Relax, It's a Fucking Game

[PeePantz]

Over the past year or two, I've noticed a big shift around these parts (I firmly believe Extra Credits have created a new wave of sheep) concerning "moving the medium forward". I've noticed the word "toy" being thrown out as if was on par with a rapist. Well, last time I checked video games are essentially that; a toy. Something to play with for entertainment.

I thoroughly enjoy my toys and I strongly believe that the medium should only move forward with technology. Sure, new ideas and creativity are going to happen, but I really could give two shits about whether or not a video game is tasteful or insightful. I don't care if certain companies give my "toys" a bad name. If I'm against something, *gasp*, I just won't play it. I'll condone it and enjoy its right to be made because I'm not a consumer fascist.

Escapees, agree? Disagree? Discuss.

Also, due to the Escapist being my primary and almost sole source of gaming news, are the views here about games moving forward and being an interactive art medium, parallel with the gaming world on whole?

 

[Kpt._Rob]

Look, I have no problem with a game being just a game, but at the same time I do think that advancing gaming as an artistic medium is a worthy goal. I kind of think of it a lot like movies, not all movies are art, some are just good stupid fun, but I wouldn't want to live in a world where some movies couldn't be considered art. It's a valid medium for exploring some deeper thing.

Likewise, just because we give games recognition as an artistic medium, does not mean that all games have to be high art. So, you can happily play with your toys, but don't think that means you have to hold the rest of us back from exploring gaming as something more serious.

All I'm asking is that gaming not be looked at as a toy or as an art form, but instead as a medium which can be used to make toys or art.

 

[T-Bone24]

Everyone wants to see what they like be accepted and liked by everyone. We all would like to see gaming respected because, by that point, people will be more adventurous in the making of games, similar to how cinema casts its net so wide with a huge variety of genres and styles.

Personally, I agree. I don't think that games necessarily have to be huge sweeping intellectual statements, I can enjoy a brainless action game about kicking space mutants. But I admire the freedom given by the medium and respect people's ability to manipulate it to create an atmosphere, or make a statement. Like you said, it's entertainment and every so often there's a bit of really intelligent, thought-provoking entertainment in every medium.

I guess gaming's just getting to the point that everyone plays games, we may not have reached it but it's on the horizon for sure. Because of that, people are starting to believe that we should only create these big sweeping statements and that's just not a fun future for a medium that, by its very nature, is supposed to be fun at the very least.

So, I agree with you, art snobs are making gaming boards a bit overly intellectual and depressing, it's as if "just plain fun" isn't good enough any more. But I must say that if a game can be both enjoyable and intellectual then by all means it should be made.

All I'm asking is that gaming not be looked at as a toy or as an art form, but instead as a medium which can be used to make toys or art.

Couldn't have put it better myself.

 

[DEAD34345]

I care that tasteful and artistic games exist, but I don't think that every game should be tasteful and artistic. Video games are just another medium like film, literature, radio and theatre. Unfortunately, as video games are relatively new they are treated with disdain much like radio and film were (and theatre and literature, most probably). While "fun" purely action based games can be good (like action movies can be) I don't want them to be only choice, just like I don't want artsy and tasteful games to be my only choice.

Basically I don't think all games should be "fun", and I also don't think all games should have to be tasteful or insightful. There's always going to be bits of both, because you can create anything in the video-game medium, just like you can create anything in any other medium.

 

[viranimus]

Well, last time I checked video games are essentially that; a toy. Something to play with for entertainment.

I fully disagree here. A movie is something you watch for entertainment, but that doesn't mean there aren't powerful films out there that push the boundaries of its respective medium. So I fully suggest that you check again, because the days of games being purely one thing have long since faded.

"Games" like Fahrenheit/Indigo prophecy, Heavy Rain, Dragon age, Mass effect, etc from the big end, to offerings from Indie devs like Tale of tales and many others that are all blurring the line of what the medium is.

Thinking that games are just toys, is akin to the argument that "All games should be fun" which is simply not true. The problem here is that we still havent found a better thing to call these simulated experiences other than games. Its long since past time since we needed to rename what the medium is, because by refering to it as games, were just landlocking ourselves one idea of what the medium is, when in fact it is many different things.

 

[Delock]

Gaming is sort of the same as any sort of art, I guess. You have the stuff done and enjoyed for fun (face it, toys are basically fun sculptures), and then you have the "professional" stuff.
Games however have the same problems movies do where there is often a story attached to it, so it makes it hard to tell what is trying to do something serious (in this case I'm talking about either trying tell a message, create an art style, perfect a gameplay aspect, or get the story across) and what is just being done for fun.

All I'm asking is that gaming not be looked at as a toy or as an art form, but instead as a medium which can be used to make toys or art.

Yeah, this is definitely my opinion on the matter.

 

[-Drifter-]

Must it always be one way or the other? Can we not have insightful, well thought out experiences as well as games that are just for fun? I think you're taking the title of "video game" way too literally.

 

[Hiphophippo]

It can be both. I don't care what others think of my hobby, personally. I just want to enjoy it.

I do.

 

[crimsonshrouds]

i play games for fun and sadly havent played any games lately that i really like but that probably isnt helped by my depression.

Games should be fun and art can be fun to watch or look at its just everybody has become a cynic in these "modern" times.

I myself am a cynic but sheesh people cant we atleast sing puff the magic dragon without tying him down for a drug reference. (sorry yahtzee if i butchered your quote)

 

[ZeroMachine]

All I'm asking is that gaming not be looked at as a toy or as an art form, but instead as a medium which can be used to make toys or art.

BAM.

The argument should end here.

Video games should be able to be toys (see: Darksiders) and intense, artistic, well written stories (see: Red Dead Redemption).

Also, for the record, want to know what annoys me more?

People who call people sheep.

