Mods are Odd: Do they detract from a game's artistic merit?

[Wedgetail122]

well, BF2 for instance was a great game, but very moddable, I immediatley installed the Australian Defence Force Mod which I enjoyed alot, when you say this as an art form, well yes, but in a way your tweaking that art form to match your own perception of how it should be, sure its not the authors way of doing it, but the player is the storyteller, and the player can tell it however she/he wants to

 

[mew4ever23]

You can't do a straight comparison between games and other artistic mediums, and anyone who says so is a bloody fool.

Gaming is all about player interaction, and modding a game is a more involved interaction with a game.

Anyway, modding just doesn't make a lick of sense in any other medium.

 

[AdumbroDeus]

Guys, can we stay on the topic of mods, please? Every single discussion doesn't need to turn into "are video games art".

snip

You're in the wrong discussion if you don't think games are art, because then the answer is an obvious no because they have no artistic merit either way, and discussing whether or not they are art period is beyond the scope of this discussion.

seriously your best argument is I'm in the wrong discussion?then please instead of dismissing me give me a real reason why games should be considered art.and please take a little more time typing your response as it basically made no sense.

I could discuss the artist merit of games quite well. In the proper thread.

Have some respect for the rules of the forum and if you want to discuss why you don't think that games have artistic merit, POST A THREAD ABOUT IT. Or post in one that exists about the topic itself. Don't hijack a tangentially related thread.


Believe it or not, people are actually interested in the topic at hand, and don't necessarily feel like every topic tangentially related to a controversal topic turning into that topic.

 

[Jennacide]

snip

instead of act's of physical threat enlighten me.because you come off as a bully,yes i don't see eye to eye with you and i even said that i await your side of the argument instead you make threats.so I'll you the opportunity to give me a better answer but remember this you've already hurt your argument and btw citing indie games in way or form convinces me of anything.



edit:so all i get is threat's of fictitious violence and insulted because i have a different view then you.point made you and the author of this thread may continue with your delusional world view that entitles you to believe that because somebody doesn't agree with you makes them a)a moron and b)automatically wrong.

1) Didn't threaten you, stated anger at your idiotic view.
2) You read one sentence and STOPPED. I gave my reasons.
3) You are starting to sound like you are just trying to stir up trouble and not actually care.
4) I don't care if you don't listen, that makes you ignorant in the debate. The mere fact you didn't even attempt to read my whole post, then respond in such a fashion asking me to restate what I already had further proves my point. You saw what you wanted, and nothing more.

 

[_Depression]

If you want to compare video games to books, then mods are the fanfictions of books.

but most fanfiction is utter garbage, while mods contribute a huge amount to the quality of a game, especially Bethseda games, which are closer to platforms for mods than actual games

I'd say mods are closer to quality editors changing up a book rather than fanfiction

The quality of most fanfiction doesn't change its relation to the original work, though, so my point still stands.

 

[James Joseph Emerald]

If you want to compare video games to books, then mods are the fanfictions of books.

Well there goes my answer for this thread.

absolutely. I've used this analogy quite a bit.

As others have said, mods to games is pretty much fanfiction to books.

That keeps coming up, but here's where I think that analogy breaks down:
Fanfiction (or covers of other songs, as someone else said; or fan films in the context of movies) are inherently distinct from the experience of the original work. A fanfiction is derivative, and relies on the original work, like a mod, but it doesn't change how you perceive the original by altering the original in any way.

For example, one of the things that got really boring and irritating in Oblivion was the lame puffs of coloured smoke that all spells produced. Even when I made a super ultimate spell that could take down a Minotaur in one hit, it was the same effect from the initial "frost" spell. It's one of the primary reasons I never completed that game (as a mage, it made combat very unsatisfying). Now, if I had used a mod that added a bunch of awesome spell effects (I was on the XBOX360, so I had no access to them), it might have been a different experience that actually kept me interested long enough to complete the main story.

My point is that's something fanfiction doesn't really do. It can never really directly change the experience of the original work. I think fanfiction is to books what fan games are to games (example [http://www.sonicfangameshq.com/games.html]). Mods are something different, something unique to games.

You can't do a straight comparison between games and other artistic mediums, and anyone who says so is a bloody fool.

Gaming is all about player interaction, and modding a game is a more involved interaction with a game.

Anyway, modding just doesn't make a lick of sense in any other medium.

Hmm, those are all good points, very succinctly made.


