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:
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 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.Mr. Omega said: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".