Perhaps as gamers and as developers we take games too seriously. I played Flower the other day, as well as some indie "art games" and it got me thinking more about the whole games as art issue.
And made me think "Who cares?"
Does it really matter if people file our preferred form of entertainment under the category we desire? Does it change the nature of games if suddenly people consider them to be art? Roger Ebert stated something similar in his denial of a game's ability to be art (which he later amended).
I guess my main concern with something being considered "art" is that it loses its original form and begins to resemble something else entirely. I've played quite a number of "art games" (and have even been accused of producing them myself) and the trend seems to be stripping away gameplay in favour of presenting a message.
I don't see why this is necessary. I believe games can be just as poignant, just as evocative and just as inspiring when made in the traditional manner - if not even more so. Instead of looking at titles like Flower - which strips away a sense of narrative and elements such as characters and things like emotional impact except on a metaphorical level - why don't we look to games such as Beyond Good and Evil or Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn or, yes, Planescape: Torment?
Why don't we study Grim Fandango or Dreamfall: The Longest Journey and focus on how the writing of the characters is fused with the gameplay rather than pushing our experiments in design towards post-game interactive experiences? I know I took away a lot more from any of the games listed above than I did from Flower because of the fact that they had characters that I could relate to, characters that I disliked that I grew to love, all with personal issues and challenges; something I can directly relate to as a player rather than trying to interpret metaphors and oblique, esoteric references to emotions.
I'm not saying I don't enjoy games like Flower. But on the same note, I think there are more efficient, effective and accessible ways to express emotion or a point of view than abstract expressionism. For me, art truly succeeds when I as a participant (on the receiving end as well as the creating end) walk away from it contemplating new ideas. And I know when I visit an art gallery, the post-painterly abstraction pieces rarely influence me in a way even nearly as effective as those creations more accurately representative of elements in the real world.
Are games art? I don't really think it matters anymore. But when I finish a game like Planescape: Torment - or even a small section of the game - I walk away from the experience with a head full of ideas, things to be inspired by and contemplate.
A good game can change the nature of a man. That doesn't necessarily mean games are art.
But it does mean they matter.
}
11 comments:
Excellent write-up Ben. We may not agree 100%, I do believe you are right. And what mainstream intellectuals believe doesn't really matter. And yes Grim Fandango is a game we should be discussing instead of utterly pretentious pseudo-artistic offerings.
Naturally I hardly expect anyone to agree 100%, or in fact at all, it's merely an opinion piece on the matter :)
I really should sit down and see if I can get Grim Fandango working on my computer, it really does deserve a 2010 playthrough!
Ah, all ideas materialize themselves, just look at Adahn! :P
"Does it change the nature of games if suddenly people consider them to be art?"
If anything else, it gives me greater satisfaction and a sense of meaningfulness when I can treat a game as something more that its' mechanics, or something more than loose story cut away from game play or experience as a whole. (watch link for other types of dissonances, as one could call them)
http://interactive-illuminatus.blogspot.com/2010/11/going-deeper-into-dissonance.html
I often feel stupid for trying to go deeper into a game and analyze different components of it when I realize that oh, there's nothing there! I believe that most people don't even consider such a possibility to be there in video games, simply because there isn't much thought going into making coherent games with all elements being treated as part of the message somehow, instead of some elements just being instrumental for the game play or something else.
"the trend seems to be stripping away gameplay in favour of presenting a message."
Maybe this has to do with why some or your games have been referred to as art games; the game play in for example eternally us to me felt quite unsatisfactory; it felt like a bunch of clicking around, waiting for stuff to happen. Many of the so called art games, or games which I perceive do have depth do seem to be very broken, sometimes in just this regard.
That said, the other parts of eternally us for me was a beautiful and satisfying experience.
Adahn is a beautiful concept in a game full of beautiful concepts :)
I agree with your points about dissonance (and have quickly read the link you posted and some of the links contained therein, which are interesting despite the overuse of language which seems designed to make it difficult to comprehend) and would like to see more games designed with all elements working in unison to create an experience that has all factors in harmony.
I also think such a thing would be very difficult to do!
I can see your point about Eternally Us being unsatisfactory with regards to puzzle design, and I think it's a result of a few things - having my puzzle ideas being coded by someone else (which is something I'm still not used to!), trying to fit in gameplay with the overall concept which required linearity to a fairly extreme degree and also simply the time limit - we had a deadline to meet and couldn't make too many drastic changes and still make the deadline.
Still, it's a learning experience and proves that as much as people want to see such concepts explored, they also demand thought provoking gameplay.
Thanks for your comment, such viewpoints are always of interest, and hopefully we'll soon all figure out a way to orchestrate all of our game design elements in unison.
Well said, an interesting read.
Thanks :)
Video games as art are just evolving. They now have to go through the thick mud of self-importance and through the necessary emancipatory stage as an art form.
They have to stop imitating other art forms and concentrate on the intrinsic possibilities they can offer - interactivity and nonlinearity. If you consider art a public phenomenon that needs its audience to react to it, build its context and discuss it, video games could well become a new "meta art", enjoyed in private but discussed in public, much like books (that are also not considered "art", but rather "literature" - one of the factors why computer games do not fit the traditional definition of art).
I mean, all the experimental games that offer very little in terms of gameplay are not trying to stretch the definition of art, but rather the definition of "video game" as we know. Which is not a bad thing in itself, but as soon as it becomes self-referential and redundant ("This game sucks. Must be art!"), it does not advance the evolution of video games any further.
And of course media studies should damn well be discussing Grim Fandango, not only because it is a masterpiece of nonlinear storytelling, but because Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze and the rest of the modern sociology and philosophy bunch would have written their hands off trying to analyze its cultural value and philosophical potential, had they had the opportunity to do so.
"This game sucks. Must be art!"
I never really understood why movies had to be so boring to be considered art.
I think what you wrote applies to all media, Ben. So if games can matter, regardless if we ponder the question if they are art, so can other things.
This suggests to me that the word "art" has simply lost its meaning and value in the modern world. I mean besides some amount of marketing value.
Sebastian: Interesting that you consider this as a necessary stage in the advancement of computer games. Perhaps they can be considered the awkward teenage years (although games are clearly far too old to be considered a teenaged form of entertainment).
Perhaps the gameplay-less experiments of today will pave the roads for new, more interesting types of gameplay tomorrow, just as the first RPGs are almost unplayable by today's standards.
On the subject of Grim Fandango, I'd love to see people able to discuss such a thing in these contexts do so.
Jonathon: I consider interesting movies to be art! The Secret of Kells is one ;)
Igor: Perhaps "art" has just become the catchy thing to do for the cool people these days. There is no question in my mind that games are an important medium, whatever labels people may take it upon themselves to brand it with/deny it from.
After every single players their very own fifty percent through the Defend of Arrav, mind over to the memorial which may be northern involving Varrock's east financial institution Buy Runescape Gold. Speak towards curator. You will get 2 certificates for every 1 / 2 of Safeguard regarding Arrav. Each participants really should keep one of the vouchers and also trade another for the certification inside better half. Now each gamers ought to have a left-half shield qualification additionally as a right-half safeguard document. To find the entire certification play one fifty percent while using additional. Today go speak to California king Roald throughout Varrock Citadel to acquire the reward Cheap Runescape Gold. Every single gamer is certain to get A single pursuit stage as well as 1000 loose change.
Post a Comment