Relax, It's a Fucking Game

Azure-Supernova

La-li-lu-le-lo!
Aug 5, 2009
3,024
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.
These are also the people that want to put RPG elements into everything and believe that every game should have multiple dialogue choices. These are the people that believe mistake 'satire' for 'immaturity' and believe that videogames are a stunted medium unless games like Saints Row, Duke Nukem and Bulletstorm hold it back in the eyes of the media.

These folk want to put complex dialogue and stat building into my chaos and fun. The community most notably splits around the topic of Grand Theft Auto where one third want it to return to its pre-GTA IV state, another doesn't care and the final wants it to continue along the IV path.

It's a majority, but not all, of the people in the final third that are in the 'it must mature to move the medium forward' camp.
 

blankedboy

New member
Feb 7, 2009
5,234
0
0
-Drifter- said:
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.
Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaay
This guy's more right than anyone else who didn't just say what he said in other words. In any case, the medium's pretty much already at that point, we have our Dooms and Sauerbratens, and we have our Knytt Stories and our Alphalands. Oh yeah, play those four games while you're at it.
 

Lateinos

New member
Nov 23, 2009
31
0
0
A lot of people are talking about this division between "artistic" games and "fun" games, but I really don't see such a division. They seem to be creating some definition of "art" that excludes anything that isn't classy/serious. The way I see it, EVERYTHING is art, even movies like Transformers or books like Twilight. Even though a great deal of people despise them, in making them, their creators made creative decisions about the settings, the characters, the plot construction. In other words, even BAD art is still art. The question for each game is not "Is this art?" but rather, "Is this GOOD art?" As long as the game allows the player to enjoy himself, it's good art, whether it does so with emotionally gripping cutscenes or by allowing the player to shatter zombie skulls.

Obviously, whether something is "good" art or not is still entirely subjective, but it's more fun to make judgment calls and pretend it isn't.
 

geldonyetich

New member
Aug 2, 2006
3,715
0
0
Frustration over clones and desiring innovation in games is no new major Escapist Magazine forum shift. PC gamers have been clamoring for decades about seeing more innovation in games, largely because playing a procession of clones is boring.

You can't just sit there and say, "derp, it's just a game, games are toys to screw around with, the content is pointless, get over yourselves." It's about as myopic as saying, "derp, it's just a book, books are for reading, the content is pointless, get over yourselves." No, the quality of the content is the whole point.

Moving that content forward, while hard to do, is the only legitimate way to get people to want to try your book/movie/game/whatever out when they've already consumed and bored of what you're building upon.
 

TrevHead

New member
Apr 10, 2011
1,458
0
0
Android2137 said:
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.
Im a big shmup fan although I havnt gotten around to playing that game yet as its sitting on my gameshelf. But shmups especially the new bullet hell sub genre arnt as hard as what they first appear, or atleast playing for suvival as scoreplay is a whole different ballgame.

Firstly you need a will to improve and beat the game on its own terms, the more willpower you have the better you do. Then its a case of memory, learnin how to nivigate certain bullet patterns and practice.

But beside that there are a few techniques that all the pro players use, here they are:-

http://shmups.system11.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=36331 Skip to the post thats 5th or 6th from the bottom, the writting is in blue with the heading Tricks

http://www.shrinemaiden.org/forum/index.php/topic,8241.0.html

Read about these techniques and watch some superplays on You Tube, youll be suprised just how easy it is once you can pull off the same techniques yourself (and cut your teeth on noob friendly STGs like Blue Wish Resurrection and rRootage)



MOVING ONTO TOPIC I think what the OP is getting at is that shallow games of any kind are rubbish. In a way I think the art game scene like the indie game scene is a backlash against the AAA industry that is increasingly dumbing down their games to make them as accessable to casual gamers as possible. Suvival Horror is a good example of a genre with great artistic merit, that is until the genre morphed into Resident Call of Duty.

