To Jim Sterling, Who Hates Art Games

>>200 comments in one day; a record?

I’m glad these aren’t comments about another crap artsy game, because some would have had the balls to claim “see, people are talking about it, it means this crap game has succeeded in some way, thus it’s an amazing game”.

@Dodger what are you talking about? I’ve never watched any anime in my life apart from maybe what little 2 seconds I see of it on TV. My name is a reference to a move from Street Fighter III. Stop trying to pull an ad hominem and resorting to false dichotomy and come up with a real argument. And last I heard, porn is all consensual.

@anothergol: criticism of art games or any games posted is encouraged, it’s just personal attacks and flames that aren’t.

example of encouraged: blueberry garden bored me, not much to do, skills weren’t that interesting, too short, underwhelming, buggy. not worth even $5.

example of discouraged: anyone who likes blueberry is pretending to be smart, its developer knows nothing about game design and he is tricking the world into liking his game. not a game.

@hayate,

Your defensive nature belies your innocence. ;-) that was a joke, so please lighten up. My comment, while directed at you wasn’t really about you.

Also, I wasn’t *implying* anything towards *you* directly (and it really had nothing to do with your name – though Street Fighter could easily be considered Anime as well), it was more of a cultural reference, people as a group who might enjoy manga or anime and sometimes video games, perhaps an otaku. I was generalizing my comment based on your comment, it wasn’t directed at you per se. I was trying to make a point about how people say one thing and do another. e.g. People speaking negatively about a game for it’s content or subject matter, but then going and participating in questionable behavior themselves. That doesn’t mean I believe all subject matter should be taken lightly, I think we need to be very careful about what we censor, but perhaps we should use caution when making certain content available to everyone where young and impressionable audiences have easy access to it.

The idea of such a game and the results of its influence should be debated and discussed. Just look at violence in video games. Most gamers would tell you that violence in video games has had no adverse effects on them, yet they’re killing people, in a lot of cases the people in the games might be innocent bystanders. So my question is, if gamers can say that violence doesn’t have an effect or influence on them when playing a video game, why would a game about rape? Perhaps those same people know someone who was raped… but what about people who know someone that has had an act of violence committed against them or a loved one? A family member murdered perhaps… Does that affect how or even if the same person will play violent games knowing that someone close to them has been either hurt, killed, or violated? Can you really separate the two and say that one kind of game is worse?

I’m just curious and I believe an honest question with no simple answers. I certainly do not have the answers, but without things (or games as in this case) such as this, would these same questions still be asked?

In other words I think it is almost vulgar that you are bible coding Impressionism and comparing it to the current state of Art-Games. You very faithfully cut and paste high school knowledge to support some belief that is simply irrelevant.

To remind you, change is nearly always critiqued, no need to refer to impressionism specifically; but you go on a frenzy and suddenly compare the impressionism movement to gameart just for the sake of finishing your clusterfuck. In order to prove your point you turned game art into an anachronism; well BOY we are so happy that gameart is still in the stage of impressionism and fucking has to reinvent the wheel.

Also it seems lotsa people here are bashing the wrong games, talking about 8 bit graphics and shit… Retro games aren’t necessarily art games… And Retro games can rock too… Just play what you enjoy and give the rest a rest, really. Criticising the whole idea of someone making a unique experience in game form that isn’t yet another shooter as some kind of abomination that should never see the light of day and as the reason indies live in basements (most don’t make art games, stupid) is quite absurd to say the least.

I am posting to add to the post count.

a few random points:

– that people are getting upset over a game about rape who don’t ever get upset about games about murder kind of have their priorities twisted; last i checked, murder is worse than rape

– derek wasn’t comparing art games to impressionism as a movement, he was just comparing the criticism of it to the criticism of impressionism: i.e. that it’s not “really” painting, is too vague, and doesn’t require as much work as “real” painting does. but the similarities between the two movements pretty much end there.

– there’s no real ‘art game’ genre, it’s really more like three genres: conceptual games (games that you have to figure out the meaning of), ambient games (games that focus on the atmosphere and generating a mood), experimental games (games that explore some particular convention by breaking it). those three don’t have anything in common except that they aren’t traditional, yet are often all grouped as “art games”. but they’re as different from each other as they’re different from normal games.

Learn how to spell pretentious, you child.

@Bush:

English isn’t my native language, blasphemer.

> Plus he’s fat!
Yeah fatso!
(lol massive get it Jim is a fatty).
I’m going to punch your fat snout.
I am sick and tired of reading fat people’s internet opinions.
because some fatso decided to make a public matter out of his idiocy
Awful power you’re giving to the fat guy.

Just quoting what Tigsource really means when it preaches “constructive criticism”.

