PeterMerkin69 said:
Why does everything you play on a console have to be a video game? What's wrong with calling a piece of software like Journey or Proteus, or even Heavy Rain, something like interactive digital media? Or interactive narrative? Would that somehow diminish your enjoyment of it? Would that diminish the quality of it? I spent a large part of my formative years playing simulators on my PC and the fact that they weren't games had no bearing on my ability to enjoy them.
P.S.: reclassifying Pluto was totes the right call. Mad props, science mans.
HAHA! I really enjoyed this post.
Interactive digital media has been around in the academic art appreciation circles for some time now. For the most part they are simply referred to as "art installations". I find the term fitting when discussing some of the interactive medium being pawned off as games.
The trick here is something I noticed a while back was a sense of "massaging" of definitions of words such as "art", "game", "play"; so that various creative works could be slipped into the dialog and sold in the same venue as your more traditional game. Now that being said Heavy Rain was interesting but even in it's advertising it was billed as an interactive experience, not as a "game". In fact it's creative director is heavily influenced by the French realist art movement and has said that he see's his work as being an extension of that.
The last thing that guy talks about is "game mechanics".
Even if he does it is very much like a film director that utilizes "3d" in his film medium. As a gimmick to placate the shareholders. There are exceptions, for example Dredd 3D uses the 3D as a part of the narrative in it's communication.
Heavy Rain... is a tech demo sold at retail like a completed work.
For all it's glitz, Monkey Island is an infinitely better game.
Now when I think of a game, I think of a system designed with the intention of being played; that play facilitated by the tools that are available in the game. Many games use their game mechanics to help tell the story, such as a powerful boss, or a dexterous protagonist such as Faith in Mirror's Edge. What really sets the definition apart is the implication of a series of cause and effect, action and reaction within the bounded rationality of the game space.
Organizing that "controlled chaos" within a system is typically the problem for which player agency "plays" with, to solve problems.
This is what has been called the "game play" or in conversation... "how (does) the game play?"
Stuff like Proteus (for me) fails this, it is akin to walking around a golf course, with no stick and balls.
It has no balls.
Game mechanics in a game are as much a part of the game medium as the art or audio direction. Sim City has most of this game element of "reaction" under the hood, although nothing is going to take place without character agency both beginning the action and responding to the results of that action. To this end it's strength is in it's simulation characteristics.
Simulation characteristics have been the corner stone of game development. Some of the most well received and beloved pc games have certainly been from the same people who where designing simulations as well. To that end some of the most successful games in recent history all attempt to simulate aspects of the world with high fidelity. The suspension of disbelief is an art form in and of itself.
Words such as "immersive" are here to stay.
Day Z mod... sold over a million copies of Arma 2... and it wasn't because of it's narrative, but really, right down to the heart of it, it had killer game play with very harsh win and lose states built on a military simulation.
Sim City again, take a couple loans from the bank and build nothing... one will "lose" the game. It has states. They are just cleverly concealed.
Again this is where most of this procedural generated stuff tends to fail, while it utilizes a strong generation hierarchy that is fundamentally expressed within the work, like a fractal; there is little to no interaction with player agency.
It is the lack of player agency which breaks down any sense of drama within the mechanism itself. Sure it may be interesting to look at.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder after all, but I fail to see the game here. That is, what does the situation placed before me have to do with me? Proteus doesn't need me, it's perfectly content just chewing up resources and making my utility bill go up.
Where is the sense of urgency to click an icon? It's bait without a hook.
Strong games allow for a certain degree of creative problem solving by the player. A golf ball in an obscure location requires a creative swing. Screwing someone over in a game to get ahead, or simply choosing to wear a pink bunny outfit.
All of these decisions imply ramifications some more direct than others. In many of these "notgames" there is little to no ramification to the action of player agency. Many games that are "on rails" now, are also questionable as to their status as "games", at least games as in "game-theory" which implies "stake holders".