Art games like anything else is a niche, and niche games unlike the mainstream is where gamers go for a more meaningfull and deeper experience. If the genre can get off its pretentious high horse, be more critical of itself I can see great things happening in the (far) future

In my last post I called The Passage crap, I think I was been unfair. Because as an Indie Art Game it was quite good. Yes it was crap from a gameplay standpoint, put the fact the game length was very short which was all it needed to get its message across.

The problem with art games is that they go on for too bloody long. If its taking too long to get its message across then its becoming more a game then an art game. This wouldnt be so bad if they had good gameplay but they dont.

Its like going to a museum with the plan of spending a hour viewing the works of art. But instead of been allowed to do so the museum forces you spend 3 hours watching and shitty art documentry or touring the giftshop before you are allowed to get to the "meat and potatoes"
 

Lateinos

New member
Nov 23, 2009
31
0
0
KrubixCube said:
I think any game can be considered art. No, it doesn't mean it has to be pretentious, or even good. If something's considered art it doesn't mean it's considered as good art. But is there a craft put into it? Is there thought put into how it's constructed? Yeah. Close enough.

No one in this thread is going to be able to define art without giving someone else a rage attack. I think the debate here is whether or not people are becoming too pretentious about games.

I think it's a good sign, there's a group of people that are too pretentious about any art form (film, music, etc) and it just means that it's moving in the right direction. These people wont go away, and like someone said above, having the popcorn flick equivalents (Bulletstorm) and the art film equivalents (Heavy Rain) in the same console isn't going to tarnish either one or stop people from enjoying them both. Why do they have to compete?
Exactly. I spent so long putting my tiny post together that you beat me to the punch.
 

geizr

New member
Oct 9, 2008
850
0
0
Reading some of these comments, something I think some of you in the "games should be fun" camp are missing is that fun is just one mode of enjoyment, but certainly not the only mode. Games can be fun, but they can also be other things, such as informative, educational, enlightening, inspirational, or being a self-enrichment tool(exercise games are one example), while still providing enjoyment. Focusing on only the idea of fun does relegate games, at least connotatively, into the realm of just being a toy, and those outside of gaming will treat gaming with according regard as toys(not unusual that gamers then get seen as immature and emotionally stunted in such light). In order for gaming to grow, it must span the gamut of enjoyment. It has to go beyond always just being an amusement-park thrill ride or being like a child's Busy-Center(if you've ever seen those toys). It can be those things, but it has to also be allowed to be more than those things.

One of the other problems, I think, is that gaming is often used as a means to escape from life rather than a means of enriching life. I think the doctrine of escapism has been one of the main problems of the entire gaming culture over the past 15-20 years that started with the advent of the home console(in the days of the arcades, gaming was a lot more social and open). I've watched over the years as the basic culture of gaming has rotted and festered in its own microcosm of stagnation and introversion as a result of this ideal. The growth of the industry and the personal growth of the people in the industry and community has become stunted by the constant efforts to escape from people, from each other, from the world, from all of reality. The gaming culture closed itself in a sealed box, with no windows, doors, or ports of any sort, and within that box, it rotted, becoming a twisted, mutated, vile caricature of its former self that rolls in its own filth. It desperately wants to be healed of its current perverse existence, but it fears too much the outside, fears too much venturing into new possibilities. It fears becoming contaminated with ideas and possibilities that it deems unworthy or corrupting to its pure essence. But, it knows that its current state is not right either. Unable to reconcile its predicament, it simply retreats further, creating a sealed box within its already sealed box in a vain attempt to further escape the horrid reality of its own existence.

But, reality can not be escaped; it can only be embraced. You can run all you want, but you will just become tired. You can hide all you want, but your location will always be revealed. You can seal yourself away, but the walls of your container will only be melted away, leaving you exposed. This is reality, and the reality for gaming is that it must grow and expand beyond only being fun; it has to take on more modes of enjoyment and enrichment, and it has to explore new areas of human experience. If gaming just continues to seal itself in old ideas, old ways, and old means, it will only continue to rot and fester until it finally withers and dies.
 

badgersprite

[--SYSTEM ERROR--]
Sep 22, 2009
3,820
0
0
You make it sound like being fun, tasteful, and insightful, or being toys and being art are all things that can't go together, and I don't agree. I mean, the way I think of it is like this: if Pixar thought all kids were stupid and that children wanted nothing more than banal cliche entertainment for 70 minutes, we would never have gotten brilliant movies like Wall-E or the Toy Story series.