Just quoting my earlier comment (comment 207) because I also have another question that I think might be relevant after the quote:

“The idea of such a game and the results of its influence should be debated and discussed. Just look at violence in video games. Most gamers would tell you that violence in video games has had no adverse effects on them, yet they’re killing people, in a lot of cases the people in the games might be innocent bystanders. So my question is, if gamers can say that violence doesn’t have an effect or influence on them when playing a video game, why would a game about rape? Perhaps those same people know someone who was raped… but what about people who know someone that has had an act of violence committed against them or a loved one? A family member murdered perhaps… Does that affect how or even if the same person will play violent games knowing that someone close to them has been either hurt, killed, or violated? Can you really separate the two and say that one kind of game is worse?”

Again, if we can live with the above and still enjoy games that involve different subject matter and / or adult themes, then why is it so difficult for some people – people who might really enjoy games that use or even exploit questionable subject matter, to accept the idea that other people might enjoy art games and perhaps what they stand for? Why is it difficult to swallow the idea that human beings are diverse and sometimes complex even though we sometimes act as simple beings? Does liking Art Games make someone pretentious? Does it make them a “poof”? If so, what does that make the people who only enjoy action or wanton violence in games? Does that make them unintelligent? Psychopathic? Can we really limit all of these ideas and not having things in common to share? And lastly, is it indicative of falling into one of these categories as a gamer to not be able to grow and appreciate ideas that might be “outside-of-the-box” and does this force those same people who are not curious or interested in exploring new ideas to only stick to what they know or perhaps what they think they know because of what they’ve either learned or perhaps only seen on TV?

I just wonder if outside influences, such as Television, play a part on “breeding” a gamers tastes. Or is it upbringing? Perhaps religion plays a part, or perhaps the lack of spirituality altogether has a different type of effect. Does it make anyone else curious how and why people are effected differently by these interactive experiences? With that, does feeling contempt towards a genre or people who appreciate that genre, mean that we are still very distant as psychological beings because of all the different influences during our upbringing? Or, when we do try to point fingers and direct negative attention to others, are we just seeking attention of some sort? Or is it just a fear of the unknown and misunderstood?

@Derek
“Mainstream indie games”? Isn’t that a bit of a contradiction? I don’t get it. :P

Finally pushed through the two articles. What are you guys so pissy about again? He isn’t even saying he hates art games, he’s just saying that indie devs need to stop relying on trite gimmicks (INNOVASHUN), “shocking” subject matter, and purposely vague mechanics and plot points to trick people into thinking their games are deeper than they are. In short, he is imploring indie game devs (and, in a huge way, indie game critics) to step up their game, and the response is BAWW BAWW BAWW YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND WALLOW WALLOW. Art games aren’t art. You’re not special for thinking you understand it. Deal with it nerds.

There really isn’t even anything wrong with indie game devs putting out silly little game maker experiments. When I’m showing people my doodle pad, there’s an acknowledgement that I’m not trying to create a masterpiece. My stick figures with moustaches are not fit for a museum. They don’t even nearly compare to DC comic books. I draw them because I like drawing gimmicky little cartoon characters, just as I’m sure plenty of indie devs like making gimmicky little one-room games. The problem is when these games get put on a pedestal and talked up as something bigger and deeper than they are. Canabalt is getting glowing praise from Kotaku, threads are passed around on 4chan /v/ saying “if you do not buy VVVVVV, you hate video games. Criticism of these half-formed fetal doodle games is UNHEARD OF. It’s not even just indies, either. The game community in general, from message boards to journalists to a great deal of devs, is just so full of whiny, pretentious little kids. I don’t even know if there is a way out. Maybe I’m just getting too old for this.

So, now we don’t only have people hating those who make or like games they don’t, we also have the apparent delusion that all indie games are art games and therefor these arguments encompass indie developers as a whole? The fuck? And these people try to pretend they bring up valid points to consider? Aw hell…

yeah — sometimes people get confused when i say i like resident evil 1 more than any of the latter ones. i think resident evil 1 did the best job of producing an atmosphere of horror, of actually making the player afraid to explore a place. now in RE4 and RE5, it’s more of an action game, with constant shooting, and not even an attempt at creating a creepy atmosphere, or making something interesting to explore. the mansion in RE1 was ten times more interesting to explore than any of the areas in RE4 for instance; they focused a lot more on making an amazing place.

i think it’s just that modern tastes have shifted away from atmosphere and into action. that’s part of what i like indie games for, there are more games which focus on the subtle and on the experience, and on creating something interesting to explore, the way silent hill 1 and 2 and ico did. not that there’s anything necessarily wrong with headshots, it’s just that sometimes it’s more interesting to slowly look around and be scared by the occasional monster when it shows up, rather than to quickly react to monster after monster without any time to breathe.