My point is that -- and this might be just me -- but I think art is about control. It's about guiding someone through a story (even in paintings and sculptures). A game has rules and limits set by the game creators, designed to guide you through the game. With mods, you possess the ability to break those rules and readjust those limits as you see fit. But in the process, doesn't that remove some of the artistry of it? Even if it's an improvement, the mistakes an artist makes are as much a part of his creation as the accomplishments. Modifying someone's work, I think, will always remove a part of what the creator put into it (even if it's a part you don't enjoy). And so it detracts from / dilutes the artistic merit (even though it might be more fun). But that's just me. (And again, I'm not saying mods are bad. It's just something to consider)

 

[zehydra]

snip

Hm. It's really more like making Fanfiction and sticking them in the middle of their respective works. Like someone filming a movie scene, or taking a scene from another sci-fi moving and splicing it into a part of starwars.

Mods can't directly change the experience of the original work either, because once the mods are added, it's no longer the original work. That is, Oblivion + Mods != Oblivion.

 

[dyre]

If you want to compare video games to books, then mods are the fanfictions of books.

but most fanfiction is utter garbage, while mods contribute a huge amount to the quality of a game, especially Bethseda games, which are closer to platforms for mods than actual games

I'd say mods are closer to quality editors changing up a book rather than fanfiction

The quality of most fanfiction doesn't change its relation to the original work, though, so my point still stands.

eh, fanfiction doesn't add anything to the original (or vanilla) work though. Modding is really more like editing a work, adding chapters, etc

 

[James Joseph Emerald]

snip

Mods can't directly change the experience of the original work either, because once the mods are added, it's no longer the original work. That is, Oblivion + Mods != Oblivion.

I think that's a matter of semantics. For example, if you update to version 1.01, is it no longer the original work?

 

[zehydra]

snip

Mods can't directly change the experience of the original work either, because once the mods are added, it's no longer the original work. That is, Oblivion + Mods != Oblivion.

I think that's a matter of semantics. For example, if you update to version 1.01, is it no longer the original work?

I would consider all revisions done to a work by the original producer to be versions of the original work. The reason mods don't qualify as versions of the original work, is because the people who create the mods are not the original artists/creators.

 

[Bostur]

Mods do change the experience. I prefer to play a game in it's standard configuration first. I like to see what the developers intended before I mess everything up. Then I may look into what other people can do with mods.

This is the same for DLC content, I try to avoid all DLC stuff until I've played the game without it. As a digression, I would sometimes wish for DLC content to be better marked in a game so it's easier to avoid it.

 

[Erana]

snip

first off in my opinion games are not "art" i wish people would stop fooling themselves and trying to put video games up on the art pedestal(true,now to some degree they are protected by the first amendment) but they they are entertainment no more no less and to this day I've not heard any arguments that convince me otherwise and i wait to hear yours.

I just have to know- have you had any form of formal arts education? I mean, something beyond basic instruction.

my i ask the same of you or anyone else on this page.imo art is open to the individual.i don't see it as art.now since I've admitted not having schooling on the subject Erana would you please be oh so kind to show your degree in art.I'm pretty sure you don't have one either.

I have a BFA, and I'm starting grad school in fine arts this Tuesday. At one of the top five schools in America.

maybe you can actually come up with an actual real reason for me to change my mind.(though honestly you probably won't)

Oh, I was never intending to do anything like that. You've decided to be stubborn, so I can't really do anything over a forum that would change that.

All I was trying to do was to make you realize that it is a bit ignorant to preach your opinion, even implying that it is right simply because no one can change your mind, when you have nothing but a hastily crafted and uninformed understanding of art.

I mean, maybe you've spent hundreds of hours independently exploring the idea of what art is to you and the notion of video games as a medium, but there is no evidence of this.

Yes, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but if you have done nothing to educate yourself on the subject at hand and then go about being extremely vocal about your incredibly biased views, I simply cannot respect it.
I hear so many people insist that games are not art, and a painfully small amount of these people have put any critical thought into their opinion.
Its like people adamantly defending a political view when they don't can't be bothered to read the news once and a while. Such behavior is simply a disservice to both sides.

I'm tired of this neither one of us is going to dissuade the other side,so all in all I'll just have to agree to disagree.you'll just have to be happy with that.

The point of snipping is to save space and delete some redundant posts from earlier in the conversation when the last quote or two are able to make the context clear.
It is rude to snip the entire thing, so I have put the conversation back.

That being said, I have made no argument on the topic of games as art, and you have not responded to the point I am making, so your response is illogical.