I feel the same way about games. I like mindless fun as much as the next person, but the gaming industry is going to be a pretty shitty place if they only aim for the lowest common denominator. I don't get this whole thing that we have to trade off "fun" and "smart" like they're two different things. I mean, I think the Spyro games are smart and works of art, as well as being fun as hell toys.

I really don't understand this point of view people have. Why does it have to be one or the other? Don't you want something that is both a fun toy and creative and innovative so that, you know, we don't end up playing the video game version of Little Fockers?

KrubixCube said:
I think any game can be considered art. No, it doesn't mean it has to be pretentious, or even good. If something's considered art it doesn't mean it's considered as good art. But is there a craft put into it? Is there thought put into how it's constructed? Yeah. Close enough.

No one in this thread is going to be able to define art without giving someone else a rage attack. I think the debate here is whether or not people are becoming too pretentious about games.

I think it's a good sign, there's a group of people that are too pretentious about any art form (film, music, etc) and it just means that it's moving in the right direction. These people wont go away, and like someone said above, having the popcorn flick equivalents (Bulletstorm) and the art film equivalents (Heavy Rain) in the same console isn't going to tarnish either one or stop people from enjoying them both. Why do they have to compete?
^^ Also this. Well said.
 

chaos order

New member
Jan 27, 2010
764
0
0
i dont get why so many people have to place games in either "art" or "toy" a lot of mediums that are considered art today were originally used for mindless entertainment, similar to what a toy is used for, or had a purely practical purpose.

why cant games fall into both circles?
why cant we all get along?
why cant we all be friends?
 

MorphingDragon

New member
Apr 17, 2009
566
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?
Extra Credits use the word toy because it is an object for a CHILD. They want to not have games as something associated with a child, as is the current mainstream view on video games. At least pay attention to what people are saying before raging.

Also people who call people sheep are tools.
 

Ericb

New member
Sep 26, 2006
368
0
0
MorphingDragon said:
Extra Credits use the word toy because it is an object for a CHILD. They want to not have games as something associated with a child, as is the current mainstream view on video games.
More like "not associated exclusively with children".
 

Ace of Spades

New member
Jul 12, 2008
3,303
0
0
I have no problem with you viewing games primarily as a method of entertainment, but you are thinking entirely as an individual and not about the whole industry. You're a consumer, and it's your prerogative to look out for your own interests, but if games are going to develop as an art form, you need to recognize that we, players and developers alike, are a collective, and if the majority still view games as just toys to pass time, we aren't going to make any progress.
 

TrevHead

New member
Apr 10, 2011
1,458
0
0
Ace of Spades said:
I have no problem with you viewing games primarily as a method of entertainment, but you are thinking entirely as an individual and not about the whole industry. You're a consumer, and it's your prerogative to look out for your own interests, but if games are going to develop as an art form, you need to recognize that we, players and developers alike, are a collective, and if the majority still view games as just toys to pass time, we aren't going to make any progress.
Not all gamers view so called "fun" games as simple toys, there are gamers out there who are very competative and serious in how they appoach their gaming and some games are as deep and complex as chess.

Ppl who just make blacket statements on either gamer or art side are just as bad as each other imo and part of the problem as to why more and more modern AAA games really are just shallow toys with no other value other then playing in a half assed way for a few hours as just a means to pass the time before they move onto their next half assed game.

Both art and games can co-exist together, hell sometime in the future we might even get a perfect game that successfully joins the two together! (mindblown) But that'll never happen while gamers continue to be snobs and wont embrace both sides equally.
 

galdon2004

New member
Mar 7, 2009
242
0
0
I believe when the word 'Toy' is used, they refer specifically to 'Child's Toy' I mean there are.. um.. -other- toys that are of an adult nature.

