Relax, It's a Fucking Game

plugav

New member
Mar 2, 2011
769
0
0
With modern technology, games have the potential to be as diverse a medium as any other. I don't see why all games should be either this or that. Does The Pianist somehow negate everyone's enjoyment of Die Hard? I don't think so. Did superhero comics cease to exist after Maus? Not really.

Making something fun is just one way of making it compelling, by the way.

Delock said:
(face it, toys are basically fun sculptures)
That's pretty brilliant.
 

mechanixis

New member
Oct 16, 2009
1,136
0
0
Then go play with your toys somewhere else. The grownups are talking. Why should people who care about something on an intellectual level stop talking about it for the benefit of people who don't care?
 

Owyn_Merrilin

New member
May 22, 2010
7,370
0
0
I completely disagree with the notion that games do not have to be fun. Games are defined by their gameplay mechanics -- story, art design, music, and all of the other "artistic" aspects are things added to make those mechanics look good. If those mechanics aren't fun, it's a bad game, not matter how you try to dress it up with "art." I will admit that games are art when you give me a game that uses mechanics, and mechanics alone, in a way that sends an artistic message. Until then, someone looking to tell a story is better off writing a book or making a movie, someone looking to paint a picture is better off painting it, and someone looking to make music is better off doing that. If you really want to make an artistic game, find out what games, as a medium do best -- whatever that is, it's going to involve the mechanics, because that is what separates it from everything else.
 

Raziel_Likes_Souls

New member
Mar 6, 2008
1,805
0
0
As everyone's been saying, you're over-generalizing. Not all movies are Rambo, therefore not all games are fun. Games can be engaging and smart, but they can also be based around fun. Not all music is Kanye West, some can be Red Hot Chili Peppers. Not every book is Twilight or a Harlequin, some can be, I dunno, Neuromancer or Interview With A Vampire.

ITT: OP Trolls, Gets Community to Respond.

You did a good job provoking discussion, man.
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
Hagenzz said:
You definition of fun differs from mine, that's all.
Fun, for me, encompasses everything that keeps you... engaged. That you want to see the end of, or that you do not want to see end.
Whether it be a book, a movie or a game, or anything else.
And whether that book movie or game be fun in the sense that it makes you laugh or that it chains you to your seat with suspense.
It's probably because English is not my native language.
Well small tip from someone who does speak English as their first language.

If you enjoy a film like Shindler's List, DO NOT DESCRIBE IT AS FUN. Or people will think you enjoyed it for the worst possible reasons.

"Fun" is not entirely synonymous with "enjoyable".
 

Enrathi

New member
Aug 10, 2009
179
0
0
PeePantz said:
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?
So does that mean all books should be texts and we should do away with all fiction? Books were originally for the extended storage of knowledge, to pass along things that may over time be forgotten. To keep a history and teach the new generations. Writing wasn't created to entertain, therefore it should only be non-fiction.

Radio was originally designed to be wireless telegraph, also not entertainment. Therefore the only programs on radio should be news, no more talk radio or music.

I could keep going, but I think you get the idea. While I think you're taking it to the extreme, I also won't say you're completely wrong. I do believe that games should entertain and don't all need to be "art". Mortal Kombat has no artistic quality whatsoever, but I love it. I also love Red Dead Redemption and LA Noire, both of which are very much the artistic that people mean when they talk about games being art. I've also heard good things about Heavy Rain, but haven't played that one yet myself.

Then there's plenty of games like God of War that are both mindless fun and gore, but also have an interesting story. Demon's Souls is another one, good gameplay, decent, if subdued, story, and difficulty to make me want to throw my controller at times (but not unfair, I've always earned every smack I took). I like DS for its gameplay, world design, and atmosphere. But it also has a story of how man's lust for power was his downfall. Is one required to enjoy the other? Not really, but the sum is greater than its parts. I would have enjoyed either aspect without the other, but together they created something I enjoyed even more.

Hell, the first movies were just literally moving pictures of common sights. Cars, trains, people dancing, just to showcase the technology. Look at Hollywood now. Dramas, comedies, action flicks, horror, romances. If the medium had never developed or become more artistic, either we'd still be watching movies of trains rolling down the tracks or it would have died out completely long ago due to stagnation.

Not every movie has to be Schindler's List and not every game has to be Bulletstorm.
 

Redlin5_v1legacy

Better Red than Dead
Aug 5, 2009
48,837
0
0
Hiphophippo said:
It can be both. I don't care what others think of my hobby, personally. I just want to enjoy it.

I do.
That's what I was going to say.

It doesn't have to be one way or the other.

[sub]Also I think the OP is pretentious to claim that everyone who watches Extra Credits is a sheep.[/sub]
 

TiefBlau

New member
Apr 16, 2009
904
0
0
PeePantz said:
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.
You're not really seeing the point here.

We use the term "game" to describe pretty much anything interactive created for the sake of experience. That's the definition everyone is using for it these days, and if you don't think that's the right definition, then you're going to have to convince everyone to adopt a new definition before you start complaining.

