Jimquisition: Lazy, Boring, Ordinary, Art Games

[comando0110]

im not even going to give any sort of explanation, but i think the modern warfares are the CODs that are the same thing with different maps.
excluding any slight graphical improvements

 

[CardinalPiggles]

The reason I liked Dear Esther was because the game encouraged the player (yes I use that term lightly) to experience as much or as little of the environment and the story as they wanted, it felt freeing to not have 'Objective' floating in the distance with an arrow pointing down, saying, 'go here and do this and kill them'. Plus the added bonus of decrypting all those little clues was kind of fun, I guess you could say that was the interaction.

In short, it was good if you allowed yourself to become immersed in the experience.

 

[disappointed]

It is kind of frustrating that many of the more ambitious developers are creating titles which shy away from the defining quality of gaming - namely the ability of the player to affect the experience through their choices. It's doubly frustrating when critics praise these games for challenging our perceptions of what it means to be a game.

But if we start to attack games in which every player's experience is essentially the same, no matter what choices they may make along the way, then Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed and damn near every other AAA title is going to have to be prepared to take its share of the flack.

I see this as a consequence of Moore's law. Computer power has grown far faster than people's understanding of the medium of games. As such, most of the advancement we've seen in the last three decades has actually been in the field of animation. Video, 3D projection, motion capture, physics and so on have transformed the way games look, while, in terms of gameplay, there's not much between Modern Warfare 3 and Quake.

This results in games that are not so much about competition as they are about exploration. It's like, hey, we've created this amazing world - do you want to have a look around? The combat in many games is only superficially challenging and merely functions as busy work to keep you involved while you progress through the environment, trying to enjoy the view.

Taken in that context, perhaps these art games are simply embracing the true nature of the modern game experience. Maybe, out of this will grow a new generation, prepared to explore the next dimension of games and bring us interesting new challenges and clever simulations that surprise and delight us as much as the best of the current crop of static environments and twitch gameplay can.

 

[s_h_a_d_o]

Jim, you conveniently seem to forget that 'art' is subjective, and that some people do enjoy a particular style of medium. Your insights may be eminently correct for your own tastes, but are at the same time completely erroneous for another's.
Don't ever presume to tell me what I should or should not like.

 

[maninahat]

snip

My only comment would be, if they are so innovative and original then why are they using the same title over and over?

They're sequels within the same franchise, hence why they share the same title (with a number at the end). You don't need me to explain what a sequel is.

Every reviewer EVERY REVIEWER starts off with "Well its the same old CoD BUT NEW MAPS!"
I'm not exaggerating

No they don't, and yes you are.

for every new interesting anime that comes out(once every 5 years) there's 600 of the same old repetitive shit. Good analogy.

You know how you were complaining about the way Jim was acting? You're acting quite a lot like that right now.

 

[viranimus]

Terrible replacement for extra credits.

Would point out this show was not a replacement for anything.However if you were to consider it a replacement for anything it would more logically be for Lisa Foiles top 5 than EC

 

[The Cheshire]

Perhaps you're playing with the wrong mindset.

I am pretty sure Jim added a reply to those claims at the end of the video.

I am pretty sure he wasn't refering to my sort of argumentation. At least I believe I make better points than "go play your fps lol".

 

[maninahat]

Computer power has grown far faster than people's understanding of the medium of games. As such, most of the advancement we've seen in the last three decades has actually been in the field of animation. Video, 3D projection, motion capture, physics and so on have transformed the way games look, while, in terms of gameplay, there's not much between Modern Warfare 3 and Quake.

This results in games that are not so much about competition as they are about exploration. It's like, hey, we've created this amazing world - do you want to have a look around? The combat in many games is only superficially challenging and merely functions as busy work to keep you involved while you progress through the environment, trying to enjoy the view.

Taken in that context, perhaps these art games are simply embracing the true nature of the modern game experience. Maybe, out of this will grow a new generation, prepared to explore the next dimension of games and bring us interesting new challenges and clever simulations that surprise and delight us as much as the best of the current crop of static environments and twitch gameplay can.

I agree that we haven't fully grasped videogames as an art form yet, and we haven't properly established all the conventions of the medium. But that said, it is generally understood that a game, above all, should feature players and player interaction. A game that sacrifices interaction ultimately sacrifices a crucial part of being a game. A film without visuals might as well be an radio play, and a game without interaction might as well be a film.

Interaction comes in many forms, and whilst conflict and challenge aren't necessary forms of interaction, they are the preferred choice to keep the player lucid. My favourite example of none-challenging (yet engaging) interaction is in the visual novel i'm sorry babe, it just ain't your story. Like most visual novels, gameplay revolves around making decisions at infrequent, key moments. Unlike most visual novels however, you get to spend a lot of time searching through conversations and evesdropping on private discussions, so as to make better informed choices when they appear. I typically dislike visual novels (which barely count as games for their lack of interaction), but I loved i'm sorry babe for keeping me involved and giving me things to do beyond just passively obserivng what my character says to people. I think i'm sorry babe is the kind of art game Jim likes: big on themes and story, but also providing the interactive element to include the player.

 

[Twinmill5000]

Myst Uru Live is a better art game than all of those, and that's the least favored of the series.

 

[The Cheshire]

I agree with his argument on certain art games lacking much interaction, but not all.

Thanks for those games, I enjoyed them a lot.

 

[trooper6]

Hi, "Him Over There"--it is lovely having this conversation with you. I just want to put that out there up front.

