NEON MERCURY's ++ ps360ii Lite ++ thread -weaning you off WoW since 07

[NEON MERCURY]

chest... down boy! 

well, i guess there's no way to win this point about video games as an artform and/or on par with the other "artforms" since the "what is art?" has always been subjective.  but, i can make valid points to make my stance on this issue hard to argue against.  and so begins some friendly banter...



"His argument was essentially that video games won't become an art form until the technology plateaus and the business no longer becomes a game of one-upmanship for the best graphics or best AI."

aw man, what a bad point made by a dude who even develops video games...  i guess this explains why i never got into the monkey island series.  first off, a video game doesn't have to have high production values to be consider art.  pac-man proves this.  to understand why i consider videogames high art, you got to look at several factors such as:  graphics, a.i., soundtracks, story, presentation, and GAMEPLAY.  gameplay should be considered the up most importance.  no matter how technical savy a game is, if it's not fun to play then who cares.  pac-man is not technically savy when compared to many games out there.  but it has some of the most addicting gameplay ever!  that's fact.  there is an art to creating a game with impeccable gameplay.  that takes talent to do.  there are so many examples of this...tetris, pong, galaga, donkey kong, space invaders, super mario brothers, q-bert, classic old school monochrome gameboy games, etc.  seriously, stop for a minute and think of all of those games that aren't visual masterpieces but have classic gameplay.  that's art. 

you want a film or music example to solidify my point?  think about all those (indie) films that are made on a shoestring budget but have amazing story and/or acting.  what about all those musicians who may not be able to afford polished studio productions in their music...well, maybe their lyrics are inspiring, possibly their ability to play the instruments is unmatched, or the whole musicianship and flow of the song has an incredible groove to it.  these are examples of why front end presentation is not necessary to each medium to be consider (high)art.


"The thing with film was that once everyone got used to it experimentation ended, so audiences came to expect things like narrative arcs and character development or something engaging about the way the story is told or whatever, rather than spectacle. Video games as a whole are still too focused on achieving the most realism or whatever (hence, an independent game designer is really limited when compared to a major company, while an independent filmmaker can theoretically make as good a movie as a major studio)..."

(in bold) not sure what your point is?

the later half...i still believe that a indie video game developer CAN create brilliant games that are high art which rivals film, music, tv, etc.  look at smaller developers and their games...such as:  q entertainment "rez", grasshopper "killer 7", "no more heroes",  team ico "ico", "shadow of the colossus".  all of these games are perfect examples of video games as art created by smaller studios/developers. there are many more but these are quick examples.  here's some inside scoop.  there is another small developer. called gamecock.  their shit is suppose to be killer.  spectacle or not, video games are art.


"...at this point that's impossible for games because production value is still so integral to the experience (so even while underground games may be enjoyed, they don't approach games backed by major labels). That's what I mean by the industry "plateauing"...that to some reasonable extent all video game designers will be equal and then the limiting factor becomes creativity, not money or time."

again, production value IS important but it's not a necessary factor when comparing video gaming as high art.  if you lack production value, excellent gameplay or story can save you.  XNA Studios provide tools for armchair developers to create their passion projects on the cheap.  the creativity is the only thing stopping the "gaming is high art argument"...nothing else.


"I didn't read the whole thing since I won't ever be getting either system in the near future, but I disagree with your sentiment that video games are "right up there" with film, etc., as an art form."

  well now.  that's not a good statement about not "getting either system".  that's like someone trying to point out that film is art and i refuse to watch kubrick, lynch, speilburgo, pta, to get see their point.

in the end, stefen has it right:

Games are most definitely an art form. BioShock itself proves this theory credible.

[Stefen]

Who else is as excited for Mario Kart: Wii and Grand Theft Auto IV?

[brockly]

mario kart is going to change my life for a week or two. and thankfully i don't keep jerk-offs as friends anymore so i don't have to hear any of the gta aficionado rave this time round.

