Relax, It's a Fucking Game

[Dense_Electric]

I don't think too many (least of all the Extra Credits guys) have EVER said that ALL games MUST be some sort of high-brow artistic experience. In fact, Extra Credits has pretty blatantly said at least once that that should not be the case, and that there absolutely should be games that are made purely for entertainment.

But even if there was a big movement pushing that all games be devoid of entertainment value, your view is just as backwards. By what you're saying, it seems like you think games should be devoid of artistic value and exist solely for entertainment value. And while I do think games like Heavy Rain totally missed the concept of "interactivity," that doesn't mean games can't tell deep, meaningful stories on par with the best films and literature.

Of course, the best games manage to blend these two aspects seamlessly, delivering a compelling narrative through their gameplay mechanics. That is the mark of a game I consider art, and that's what we mean when we say "moving the medium forward" - managing to combine both entertainment and art into an experience that is both fun to play on the spur of the moment, and yet still leaves a lasting impression after you've put down the controller or walked away from the keyboard.

Now again, sometimes mindlessly blowing off alien heads with the BFG9001 is great fun, and there's no reason mindless shooters can't exist. But are you really suggesting that we should ONLY create those, and NEVER make games that serve a higher intellectual purpose as well?

EDIT:

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".

I say again, the above statement is false. This is a view that came around because someone confused "artistic = good" to mean "entertainment = bad." And once again, I don't think too many people actually think that.

 

[lacktheknack]

Movies were also meant to be sat and watched for entertainment, and yet they're considered high art in many circumstances.

Here's a fun question: Why CAN'T I have my cake and eat it? It's not like we're forced to have one type of game forever and we're battling it out to see which one it is.

 

[Aeonknight]

No one said that all games must have a set standard of artistic merit. But to refer to gaming as a toy does it a disservice not only to gamers (making us seem like children in the eyes of society), but also to developers, saying that their hard work isn't worthwhile or credible.

There are plenty of games out there that give gaming as a whole some merit. And credit where credit is due is a welcome change, as opposed to scape goating gaming for every school shooting in the US and trying to censor the shit out of it.

 

[PeePantz]

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.

Nothing should or can stay stagnant for too long because it will become obsolete. However, even with the COD games, with each installment of a certain genre of a game, there tends to be something (no matter how small) new. Some of it doesn't work overall and gets tossed, but some features become a gaming staple. It just appears to be a slow evolution due the saturation of a popular genre.

 

[BanthaFodder]

the way I see it, not EVERY game has to be worthy of the frigging Louvre. take Call of Duty for example (pretty much any game starting with 4 onwards):
do I play it for the story?
no (even though I enjoy the characters and setpieces, the stories are just pants on head retarded sometimes)
do I play it because I think it will break the mold and be something REALLY special?
no
do I play it because it's a paragon of good game design?
no

I play it because I enjoy it. when you get down to it, video games (and all art forms) are forms of entertainment. when I play a game, I play to have fun and be entertained. this doesn't mean that the game can't be insightful or original too, but for me personally, enjoyment is the biggest priority.

another example would be something like, say, Pokemon. the basic formula hasn't changed over the past 16 years. and yet I still come back. the story is basic, the characters have little to no personality, and there's no required goal after the main story. but I still buy at least one game each new generation. why? because I have fun. I didn't finish Silver as a 6 year old and say, "WOW! I get it now! Pokemon are living creatures, not weapons! We should respect our Pokemon and treat them as our friends!". It isn't an insightful journey of the soul, but it's FUN.

I think another Escapist put it nicely; games should be recognized as an art form, but not EVERY game HAS to be art.

 

[The Grim Ace]

It's just like how some people view movies as entertainment and others as serious art, it depends really on what you have and how you look at it. Flowers will always be an art game to me while Gears of War will always be mindless entertainment. Just like how calling Big Trouble In Little China art is a stretch and Citizen Kane is both entertaining and artistic.

 

[gussy1z]

not all films are made to move people or advance the genre in the same way not all games drive the to improve the concept games. i see nothing wrong with playing a mindless game from time to time, as i dont see anything wrong in watching a silly film. Neither are going to greatly advance the medium, but that doesnt mean there not fun.

 

[PeePantz]

Pretty sure the flock you mentioned are misrepresenting the Extra Credits crews' ideals for ya there.