 

[lacktheknack]

snip

it's truly a sad day when you ask me about art.i asked for a simple request and only one person came close to changing my mind.as for burden of proof you would never accept my ideal of art any more then I'll accept your overly generalized idea of art.and getting mad with me changes nothing what so ever.btw booker is the only person on this thread who may actually be able to convince me otherwise.so in the end i say good night to everybody.maybe one day you'll change my mind but atm it just isn't going to happen.bye

So... You define video games as art BY YOURSELF when I ask you to, you still say you aren't convinced, and yet when I ask you why video games AREN'T art (I have no idea why you think they aren't, and you've given me no clue), you throw your hands up and sign off. I love how I'm supposed to convince you, yet when I try by actually trying to target why you think the way you do (which is how you convince people), you block me off and leave.

This wasn't a debate, this was a battle of wills.

no,this was a waste of everybody's time(didn't sign off actually browser crashed)mine especially.believe what you will doesn't change anything.and btw the defintion i gave earlier is the ones i ascribe to.so please feel free to toot your horn about it.

editnce again good night.

art

?noun
1.
the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.
2.
the class of objects subject to aesthetic criteria; works of art collectively, as paintings, sculptures, or drawings: a museum of art; an art collection.
3.
a field, genre, or category of art: Dance is an art.
4.
the fine arts collectively, often excluding architecture: art and architecture.
5.
any field using the skills or techniques of art: advertising art;

It's like you don't even read my posts.

 

[Wayneguard]

Depends on the game. If Ico were to, say, have a nude Yorda mod, then yes it would detract. But if something similar occurred in unreal tournament, it would change nothing.

 

[James Joseph Emerald]

Trolling

Troll-feeding

I would consider all revisions done to a work by the original producer to be versions of the original work. The reason mods don't qualify as versions of the original work, is because the people who create the mods are not the original artists/creators.

Most of the time update/revision patches are done by a small team of support staff, with minimal involvement from the original artists/creators, who usually have moved on to other projects by the time the game has shipped. But that's mostly irrelevant, the point is that by making a tiny adjustment (e.g. changing the UI), you can hardly say you have just created a completely distinct work.

Games are in no way at all comparable to books or movies. Aside from the fact that they have a story they are not alike at all. Its like trying to compare apples and oranges, it just doesnt work so stop trying to do it.

First off, it's not that hard to compare apples and oranges. They're both fruit, they have tastes which can be described relative to each other, one's in segments, one has seeds in the center, etc. There's also the fact that I like apples but I don't really like oranges. Something about the texture of it makes me think I'm biting into a slug or something.
I just compared the shit out of apples and oranges. Comparing games to movies/books is easy next to that.

Also why the fuck do people give a shit about the are games art or now and how does this effect the context of games as an artform? You know what fuck it games are not fucking art so give it up already.

You're taking this a bit fucking personally.

 

[James Joseph Emerald]

First off, it's not that hard to compare apples and oranges. They're both fruit, they have tastes which can be described relative to each other, one's in segments, one has seeds in the center, etc. There's also the fact that I like apples but I don't really like oranges. Something about the texture of it makes me think I'm biting into a slug or something.
I just compared the shit out of apples and oranges. Comparing games to movies/books is easy next to that.

I realy really hope you are not being serios because that would be extremely sad if my comment went right over your head.

Almost as sad as obvious irony going right over yours.

I'm saying, there are hundreds of ways you can compare movies/books to games. In fact, you completely misused the "apples and oranges" idiom. Apples and oranges are not the same, but they are comparable. In more explicit terms: you can compare apples and oranges, but you can't judge them by the same criteria (which is what the idiom means).

Here, I am not attempting to judge games by the same criteria as movies or games. I'm not claiming them to be the same, or assuming their basic values are commensurable (i.e. "the game Deus Ex is better than the book Neuromancer" -- that would be apples and oranges). I am simply saying that games and movies/books have a lot in common, and I think most people would agree, except for mods which are an oddity which doesn't really fit in with the artistic landscape.

If you would like me to list out all the ways that books/movies and games are similar, I could.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

If games are art then modding is a form of daubism (look it up).

 

[Chemical Alia]

Game development is collaborative, unlike books and most art. It's not the product of one person's work or vision, and is intended to be delivered to a massive audience for their entertainment. I'd say modding is closer to the idea of reinterpreting and performing existing music.

Modding is also a useful learning tool for people aspiring to work in the game industry, much like artists will study and copy the technique of particular artists to develop their own skills.

Also, I don't know that this is adding to the discussion, but as an artist and a game developer with a great deal of respect for both, I don't think it should be considered a "given" that video games are an art form at all.