,000 games has deep/meaningful/great story/whatever his point kind of shrivels.
"Jaffe says that it's his prerogative to make the games that he wants whether we like it or not.", it's our prerogative to buy what we want to buy, so if he starts pumping out crap, he wont be making the games he wants, whether he likes it or not!
Take that Mr. Cake!
"Jaffe says that it's his prerogative to make the games that he wants whether we like it or not.", it's our prerogative to buy what we want to buy, so if he starts pumping out crap, he wont be making the games he wants, whether he likes it or not!
Take that Mr. Cake!
No, it really doesn't. To declare something as "crap" means you have determined that a particular thing is, for some reason, sub-par. You have injected an opinion into the statement. Without further support, such a statement has no rhetorical merit as it is simply an accusation in passing. What's more, when said generic crap sells untold millions of copies, I'd have to say the Developer's a getting a mixed message. Press can complain all they want about such a game, but in the face of commercial success they'll need to start making a very compelling argument about why the developer of such a game ought to change their wicked ways it will lead to absolutely nothing.lacktheknack said:
What's more, the specific elements he cites, like the constant call for developers to try and make a "citizen kane" of games, does require explanation. Citizen Kane is, for the unaware, widely considered to be the finest American film ever made. Yet, in spite of this status, I would be willing to assert that few people on this board could watch the movie and understand why it is considered great. Hell, people on this board ask on a constant basis why a popular piece of media a decade old is considered great and Citizen Kane is nearly 70.
Without qualification, I could look at the vast sea of games that have been made and pick any of a number that were important to the industry as a whole. Half-Life and Unreal introduced a coherent narrative to the FPS, featured cutting edge technology that had never been used before (especially in the case of Unreal as Half-Life was based on modified Id technology), were easily extensible leading to enormous success in the online space and so forth. Mirror's Edge took the concept of platforming and translated it elegantly into the first person perspective. Mass Effect delivered an experience where the player had actual meaningful agency upon both the narrative and their character. Any of these commercially and criticically successful games could be considered the citizen kane of games.
So, just how does one judge such a thing? Is the greatest game going to be determined by the introduction of a revolutionary method of interaction? Is it going to be the result of increased agency on the narrative and characters? Is it going to be based on some new and shiny piece of technology? This is the problem: what such an oped asks for is, in fact, the game by which all future games must be judged. They ask for the benchmark that will establish an entire medium's place among it's peers. They ask for something that no amount of goading, prodding, complaining or meddling can possibly deliver. You can't just ask for a masterpiece and expect someone to deliver it to your doorstep, especially when you can't even tell the craftsman what it is you want to see in said masterpiece.
The key word was "generic", not "crap".Eclectic Dreck said:
Besides, I'm not looking for "Citizen Kane". I'm looking for the "Inception"s and "Up"s and "The Incredibles"s. Those aren't as hard to make.
They aren't hard to make? Were that true, movies such as this would be more common as each movie you cite was a critical and commercial success.lacktheknack said:
There are games that don't suck. Do what they do.Eclectic Dreck said:
I can understand where he's coming from, but only to a point. Yes, it's much easier to criticize than to create. That's probably why successful creators are fucking gods among men while successful critics only ever achieve a certain level of notoriety/success. Creator and critic, as practices and professions, are not "equal". They don't have the same responsibilities to the audience.
We have bad critics in the gaming industry, same as anywhere else. That doesn't invalidate the concept of criticism.
Heres some salt.
While developing by committee creates games that are typically nothing but generic forgetable bullshit, what jaffe is saying doesn't exactly mean uniform improvement for the industry.
Cliffyb, despite coming across as a pretentious delusional preteen, thinks hes creating worlds. Making the games he wants the way he wants. Despite all this, he still makes complete shit. There is, no doubt, a metric shit-ton worth of people with utterly boring and generic visions. They have, after all, been raised on the thin, tasteless, almost sour milk of design by committee.
So, yes, please jaffe, save us from the cancer of design by committee, but please, don't expect much in the way of gratitude until after we play whatever "your game, your way" turns out to be... and be prepared to fall into complete obscurity if it fails.
While developing by committee creates games that are typically nothing but generic forgetable bullshit, what jaffe is saying doesn't exactly mean uniform improvement for the industry.
Cliffyb, despite coming across as a pretentious delusional preteen, thinks hes creating worlds. Making the games he wants the way he wants. Despite all this, he still makes complete shit. There is, no doubt, a metric shit-ton worth of people with utterly boring and generic visions. They have, after all, been raised on the thin, tasteless, almost sour milk of design by committee.
So, yes, please jaffe, save us from the cancer of design by committee, but please, don't expect much in the way of gratitude until after we play whatever "your game, your way" turns out to be... and be prepared to fall into complete obscurity if it fails.
"Everyone's a critic" is just another way of saying that the bar for entry into criticism is virtually nonexistent. If this guy's assertion is something akin to "the average competency of critics is far lower than the average competency of game makers", he's 100% right - but that's kind of an obvious and pointless statement. There are, necessarily, far more terrible critics of games than there are people making the games because everyone in the world is a potential critic of games.Lightslei said:I think it's more that he's fed up that they don't do it constructively ^_^. Also copying is badFieryTrainwreck said:.
I think I'm losing my mind. Anyways, he was probably just blowing off some steam. Not gonna begrudge a hard working dude the occasional blowup.