Let me explain, one day I played Heavy Rain. I knew going into it that it would be a depressing story, something I thought I was prepared for. However because it was an interactive experience that I was driving forward I was just as devastated as the characters in the game, not because I was empathizing with them but because this was happening directly to me. I know this sounds like a good thing but hear me out, I couldn't appreciate the story telling because I was legitimately sad, I hating playing the game because it made me sad, so it's hard to make a game exploring negative themes because it leaves the player feeling negative as well.

This is the thing I want to say about this. I think that video games can leave the player feeling negative is why video games are better at that sort of dramatic effect than film is--and that sort of effect is what Aristotle called catharsis. You didn't like Heavy Rain because it made you legitimately sad, it left you feeling negative. You didn't like that. I would *love* that. There is only one reason I'm sad I don't have a PS3, and it is Heavy Rain. I really appreciate media (film, television, video games, music) that makes me feel like I've been punched in the gut. That make me feel legitimately sad or disturbed. If it haunts my mind and keeps me up thinking about it for days...that is something I value highly--because it gives me catharsis. One of my two favorite films are Requiem For a Dream and Last Exit To Brooklyn. Now, I have friends who just can't watch those films...because they don't enjoy being wrecked by a film. They don't find it stimulating....they don't get catharsis from them. So they don't watch them. And I think that is fine.

But some people do appreciate being sent through an emotional wringer. I'm one of those people. Atonal music? Bring it on. A film where afterwards I can barely breathe I'm so upset? Awesome. A video game where I'm so disturbed I question if I exist? That's the best!

Is it for everyone? Not at all. It is boring for some people? Certainly. Can I do it everyday? No way. I have to be in the right space...but it is something that I really like. And it is so rarely attempted...especially in video games that still are mostly caught up in the idea that they need to be entertaining and that entertainment involves in an ending that makes you feel okay...or if you feel sad, not too sad. And I enjoy those games too...but sometimes I want a real downer ending. Or an ending that makes me think and question. The Path I thought was brilliant. I could only play one girl a session and then I had to wait a week between sessions, because it was pretty overwhelming...but I enjoy that. I spent days going back to Trauma in my head wondering about the woman in the car accident. For me (and I suppose people who are like me) the level of interaction in those games is not only higher, but it lingers with me long after the game is done. I really loved playing Prince of Persia...but once it was over, it was over in my mind as well...it didn't make me think about the world differently...or games differently...or myself differently...it didn't cause me to have personal, existential interaction. Some art games and some mainstream games, on the other hand, have done that to me.

Games like that aren't always "fun" in the traditional sense. They aren't exactly "entertainment"--but there is a place for tragedy and disturbing and ugly. There is a place for that work of art that you can barely look at/listen to because it is so disturbing. Does everyone have to play it or like it? No. Can a creator try to go for that and then fail to achieve that? Yes. Is Dear Esther a failure to achieve its end? No idea, I haven't played it. But there is a place for video games like Dear Esther, et al. It will probably always be a small place...but I'm glad they are there.

Sometimes I want to see the Captain America movie, and sometimes I want to see Precious. No one says, Precious isn't a move...or Waiting for Godot isn't a play...none of my Musicology colleagues would say atonal music by say...Ruth Crawford Seeger isn't music...so Dear Esther is still a video game...just one for people who like that sort of thing...which is definitely not everyone.

 

[him over there]

Snips

Oh no I wasn't saying that I don't want to be put through an emotional wringer as you call it, One of my all time favourite films is grave of the fire flies which I reference in my post. In fact I think my second point (in the last paragraph) put this thought better than the first one did. Usually when you see a film or read a book that is sad you come out not enjoying but appreciating it, disturbed but in a good way y'know? I'm saying that since you have to actually play and progress through the game rather than experience it passively it actually makes you feel like crap legitimately, not just while you're involved with the medium.

My other comparison about a game that is no fun I feel made some more sense, it's hard to craft a story dealing with the theme of something like routine or the futility of the rat race or something similar because you experience it first hand and not while involded yet detached, the game is literally a chore to get through, not stimulating or interesting to watch or read or listen to like other mediums where you come off it wondering about things intrinsically.

The way I could best put it is like I said before, instead of a painting that is unpleasant on an emotional level to look at because of the subject matter it is physically unpleasant and painful to look at because of how gaudy and ugly it is.

I'm really just rambling now and what I said probably doesn't make sense but I hope I sort of got my point across.

 

[Moeez]

I agree with his argument on certain art games lacking much interaction, but not all.

Thanks for those games, I enjoyed them a lot.

Oh thanks, glad you did! I keep on promoting those games a lot of times in such art games threads.

 

[CapitalistPig]

Journey looks awesome, might have to pick that up when I make my new PC this summer. Thank god for Jim.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

The #1 priority for me when choosing a videogame is how much it integrates Jim Sterling into my world.

 

[Grey Day for Elcia]

Sure, get into a piece of art and expect it to be a video game like Mortal Kombat and you won't be pleased.

This is news?

 

[Tanakh]

Sometimes I love you Jim.

 

[JohnnyDelRay]

Generally I agree with a lot of issues Jim has mentioned in the past, and although I haven't played any of the games Jim mentioned here, I find this to be pretty much a 'non-issue'. I mean, if these games are selling, and there are people out there enjoying them, really, who gives a damn? I'm not one to get in the way of other people's fun. If you don't like them, or think they are getting sale, that's our wonderful right as a consumer to ignore them. It's kind of evident from people posting here that these games still have a solid fan base.

It's a bit like the whole family or friends sitting around a table, all on their phones & gadgets instead of talking to each other. Everybody likes to get all righteous about how stupid they look and how screwed up modern tech has made us. But if that's what they like, wtf do I care?