Relax, It's a Fucking Game

[badgersprite]

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?

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Vrex360]

Also people who call people sheep are tools.

Another thing I can agree with.

 

[Biodeamon]

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]

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]

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.

 

[Mastercylinder]

I'm not under the impression that every game needs to be insightful or meaningful, but I do like to point it out if I feel it is in some way.

Games are still entertainment, just like books or movies, I don't really think that's all that they should be considered as.

I just complain when people argue that they're a waste of effort and time etc. The interactive portion of it is just so different and can be used artistically in so many ways, I feel it kinda deserves some defense sometimes.

I'm not for everything being art nor everything being just entertainment either.

 

[galdon2004]

I never understood why games have to be classified as art. Some are, but that doesn't mean every single game should be art.

It's the same as how not every 4 year old's crayola drawing is art, but drawing as a medium is an art. We want the MEDIUM of game design to be recognized as an artistic medium, not every single game to be automatic art.

 

[subfield]

Most things on this rock we temporarily live on are just toys. To not acknowledge that is to give up half the light of the world.

You call the fans of Extra Credits "sheep". As someone who can't bear to watch the show and not convulsively retch my last meal out, I object to this statement in the strongest possible terms.

 

[NickFury90]

I'm also not part of the borderline OBSESSION with seeing my favorite pastime clarified as "art". I don't feel the need to justify myself to anyone, I don't need video games to improve intellectively and tastefully so I can say, "Hey friends and family, look at this medium of entertainment! Its so meaningful and deep, so you can respect me now!" If people disrespect me for playing video games, well quite frankly, fuck those people. They aren't my friends and I don't want to associate with people that judge others over their harmless pastimes.

If you want games to have richer, deeper stories for the sake of improving gaming, that's fine. But I'm so sick of this constant crying for respect from these peers, trying to validate your favorite medium.

 

[WorldFree55]

Video Games to me are what Movies, TV, Music, etc. Entertainment. But all of them can show a powerful and inspiring message in a form of creativity, intellectual art to it's own right.

Every now and then, we will get a game that has just mindless killing zombies, aliens, nazis, etc. And sometimes, we will get a game that has a powerful or insightful message that is meaningful to it. That very same thing applies to both movies and music.

Music at times just has a bunch of crap rap songs that the only message it shows is having sex with girls and being rich makes you the best man ever and that is all. Some music however, like for example Dream On (one of my favorites) by Aerosmith has a powerful message and meaning to it while the song itself is catchy .

Some Movies like Piranha 3D have absolutely nothing meaningful or bring anything to the table with just a bunch of fish killing people while movies like Shawshank Redemption (my personal favorite) have powerful messages and inspirational stories that make people feel deep inside with themselves.

Point is, i love games, and imo, they are more then just entertainment at times like movies, TV, and music. In fact, i have learned a lot from good video games that have made me a better person and I am not afraid to say that, nor should i feel ashamed by it. Heck, I learned more about the Italian Renaissance from games then my entire 10th grade history class ever did because of some Video Games i have played in the past. I have a better sense of logic and have become a really deep, sensitive, caring and courageous person then i thought i could ever be then what the schools could have (or SHOULD HAVE) taught me.

Games are not for everyone, just like sports are not. Some people also believe that sports like Basketball or Football or Baseball are just games. But to me, there more then that. They have a history behind it. They have a sense of life and struggle behind it and I'm definitly not the only one who thinks this as well. We also see these as things that entertain us.

So i disagree with you mostly. But i won't judge you unless you attack other people for portraying games otherwise. Just like I wouldn't judge people if they weren't into sports either. But to me, some games (NOT ALL), mean much more to me and some people.

That's probably the longest post i ever did here on this site XD.

 

[Hamish Durie]

while i do firmly belive that the medium of games should be moved forward( ihave felt this way before extra credits)i don't belive that they should be considered anything but games thats what they started as thats what they will eventually but hopefully not die as.

 

[DigitalAtlas]

I'm going t ogive you the same advice Doc Brown gave me once: You have to think fourth dimensionally!

In all honesty, I see your opinion as backwards and relating tons toward a past view people had of your gaming.

Fun fact: EXTRA CCREDITZ NEVER SAID GAMING HAS TO HAVE DEEP MEANING

They promote Demons' Souls and Vanquish, both games are ridiculous fun fests. They want games to be a smorgas-board of entertainment. Those who want an intelligent experience should be able to come to gaming, those who want an escape should be able to go to gaming, those who want a ridiculous and hilarious time should be able to go to gaming. We have an interactive medium where developers can give people a chance to be a part of brand new universes, take on new lives, meet new people, and experience a narrative beyond that of a normal dreary day.

Just like the team at Extra Creditz, I want gaming to cover vasts amount of genres and entertainments. I want it to approachable and loved by every one on the planet.

Games matter. They've influenced all of us in many ways. That 'toy' you claim to just simply enjoy has influenced many things about you. It influences how you spend your days and your money. It's influenced a certain topic you excel in discussing. It's influenced who is a celebrity in your world (some people have Hugh Jackman and Steven Spielberg, we have Mario and Miyamoto). It's influenced your very culture has a human being. It has for millions of people.

Saying video games are toys is ignorant. Video games are video games and always will be.

 

[DigitalAtlas]

Double post, sorry. I am posting this for a friend. I told him about the topic and showed him the first post and he responded with this. I thought it was beautiful.

Spoiler

I agree and disagree with him. Games can most certainly go beyond a level of simple entertainment media, and it's not a bad thing if they do, though not necessarily good either. However, just because they can doesn't mean they need to. A game should be, first and foremost, an interactive form of entertainment. Of course with the different genres and whatnot it's difficult to pin down exactly what is important for games to maintain their own identity, and to apply generalized statements, but I think everyone can agree that games must be, in some way, interactive. To that end it's always a good thing to involve the player in that element of interactivity to give control. But it's not necessarily bad to make the interaction more separate from the narrative or other elements, either. In the end, I guess what I'm saying is, it's a big medium, and there's room for games of all types, all ethos and principles. And so I think they should be judged on an individual basis, not just thinking of all games as a whole. I love both games with engaging narratives and creative stories and games with mindless button-mashing action. So, I don't think video games should be viewed as "movies" or "toys". They should be viewed as what they are: video games. And all the possibilities that encompasses.