The desire to move forward as an art form is basically a need to be recognized as creating something worthwhile. For example, a book is an example of literary art. Why is a well written game which involves more than just a writer considered inferior from an artistic standpoint?

More than that though, a game is not allowed to touch upon subjects that every other medium is. For example; if you made a movie with a likable and sympathetic main character who kills no less than 10 guys for every minute of film it would probably be considered awesome by most, and generally would not cause much of a fit unless they somehow managed to get a pg-13 rating and then the parents would complain that it should be rated R.

If you look at any simi-realistic shooter, you will find around it's release a small uprising of extremely vocal 'games cause violence' extremest.

If you have overly gratuitous sex scenes it might boost the rating on a movie. If a pair of exposed breasts appear on the screen of a game for half a second you can bet there will be a highly vocal and sadly influential group that will cry that they don't want their children exposed to such things despite the mature rating the game would already have.

Games through an interactive medium have the potential to be the single most powerful medium there is to tell a story, send a message, or teach someone. Yet so long as games are regarded as children's toys they are literally forbidden from reaching their full potential.
 

Vrex360

Badass Alien
Mar 2, 2009
8,379
0
0
Kpt._Rob said:
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.
I imagine you might be sick of being quoted by now but seriously, you hit the nail on the head with this one.
I mean come on, movies have something similar going on. There have been some great artistic and culturally refined movies that address the important aspects of the human condition and then there are movies about Piranha's devouring porn stars in 3D.
There's room for both in the movie industry, mindless violence versus thought provoking subject matter and occassionally you'll even see the two mix together.

Games I don't feel should be any different. Yes there are some games that I play just for mindless entertainment value alone but still when I play Psychonauts and see how much work went into creating the worlds, or Mass Effect and see how hard the writers worked at making beloved characters, or Halo and listen to the music that was brilliantly composed by a whole orchestra, or Bioshock and see how much effort went in to creating the feel of the 1930's or Otogi: Myth of Demons and just see how beautiful the whole game is.... I feel I have a right to call art when I see it.

Games have every right to be considered art as any other medium and while it is true that some games do just exist as mindless fun, the same can be said for movies, books and television programming. People don't judge the medium as a whole for that, just the individual elements of them. Games should get the same treatment.
 

Biodeamon

New member
Apr 11, 2011
1,652
0
0
should include a poll with this.
but yes, i agree. however on the topic of rape in video games you can chop a guy to pieces while he begs for mercy and people are fine but just the suggestion of sex will make people go batshit crazy. the world is messed upside the head
 

SL33TBL1ND

Elite Member
Nov 9, 2008
6,467
0
41
I've seen a bunch of people make the same argument that you have. But what you miss is that all of us asking for these tasteful and insightful games aren't slamming the others.

We want both types.
 

Haydyn

New member
Mar 27, 2009
976
0
0
I never understood why games have to be classified as art. Some are, but that doesn't mean every single game should be art. I've been digging into some of the things I overlooked in Portal, and that game is shitting artistical statements. Lumping all games as art mask the ones that really are, kind of like how if we make it easier to become a sex offender, it defeats the point and actual dangerous people suddenly are compared to more one time offenders that could've just been pissing in an alley.

I want to move the medium forward. "Games are for kids" is an ignorant statement. I also don't want gamers to be looked down upon. But as far as focusing on why games are great rather than enjoying them? It's overanalyzing things. Knowing all the secrets makes people a completely different kind of fan. Ignorance is bliss.

All the talk of "moving the medium forward" doesn't actually get us anywhere. It just makes us into elitest douchebags who are bumhurt that a medium we like doesn't have the advantages of other mediums. I've been enjoying Extra Credits less and less, and this week was the last week I'm watching.

Recently a great amount of personal drama has come from a group of people I know all playing the same game. Everybody got so mad at eachother that we were treating a fucking video game like politics. It took me telling people that I broke my game in half to escape from the river of drama for good for people to finally wake up and be like "Oh, it's a game."

What is this obsession with art in the world? "Oh, a giant metal pear makes such an artistic statement. Let's put it on some random street." Sometimes I just wanna get on Halo and shoot shit.