I agree to an extent, but it doesn't make my statement false. A lot of people don't listen to what they say and just spew certain rhetoric they think they've been told.

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.

Only if there's a nail gun to prevent them from falling........

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Surely by making a post about this topic, you've identified yourself as someone who gets bothered about it?

 

[Mechanix]

I've noticed a lot of people on here become very defensive when it comes to games. Yeah, very unexpected on a video game website I know. but really, it gets bad on here sometimes. The most recent example was that thread openly bashing Jim Sterling for his review of the Witcher 2. Many times I'll look at the comments for escapist videos and see extremely pissed off nerds, outraged something they like could be called bad, or even mediocre. I see this all the time on Moviebob's videos, even on Zero Punctuation from time to time.

People like and dislike different things for different reasons, and everyone has different tastes. It's only to be expected others do not enjoy similar things as you. There's nothing wrong with debating whether or not a video game is good, whether a book is worth a read, etc. But there's no reason to get flustered over different tastes, we have politics for that.

 

[nbamaniac]

The primary goal of a video game IS fun. Secondary goals could be art, etcetera. It's not called a 'game' for nonexistent reasons. Although since the human race is a diverse collection of 'intelligent' life, many people differ in their interpretations of 'fun'. This is where categories go in. Violence could be fun, sex could be fun (aint it?), and more of the like and I would even go far as to saying even tedious work can be fun to some ppl *cough* WoW *cough*.

So all in all, it comes to preference. The human species can be a very confusing phenomenon.

 

[Brother-Link]

Everyone's idea of fun is going to be different. Some it will be playing the silly wacky games that some would call 'toys' and others find fun in the more artistic games. It comes down to a matter of taste. But games should be made for all kinds of people, and we won't know what's all fun if we don't branch out and experiment. Any game that someone found entertainment or enrichment out of is worthy of its merit. We all have opinions on what makes a good game or not, it's now a matter of respecting them instead of trying to homogenize everything and getting everyone to like the same thing.

 

[lazysquirell]

The thing is I agree yet I disagree with you games are art every single last one of them wether you stip it down to plain basics - it has a story line and the levels had to be designed - or you look at it in a broader sense of the word. I think that attitude towards art however needs to change dramatically. By no means am I saying express no opinion at all but just remember art is something that is viewed differently by every person what you may dislike could be a masterpiece to another person. Respect one another's opinions and realise that whilst you may dislike something it doesn't make it terrible.

 

[aegix drakan_v1legacy]

Can't gaming be both art and toys?!

Can't we have our "moving the medium forward art games" like Shadow of the Collossus and Braid...

AAAAAAND have our "whiz-bang-ZOMG-fun" games like borderlands, Sonic, Mario and vanquish?


It's not like they can't freakin' co-exist! They're both game types, and they're both good in their own respective ways. You CAN have both of them co-existing, and have games that are part of BOTH too. So keep advancing the medium, but also keep making games whose sole purpose is to entertain!

Movies are considered "art", and THAT industry has no trouble churning out balls-out action movies that aren't trying to be anything more, so we shouldn't expect different from gaming.

(/me is a big fan of extra credits and wishes people would stop thinking that the EC guys want to make all games high art that isn't fun. They have explicitly said they aren't trying to do that.)

Also, sorry if my post feels aggressive. I'm in a really bad mood today, and I'm tired of people pretending that we CAN'T have "just for fun" games AND "high art" games in the same medium. >:|

 

[Kahunaburger]

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.

Does every movie or book have to be fun?

Games can be whatever, honestly, although I'm hugely not a fan of games that have clunky mechanics to make a point. But take the upcoming 6 Days in Fallujah - the devs don't describe it as a "fun" experience, because it's supposed to communicate what it's like to be a soldier in a modern war. Compare The Hurt Locker, which isn't very "fun" but is a very good movie I'm glad I watched.

 

[ChocoFace]

Seeing the world in 2 shades won't help your cause.

Gaming can easily be both a toy and a piece of art, usually both at the same time.

 

[Treblaine]

I don't care if certain companies give my "toys" a bad name.

Things that get bad names tend to suffer at the hands of the authorities.

How would you like it if your government treated video game like the Australian Government has treated video games? Treating them as "toys" and assuming they could only possibly be for children to the point of refusing to grant an adult rating, effectively banning all 18 rated games.