What makes a game pretentious?
- Thread starter G-Force
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Usually when it's a little full of itself and when they take liberties saying things like "It's artistic, I don't have to explain it". *cough* star child *cough*
I really don't think a game in and of itself can be pretentious. It's inanimate after all and has no thoughts and leanings of its own.
Gamers, game developers and game reviewers most certainly can be pretentious though. If I had to describe what makes a game pretentious it would have to involve the intent and attitudes of the people behind it. For example, a game that is independently developed is not pretentious in and of itself. However, if the person who made that game feels that they are entitled to some higher level of respect and credibility than other developers just because the big, nasty corporations had nothing to do with their game, regardless of the actual quality of what they've made, then that makes it pretentious. If a game satirises tropes from other games, that is not on its own pretentious. However, if the person who made the game's only intent was to point and laugh at the rest of the industry and say "Look at how drab and predictable everybody else's games have become!" without actually bringing any big new ideas to the table themselves, then that makes it pretentious.
So, my more succinct answer is that pretentiousness is defined less by the actual content of the game than it is by the attitudes of the people who make and play it.
Gamers, game developers and game reviewers most certainly can be pretentious though. If I had to describe what makes a game pretentious it would have to involve the intent and attitudes of the people behind it. For example, a game that is independently developed is not pretentious in and of itself. However, if the person who made that game feels that they are entitled to some higher level of respect and credibility than other developers just because the big, nasty corporations had nothing to do with their game, regardless of the actual quality of what they've made, then that makes it pretentious. If a game satirises tropes from other games, that is not on its own pretentious. However, if the person who made the game's only intent was to point and laugh at the rest of the industry and say "Look at how drab and predictable everybody else's games have become!" without actually bringing any big new ideas to the table themselves, then that makes it pretentious.
So, my more succinct answer is that pretentiousness is defined less by the actual content of the game than it is by the attitudes of the people who make and play it.
A game is pretentious if it sacrifice actual gameplay for artyness, or you're making the game with the intent of showing people it's art. Even if the point of the game is to tell a good story or show off pretty visuals, you need solid mechanics behind it.
So, Limbo. Not pretentious. Dear Ester? Totally pretentious.
So, Limbo. Not pretentious. Dear Ester? Totally pretentious.
A good test for me is if they try really hard to make you cry and just end up making you laugh; see any R* game climax from this generation. Essentially they are laboring under the "pretense" that they've gotten you to care about the characters and what happens to them when they're essentially walking cliches guided by relatively contrived plot twists.
A game that contains pretension?!! Come on guys this is tautology 101. It's basic stuff 
Seriously though, a pretentious game is one that sacrifices beauty (in video games this includes a fun factor) in order to make a point. Look at Modern art for God's sake. It's all about artists trying to make points (often annoying politically motivated ones) at the expense of Beauty.
Seriously though, a pretentious game is one that sacrifices beauty (in video games this includes a fun factor) in order to make a point. Look at Modern art for God's sake. It's all about artists trying to make points (often annoying politically motivated ones) at the expense of Beauty.
