A very good post, sir, allow me to elaborate.
LiquidGrape said:
While I agree with the fundamental sentiment of interaction being essential, Sterling has a history of advocating this notion of "fun" as absolutely vital to the form, an angle which I cannot agree with.
I feel that always applying the label "game" is limiting in this sense, considering the inherent connotations of the term. (i.e frivolity, amusement, entertainment)
Saints Row 2 is definitely a game, and a brilliant one at that.
I'm not sure I would describe The Void as a game, however.
It's a common problem but the idea that all games should be entertaining is not in itself a bad idea. I find
The Void to be an incredibly satisfying experience in a way very different from
AaAaAA!!! - A Reckless Disregard for Gravity, but that doesn't make
The Void any less entertaining. The problem is when the aforementioned idea is combined with the concept of a dichotomy between "fun" and "art." This creates the problem where a game must be mindlessly shallow to be considered "fun" (e.g.
Bulletstorm) and pretentiously uninteresting to be considered "art" (e.g. [a href="http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/567370"]
Psychosomnium[/a].)
LiquidGrape said:
That does not imply an assessment of value, mind you. I think both are perfectly legitimate approaches. I simply believe a distinction is called for, considering the radical difference in their respective sensibilities.
I agree insofar as that all games are not created with equal intentions and it would be very silly to apply the same set of criteria to everything. However, one must bare in mind that the best art is entertaining in some fashion.
LiquidGrape said:
To continue on that point, the inclusion of The Path felt thoroughly incongruous.
What exactly is "weird" about it?
Granted, it's an allegorical account of Little Red Riding Hood, but we've seen that done many a time before. The fact that it operates on a symbolic rather than literal level doesn't render it incomprehensible, nor does it detract from the experience.
It is involving because it invites the participant to consider the manner in which he or she is complicit in the events unfolding.
Far Cry 2, a much more populist title, is quite similar in that respect as it asks the participant to commit the most heinous crimes, all under the guise of traditional progression through gameplay.
I believe that Jim considers
The Path weird because of its aesthetics. This is an issue of perception: that something is weird simply because it looks a bit odd. Consider
Modern Warfare 2 a game which purports itself to be one of the most realistic shooters on the market, and yet once you get past its aesthetics it's completely bonkers. We have a game staring protagonists which can heal multiple gunshot wounds in a few seconds and is somehow able to go back in time a minute or two whenever he dies yet is unable to survive a single pistol shot in a cutscene. We have a game where Russia launches a total invasion of the United States because of a very suspicious massacre at an airport that doesn't make any fucking sense for a country to do. By comparison,
The Path is a tad more realistic with its permanent deaths and open spaces.
LiquidGrape said:
There seems to be a lot of moaning about pretensions and artistic snobbery abound, but honestly, does any medium evolve unless there's some level of pretension involved?
What I admire about a developer such as Tale of Tales is their seemingly endless desire to disregard the unspoken rules of the interactive medium as we know it today.
Be it successfully or not.
The Endless Forest, available free of charge, is probably the most original multiplayer experience I've had as of yet in its utter dismissal of established norms in online interaction.
Agreed, no medium gets anywhere without experimentation. Sure, a lot of the first talkies sucked but without them we'd still be watching silent films.
LiquidGrape said:
I'll readily agree that this policy of theirs occasionally renders their work a bit too willfully obscure, however. The intentionally incomprehensible control scheme of "Fatale" is a perfect example of this self-indulgence. But frankly, I'd much rather spend my time being exposed to an interesting, new and unfamiliar approach; albeit genuinely confusing, than simply submit to yet another run-of-the-mill, predictable exercise in box-office lucre à la Epic Games.
To me part of the fun of games is figuring out how to play them. I'm sure a fair number of you have played
Super Mario Galaxy, tell me, what was the most fun part of that game? The answer is obvious: the way it played with gravity.
Super Mario Galaxy found an entirely new way to express the weakest of the four forces and was much more fascinating for it.
LiquidGrape said:
P.S
I find it delightfully ironic that Sterling criticises something for being self-satisfied to the point of disregarding the enjoyment of its audience.
I still dislike his approach, and I still find him a very problematic commentator.
D.S
Well, at least he's not assaulting our eyes with crudely drawn pictures of penises anymore. Which isn't to his credit at all in the same way that a car manufacturer should not be praised for making vehicles that don't explode when you turn the ignition.
Deadly Premonition, Jim, really? That game is
The Sims crossed with
Resident Evil. It also had the terrible idea of putting a pistol with infinite ammo. I can respect
Deadly Premonition for at least trying something different, but it made so many bad design decisions (e.g. unpredictable QTEs within gameplay) and coding errors (e.g. can't walk through a zombie's corpse for 10-20 seconds after it disappears) that it just came out as a complete mess.
I haven't played
Cargo! The Quest for Gravity but even I know there's a bit more to it then kicking gnomes and building vehicles. You can collect notes to play music (the music being taken from any of your own music files, happily,) you can summon objects out of the stratosphere in order to progress, and the Devil is involved somehow. You make it sound like the game is just putting on a show for you without letting you do anything, but frankly you're the only one who does anything whatsoever. It does seem like a bit of a grind though. I can't make a determination of its value right now. All I'm saying is don't misrepresent things.