So maybe someday, we can categorize them into video games and interactive fiction, but for now, we're just going to have to deal with calling both of them games.

But that doesn't mean we should judge them all as the same kind of game.

You might not like the kind of art games that other people do. That's fine. No one's forcing you or expecting you to play them and like them. But on the other hand, the world doesn't revolve around you and you can't expect everyone to tailor to your individual tastes. If you're not the target audience, play another game. Don't complain about this one.


PeePantz said:
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.
That's great. You continue playing with your toys. I like toys as well, but I also like the art stuff being made, and I like to see when people experiment with the concept of interactivity. If you don't like this, you don't have to do it. Again, no one's forcing you to do anything.
PeePantz said:
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.
Yes, don't be a consumer fascist.

If you don't like art games, don't play them. Don't get on this huge schpeel and start insulting other people for liking them. Just because you play games doesn't mean you have to act like a fucking baby.
 

CyprisVeil

New member
Jan 20, 2011
34
0
0
Sorry if I'd prefer to have decent stories in my RPGs. I love Extra Credits. Yeah, it's a game, but that's no excuse not to move the medium forward. Other forms of media have improved from it, why shouldn't gaming?
 

KrubixCube

New member
May 26, 2011
50
0
0
Maybe it's just been because there's been so many good games that advance the storytelling parts of games. I think it's annoying when people get so uppity about anything that isn't "art" but surely it's a good thing that people expect more of their games. If I get one more games that take themselves seriously and is about a military grunt fighting vaguely terrorist/chinese/korean/russian people I might kill something.

But all games are art, even if they're not high brow. Do you have an emotional reaction to it that was intentional on the developer's part? Well then...good enough.
 

Zaik

New member
Jul 20, 2009
2,077
0
0
Yes, I too noticed the dirty hipsters trying to ruin something else for everyone involved.

I laughed, mostly in their faces, and intentionally bought games they hated because they weren't pretentious clusterfucks, and then proceeded to have fun with them. They cried on an internet forum, and the world somehow managed to keep spinning.

My opinion on the issue should be obvious.
 

Android2137

New member
Feb 2, 2010
813
0
0
TrevHead said:
When I think of art game I tend to think of solid games with solid 2D art like Odin sphere and Aquaria or fantastic pixel art by Cave like Deathsmiles and Mushihimisama Futari
Dear lord. How can you pass even one level in that game? I know there's only a 1 pixel hitbox, but still.

Anyway, why is it so bad if we want our games to explore more artistic directions? It doesn't mean that we don't want the fun games to stop being made either or that it can't be both fun and artistic.
 

kikon9

New member
Aug 11, 2010
935
0
0
YOU CAN HAVE BOTH!
There will always be "fun" games and there will always be "art" games. These are not mutually exclusive. In the same way that there are artistic films and enjoyment films, there can be the same two groups in games.
 

Marble Dragon

New member
Mar 11, 2009
352
0
0
Why can't art be fun? I like looking back on an experience and thinking about it. When I walk out of a classical concert, I sometimes feel as if my heart has escaped me. As if I don't need wings to fly. Because for a moment there, the emotion of the piece stunned my brain, and it was just my heart driving me. And I love it when games are able to do the same thing, without all the effort of putting on a fancy dress, putting my hair up, going somewhere and playing the horn. (I mean, seriously, what a pain in the ass.)

I'm not saying I can't have fun with a stupid zombie shooter. Those are great! Adrenaline rushes, fear, excitement - it's all there. I like witty games. I like all sorts of games - that's why I call myself a gamer. But I also like art. And I think that zombie game can have artistic merit without sacrificing all the bloody, gory fun.

You don't care about art? That's cool. Go on enjoying your toys, and go on calling them what they really are. But realize that there are people out there who think games could be something more, and that they have just as much right to games they like as you.
...Or you could make an angry post about how stupid they are for wanting an insight into something deeper. I guess that's cool too.

Long story short: If you want to look at cave paintings all your life, that's fine. But the Mona Lisa was more than just a fucking pretty picture, and people like it that way.
 

fates_puppet13

New member
Dec 20, 2010
247
0
0
the views of extra credits have been about since before youtube
so sheep hardly

games are art
and we should strive to bring our medium forward for the respect the deserve

are all games art
no
flims are art
are the saw films art
no
they're pieces of crap
is the hangover art
no but its funny

the point is we should strive to have games respected and encourage innovation
otherwise we'll forever be slandered by fox news as adults only by age
and all we'll have is fps "grey-brown-lots-of-bloom" forever

even if we don't all agree on if i should be an art
we should at least desire the respect for our chosen outlet deserves
and we should demand better gamesfrom publishers whilst not being unresonable

because then we would have better toys to enjoy as you'de view it
 

LarenzoAOG

New member
Apr 28, 2010
1,683
0
0
PeePantz said:
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?
I agree for the most part, games were and, for the most part, are meant to be enjoyed, but is it too much to ask that a toy be fun and maybe teach us something? Or that a toy be made that can be appreciated for more than just being fun to play with?