[cron]

the level of detail in gta iv looks good, considering the past games have been fucking horrible in the aesthetic sense. i'm looking forward to the multiplayer, and i like what i'm hearing about the game not being as inmense as san andreas, probably the most boring and overrated game i've played. this one looks more serious, even if it still superficialy glorifies the thug lifestyle. i believe really stupid people run rockstar who just want to shock, but this game looks like a must, regardless.

[Redlum]

i guess this explains why i never got into the monkey island series.   

Sorry to just pick-up on one nugget of your interesting post, Cronopio....

The Lucasarts adventures are still some of the richest games I've ever played. While the actual act of playing them may seem uninvolved by today's standards A good 10-15 years on from first playing them, their cast of characters, story, music, wit, and obscure puzzles are still fondly stored somewhere in my brain like a favourite film.

I've been playing Day of the Tentacle, and Monkey Island 1&2 on my DS now and again and its such a refreshing change of pace on the platform. Lucasarts need to seriously consider bringing the next installment out for the DS as it's the perfect vehicle to breathe new life into the series.

Too bad Pirates came out and blew any chance of a movie out of the water. This game is so beloved that an American High-school kid staged an adaptation of the game as a little three-act a la Max Fischer.

[pete]

there are two ways that the videogame can become art, I think I've said this before, but more clumsily.
the first is the game as a piece of art- similar to what everyone has been saying.  museums these days exhibit a ton of toys and playthings from the past that have been crafted by exceptional artisans, who can turn a chess set or a doll or a mancala board into something so exquisite and rich.  video games can do that too, no doubt.
but the second is if the gameplay becomes an art - meaning if the game can be open-ended enough that a player is free to express himself through gameplay.  this is more similar to sports - how certain athletes like Ali or Jordan use the games and the rules as their canvases.  This is the type of game that is lacking these days.

[NEON MERCURY]

"the level of detail in gta iv looks good, considering the past games have been fucking horrible in the aesthetic sense. i'm looking forward to the multiplayer, and i like what i'm hearing about the game not being as inmense as san andreas, probably the most boring and overrated game i've played. this one looks more serious, even if it still superficialy glorifies the thug lifestyle. i believe really stupid people run rockstar who just want to shock, but this game looks like a must, regardless."


haha, i agree about the guys at rockstars being dumbasses.  i do think they are douchebags.  and their legion of fans may well fit the "games that assholes like" genre.  it's funny that you mention rockstar's visual presentation to their games.  out of all the ones that i played, rockstar's table tennis was the most visually impressive.  and i think that gta4 will use an updated version of the same graphics engine.  i am excited about gta4.  i didn't really like gta3 as much as the other two "real" gta games.  that game was too much and way too cumbersome (vice is still my fav).  i didn't even complete gta3.  and it was too ghetto.  i think it's safe to say that jax friom the mortal kombat series is still the industry's one and only true black video game character protagonist.   

i am looking forward to playing gta4 and checking out the multiplayer aspect of the game.  but my major summer release is still ninja gaiden II.



pete.  good point   

[Stefen]

How do the Rockstar Games people glorify Thug Life? If anything, they make fun of it. I don't think you guys are getting the joke with the GTA games.

[cron]

i truly recommend the british magazine Edge for essays on the script-writing and increasing importance of storytelling in videogames, those kinds of topics. they had a really interesting one last week about the need for games to become tools for raising questions, instead of just becoming interactive binary, morality plays. it's the only source i've found on videogame journalism where the writers aren't imbeciles.


please take a look at echochrome, a game that's based on the impossible figures of swedish artist oscar reutersvärd:  http://youtube.com/watch?v=QfICeBtVv8U
and spielberg's produced videogame, boomblox:


it's super hard for a videogame to be considered a piece of art cos people still have this absurd and incomplete idea that anything that involves tactile or digital interaction is immediately lesser art or another form of entertainment, as if the sculptures that are exhibited for blind people or kids to touch were less valuable than fancy rodin's. the vanguards taught us nothing.

i don't own an xbox 360 anymore, but i read that the game Rez HD is dedicated to the 'creative soul of Kandinsky', which made me a little angry for selling the console before playing it , but there you have it people, it was tetsuya mizuguchi's intention as a videogame designer for sega 'to transmit the same sensations one percieves in Kandinsky's paintings' . we just need less studios producing gta clones and godawful sports games.