Exceptional games, such as chess with something like 10E100 plausible games, for all it's rigidity, offers a replay value within it's context that even the best QTE or on rails narrative simply will never deliver on. They are one shot experiences and giving credit where credit is due some of them are very interesting and quite enjoyable.
Many are simply not very interesting games. A whole slew of FPS make my point here.
Proteus is the lowest of all the hanging fruit, there is simply "NO" agency for the player. There is no problem to solve, no tools to solve it. It is interesting, but a game it isn't.
It is a park. It is the "possibility" of a golf course, but it is an incomplete thought. To make it into a game like a lot of this stuff would require much more effort then what is really contained within it.
Hell even Mass Effect used procedural terrain for the planets... and that is nothing particularly new.
Plenty of games randomize maps, thus it has been used as a tool for the facilitation of a game, not as the "game" in and of itself. Planetside 2 used it as well as part of it's lazy game development and it hurt the game play. Looking at Skyrim, make no mistake, that ***** was built from the ground up by a person for a person.
Dear Esther is another one. A couple short stories more or less on a theme, cut up, and fed randomly to the audience as the trip script triggers. Some voice acting and the talents of a DiCE level designer, presto... there really isn't much of a game here though. The creators didn't think so, in fact the original application for the grant to make it described it as a "narrative experiment". The fact that they have let the discussion rage on is more an anecdote to the purpose of it's design. To see if people would "pot hole" a coherent narrative out of snippets of information.
They did, and they still do.
It is interesting, and very "artful" in many respects, but it was NOT designed as a "game". It really wasn't designed to be much in the way of art as an expression. It is an art installation that plays with some interesting concepts and stretches metaphor more artifice than art. Very clever.
The game (to me) has always been the one that was being played by the developers on the audience, not really contained within the "context" or the "wrapper" of the product itself.
Much like how psychology of various schools, and the study of astrology are considered "pseudo science" so to are these products "pseudo games".
Now should these things be made? Sure why not, free country. Plenty of headroom in the general marketplace to sell all sorts of stuff on.
Just don't piss on my roof and tell me it's raining.
When the audience of a title finds themselves having to defend what they are interacting with, it probably isn't much of a game. Many of these things are really just toys, and in that Will Wright was way ahead of his time.
The Sims being one of the most successful games out there really amounts to what is a doll house with an extensive back end under the hood is as good as any "not game" out there, yet there it is complete with tremendous amounts of player agency and tools. I am pretty sure it has balls.
I think that the discerning eye sees that much of what has been called "video games" are hardly games at all. Trying to expand the definition like an inflated bubble economy has no where to go but "pop". I say let the thing pop, but then again if these kickstarters and little companies where looking for my dollars, they would of long since been out of business.
The beauty of most of these arguments is that they do tend to work from the "video games are not toys, video game creators are not toy makers, players of this stuff are not playing with toys" standpoint, and attempt to build a cohesive case from there. Finding ourselves stuck defending some personal ego rather than looking at what this stuff actually is.
The fact of the matter is, video games are toys, video game makers are toy makers, and most people that play with this stuff are kids or kids at heart.
There will always be a push from industry and production side to pawn off any ole' piece of crap as being something that it isn't. Sometimes it is hard to tell the difference between aggressive laziness and a real attempt to try something different.
That is where the discussion is at. Finding the lowest possible minimum for some code to qualify as a product to be stamped out for the maximum amount of return.
Calling some of this stuff "games" is no more accurate than calling a McDonald's patty a "steak". There is a stark lack of intention to actually make a "game" never-the-less a "good game".
There is a big intention to make a "buck". Grey patty is more plentiful than prime rib. Just how it goes.
There is a big intention to be considered a "game developer", when in fact so few people have actually made a game. It's very "artsy" to look for credit and accolades where none is due. Very common in the industry as it is for better or for worse heavily leveraged in Art and liberal education centers.
Personally, the games and game play across the board have suffered as a consequence of it.
With no where for this stuff to go this conversation seems to come up every couple of months. Set my watch to it.
Still not a game.