Never do that.

Makes you look pretentious.

 

[PeePantz]

Thinking that games are just toys, is akin to the argument that "All games should be fun" which is simply not true. The problem here is that we still havent found a better thing to call these simulated experiences other than games. Its long since past time since we needed to rename what the medium is, because by refering to it as games, were just landlocking ourselves one idea of what the medium is, when in fact it is many different things.

I understand that this could create a lot of ping-ponging between us without much results, but games should be fun. Every single one of them. If they're not, then it's a bad game. Sure, my xbox or your pc can do a lot more than games and can even host a medium that's interactive but not necessarily a game. However, that's not a video game and I don't think it should ever be one. While the lines get blurry, one shouldn't stray because they can.

 

[Mr. Omega]

I get that games can be artistic and can have a good story. The problem is that this "movement" wants to take away any game that isn't "moving the medium forward".

What's more, it's created a level of pretentiousness in the gamer community that just disgusts me. The fact that "The Graveyard" is being defended as a good game just because it features an old woman walking through a graveyard and dies "Oooooh we're making a game based on mortality SO DEEP AND ARTISTIC" makes me sick. There's also the whole "Fun isn't enough" argument they make about games, probably one of the most harmful ideas to this medium there has been that doesn't involved stupid politicans trying to ban them. If a game is arty, but not fun, it's a bad game. Being arty it NOT an excuse.

It's also created a wave of sequel-phobia, where if there is any number on it higher than a 1, or maybe a 2, the fans will cry "Milking! Let the franchise die!". And the best part? Even though they clamor for new original ideas, lots of the new ideas they beg for end up being a commercial failure. And the over-glorification of indie gaming and the demonization of the AAA industry, hating not only the games they make, but in some cases, the gamers who enjoy them.

Basically, suddenly there has been an increase in snobbish behavior, and games that would normally be panned are now getting acclaim because they're "arty", while games that are genuinely fun to play are being scoffed at because they "don't progress the medium as an art form.". There is also a whole "holier than thou" sense of elitism if they act like this, acting like they are just better gamers. It's a bit of a "growing pains" thing for the medium, but I just don't like it...

I don't mind what's happening to gaming. I love that it's finally being accepted, and I love that games are being recognized as art. But I hate the way the gaming community has become so desperate for this acceptance that now EVERY game needs to be art, or it's not a worthy game. Fun and art can co-exist.

 

[binvjoh]

Games, just like any other artform, should be engaging. Whether this is through pure thrills and action, the satisfaction of solving a difficult problem or through experiencing a rich and detailed story.

What Extra Credits has set out to do is encouraging us to broaden our perspective of what gaming can be. It's not about stepping away from the fun, instead it's about opening our minds to all other emotions and experiences that can be portrayed through this truly awesome medium.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Ah but that is where you are wrong mate, not every game is a toy, and not every game is art, games have the widest range of possibilities, wider then any other medium.

So you really can't shove them all in the same pot and then go putting labels the entire medium.

 

[PeePantz]

People who call people sheep.

Never do that.

Makes you look pretentious.

I agree it looks pretentious. I'll use lamb next time.

Also, RDR is one of my favorite toys. It's a toy that's well written and beautiful, with a score that is on a different plane compared to any other game.

 

[ZeroMachine]

Thinking that games are just toys, is akin to the argument that "All games should be fun" which is simply not true. The problem here is that we still havent found a better thing to call these simulated experiences other than games. Its long since past time since we needed to rename what the medium is, because by refering to it as games, were just landlocking ourselves one idea of what the medium is, when in fact it is many different things.

WHOA, what the fuck?

Games should be fun! That's just ridiculous! What would be the point of a game that isn't enjoyable?

And also, changing the name of them won't change what they are.

Saying "interactive entertainment" instead of "video game" is nothing but a semantics argument. You know what the simple term for "interactive entertainment" is? GAME.

I said it before in another thread and I'll said it again here.

I am a gamer and I am proud.

I play video games and I am proud.

I will call them "video games" and the people that love them as much as I do "gamers" until the day that I die.

 

[dantoddd]

I thoroughly enjoy my toys and I strongly believe that the medium should only move forward with technology. Sure, new ideas and creativity are going to happen, but I really could give two shits about whether or not a video game is tasteful or insightful.

I don't care about the tasteful artful stuff. But don't like doing the same thing over and over again. game play has to evolve, people have to innovate. I need to do something different and interesting. otherwise i get bored. there was a lot of this in the late 90s & early 00s. Games like Deus Ex, System shock 2, FO, Kotor and many others changed how we played games. That to me is what is meant by moving the medium forward.

The best example of gaming franchise going nowhere is CoD. Anyone who's played the old MoH allied assault game will tell you that every CoD & MoH game is more the less a copy of that game with Prettier and bigger explosions. I'm not impressed by that.

 

[dcdude171]

i think it just goes back to the old saying : if you have to ask if it is art or not , it is art

 

[loc978]

The only games I'm against being made are quick-and-easy cookie-cutter titles with no complexity or depth given a AAA polish and then shipped to the customer at US$60 a unit. Pretty sure the flock you mentioned are misrepresenting the Extra Credits crews' ideals for ya there. Games are toys, but not every game has to be a child's toy. A four-wheeled ATV that can run a quarter mile in under 8 seconds is a toy too... but you wouldn't want a child seated on that any more than you would want 'em playing Mass Effect.

 

[ZeroMachine]

i think it just goes back to the old saying : if you have to ask if it is art or not , it is art

Interesting, if flawed, logic.

What if someone, say, has a baby and shit leaks out from the diaper onto the floor in a modern art exhibit?

People may ask if it's art.

It isn't art.

It's shit.

Though I guess I could have used Superman 64 as an example and it would have sounded relatively the same...