and i stand about what i said on rockstar superficially glorifying the thug life. it's the pontius pilate attitude i dislike about them. it is always 'we're just concerned in making an excellent product.' and they really believe they've turned excellent products with the 3D gta's, cos stupid journalism has made them believe those games where perfect and awesome even if the had, for example, an annoying and imprecise shooting system. paraphrasing what john kricfalusi said about contemporary animation, if you're a kid who wants to be a videogame designer nowadays, you don't have to aim very high cos the standards are so low.( http://youtube.com/watch?v=mvM-BXaFrF0&feature=related ) and it doesn't have to do with quality, it's about deserving the portrayal of violence
it's like with the sopranos or no country for old men. the reason those two things worked well on unusual audiences is because violence is earned, which means it is there to elaborate on bigger themes, like a human being's inabilaty to feel compassion, etc. gta needs that, but the writers are naive enough to think that if you just plant a couple of ironical winks to the excesses of urban lifestyle into the game you will immediately have poignant satire!

[Chest Rockwell]

chest... down boy! 

well, i guess there's no way to win this point about video games as an artform and/or on par with the other "artforms" since the "what is art?" has always been subjective.  but, i can make valid points to make my stance on this issue hard to argue against.  and so begins some friendly banter...

Fair enough. Sorry if I came off as, I dunno, hot-headed on this issue. Didn't intend on that sort of tone. I just meant to start the discussion (which is one I've been interested in for a while...where games are or can go in The Arts).

"His argument was essentially that video games won't become an art form until the technology plateaus and the business no longer becomes a game of one-upmanship for the best graphics or best AI."

aw man, what a bad point made by a dude who even develops video games...  i guess this explains why i never got into the monkey island series.  first off, a video game doesn't have to have high production values to be consider art.  pac-man proves this.  to understand why i consider videogames high art, you got to look at several factors such as:  graphics, a.i., soundtracks, story, presentation, and GAMEPLAY.  gameplay should be considered the up most importance.  no matter how technical savy a game is, if it's not fun to play then who cares.  pac-man is not technically savy when compared to many games out there.  but it has some of the most addicting gameplay ever!  that's fact.  there is an art to creating a game with impeccable gameplay.  that takes talent to do.  there are so many examples of this...tetris, pong, galaga, donkey kong, space invaders, super mario brothers, q-bert, classic old school monochrome gameboy games, etc.  seriously, stop for a minute and think of all of those games that aren't visual masterpieces but have classic gameplay.  that's art. 

Hmm, I think you misunderstood. I don't doubt that HE (Ron Gilbert) respects classic games and I would also assume he feels many such games are some sort of "art." But a medium doesn't become "art" until there's a large community that thinks such and maintains a discourse using the medium. And he was saying that he doesn't feel like that will happen until the technology plateaus and the general population no longer gives as big a shit about graphics-one-up-man-ship.

you want a film or music example to solidify my point?  think about all those (indie) films that are made on a shoestring budget but have amazing story and/or acting.  what about all those musicians who may not be able to afford polished studio productions in their music...well, maybe their lyrics are inspiring, possibly their ability to play the instruments is unmatched, or the whole musicianship and flow of the song has an incredible groove to it.  these are examples of why front end presentation is not necessary to each medium to be consider (high)art.

But that's my point, exactly! Video games are still very much presentation-focused, in my opinion, which is what separates it from the examples you mentioned.

"The thing with film was that once everyone got used to it experimentation ended, so audiences came to expect things like narrative arcs and character development or something engaging about the way the story is told or whatever, rather than spectacle. Video games as a whole are still too focused on achieving the most realism or whatever (hence, an independent game designer is really limited when compared to a major company, while an independent filmmaker can theoretically make as good a movie as a major studio)..."

(in bold) not sure what your point is?

Basically, that when film started audiences were just amazed by the fact that they were watching something move that wasn't there (Lumiere Bros. films, for example), and so a lot of early silents are just bits of spectacle. Then film expanded and audiences came to expect more. I would argue that video games are in the same sort of transition phase, still attached to graphical presentation as a whole. Arguments against the Wii as a "Gamecube with waggle" prove this.

the later half...i still believe that a indie video game developer CAN create brilliant games that are high art which rivals film, music, tv, etc.  look at smaller developers and their games...such as:  q entertainment "rez", grasshopper "killer 7", "no more heroes",  team ico "ico", "shadow of the colossus".  all of these games are perfect examples of video games as art created by smaller studios/developers. there are many more but these are quick examples.  here's some inside scoop.  there is another small developer. called gamecock.  their shit is suppose to be killer.  spectacle or not, video games are art.

Of course there are a few "artsy" video games out there in existence....but I'm talking about the video game medium as a whole, and most particularly about the general public's reception of video games.

"I didn't read the whole thing since I won't ever be getting either system in the near future, but I disagree with your sentiment that video games are "right up there" with film, etc., as an art form."

  well now.  that's not a good statement about not "getting either system".  that's like someone trying to point out that film is art and i refuse to watch kubrick, lynch, speilburgo, pta, to get see their point.

That's a point in itself. What kind of art requires its patrons to pay so much money just to experience it? Whereas I pay the same amount of money to see a Spielberg movie as I would pay for a Farrelly Bros. movie, I would have to pay lots of more money to pay a 360 game over a Wii game. Again, it's a matter of improving technology.

But yea, in the end, I guess this is just my opinion. I love video games just as much as you. I was raised on NES and SEGA Genesis. I just don't think that video games are yet on the whole viewed as art, but that doesn't mean that they aren't art. Just that they're not "accepted" as such.

[Myxo]

Purchased a 1080P 42" LCD recently along with a PS3. Watched my first Blueray movie and.. wow.. Very impressive. I wasn't sold on the quality vs. DVDs. Thought there was alot of hype. But all it took was one movie and I'm a believer now. I grabbed MLB 08' The Show, and Devil May Cry 4. Both solid games. Grabbed Oblivion a few days after that and hate it. Anyway. All in all, I mainly bought the PS3 system for Gran Turismo: Prologue, MSG4 and hopefully FFXIII this Christmas.

[ᾦɐļᵲʊʂ]

What was the movie you saw that changed your mind?

[cinemanarchist]

Two things: (THING ONE HAS A MILD GTA IV SPOILER)




1) Have you all heard about Ricky Gervais being in Grand Theft Auto IV? That excites me to no end even though his schtick has worn somewhat thin on me.

2) I just bough a PS3 so I've completed the trifecta and now own every system...I feel like a god I tell you...A GOD. Initial thoughts on PS3...It's very quiet and I like the design elements of the actual hardware and software much better than the 360. So far I only own MLB 08 The Show and I'm loving that but graphically things seem fairly neck and neck vs. the 360. My first two Blu-Ray purchases were Ratatouille and Blade Runner: The Final Cut. Both look tremendous but I've had HD On Demand for a while now so it wasn't that much of an oooooh/ahhhhh moment when I popped in the first disc. Bring on that Little Big Planet game and I will give Metal Gear Solid a try even though the story lines on those games never make a goddamn bit of sense.

If anyone wants a PS3 friend my online ID is Hulot313.

[Stefen]

The comedy clubs in Grant Theft Auto IV are supposed to all have different well known comedians on stage. Is that where Gervais is? Or is he an actual character in the game?

I'm not turning on my 360 till next week when I have GTA. I just don't want it to break. It's a shitty piece of hardware and fails all the time. If it didn't have the best games I would have gotten a PS3 instead. Now theres a system that's built like a norse god. It's a fucking tank.

[cinemanarchist]

He's in the comedy club but apparently somewhere else in the game...the article I read wouldn't divulge where. They recorded a three minute routine and he put on the motion capture suit and everything.

Yes, the PS3 is a fucking stallion...a bulletproof stallion that shoots bullets made entirely of sleek! 360 does have way better games, but I wanted a Blu-Ray player and figured what the hell.