Paul: Mechanics can make you scared of a monster. They aren’t all about putting omnipotence into the hands of the player. The volatile AI in Bioshock kept me absolutely terrified the first night I played it. As a more indie example, I still can’t play more than twenty minutes of Minecraft indev without getting jumpy and nervous. When stepping too far into a pitch dark cave can kill you, you have to weigh your options and take risks, which is much scarier than when the mood is just implanted into the atmosphere with graphics and sound. Games that rely on aesthetics to cause emotions often can’t hold up after the first playthrough, because the player knows what to expect and sometimes he just wants to get on with things. Solid mechanics, however, can hit you again and again with the same impact every time, and even grow into something different as you learn more about them.

We do this like, every time I come here, Paul. I’m almost starting to enjoy it.

look at that fat bastard’s meaty paws completely swallowing up that wine glass

The one thing I feel compelled to say is that The Void is one of my favorite games ever. It is also one of the most flawed games I’ve seen, and it’s target audience is very narrow. But once you get past the initial confusion of what type of game you’re playing (you’re not playing an RPG or a FPS, you’re playing a First Person Resource Management game, as if you were a WarCraft peon playing in first person), it is very innovative and very well put together.

@ paul eres:

“a few random points:
that people are getting upset over a game about rape who don’t ever get upset about games about murder kind of have their priorities twisted; last i checked, murder is worse than rape”

This is true.

However, killing isn’t automatically murder. A lot of games have you killing enemies, but there aren’t many where the goal is to murder people. The distinction’s an important one.

In our society, there are circumstances (war, self-defense, etc.) where taking the life of another person is considered a justifiable act. In most games where the player has to kill enemies to advance, there’s some sort of backstory present to provide context for the player’s actions, so that he or she can feel justified in carrying out those acts. (There are exceptions, I know, but this is generally the case.) There’s no need for the player to feel guilty about killing enemies who would kill [i]them[/i] if left unchecked, or slaughtering enemy soldiers trying to invade their country or what have you.

Rape, by comparison, is impossible to justify. It’s a purely selfish act. Unlike killing, there are no extenuating circumstances that can be invoked to make it defensible, let alone acceptable.

That being the case, I don’t think people ‘have their priorities twisted’ for taking issue with a game that casts the player in the role of a rapist, but has no problem with ones that expect the player to kill foes to advance, presenting it in a framework that validates the player’s actions. In fact, I’d say those people have their heads on pretty straight. Now, if we’re talking about games where the player is encouraged to (and rewarded for) murdering the innocent for no better reason than the player’s amusement, I’d be inclined to agree, but like I said earlier, there don’t seem to be a lot of those out there.

i’ll edit it, one sec

edit: fixed

regarding rape vs murder, there are a lot of games which focus on murder too — the grand theft auto series are pretty popular, and it is kinda encouraged (though not required) that you kill random civilians in that game. there are also games where you play as assassins or hitmen, and generally international treaties and world courts frown upon assassination, even if the person you’re assassinating is pretty bad.

there are also tons of games where you kill non-sentient things (such as wolves in world of warcraft or whatever) which pose no threat but presumably just want to live in peace, and are encouraged to do so and given rewards for it. i’d even say the majority of enemies in most games won’t go out of their way to kill you unless you stand in front of them; otherwise they’d just walk back and forth, forever — so it’s not exactly self-defense to stand in a koopa troopa’s way, say you’re threatened, then kill them. bearing all that in mind, i’m not convinced that the primary action in most violent games isn’t murder.

besides, as someone else mentioned earlier, there are thousands of hentai games, often about rape. i don’t see why making an experimental/artistic game about rape is any worse than making an erotic/pornographic game about rape.

Monster Hunter sucks. It’s a tedious and boring game based mostly on mindless grinding. The only somewhat redeeming factor is the combat, but that’s ruined by the terrible controls and camera.

People who claim to “enjoy” it are all either weeaboos who play it because they heard it’s the latest craze in Japan or people who suffer from a severe case of item collecting OCD.

See, I can back up my opinions with reasons and my own experience, which makes me a super awesome gaming expert just like my idol Anarkex. Bonus Expert Points are awarded for stating opinions in the most inflammatory manner possible and spiking them with not-so-subtle ad hominem attacks.

@Anarkex, but there are plenty of shitty non art games as well, would that justify claiming that “games” in general are bad? I mean, isn’t that how the mainstream media often treat games, causing an outrage (by those who have yet to get used to it at least) in such communities? And besides, there are plenty games that don’t attempt to do things art games attempt to do, how exactly would we be better off if those developers suddenly saw the light and started creating such experiences only? And what’s so hard about accepting that something you personally don’t enjoy can still be appealing to others? I didn’t want to insult the games you stated you love to start the bullshit fest all over again, but I suppose it’s almost needed to get the point across. Personally I didn’t enjoy Bioshock and barely found it worthy of playing through once, while Minecraft, as said already, can be considered an art game. The second part especially should hit home to the “different strokes for different folks” mentality. You can like art games. You admitted that much. So why argue against them? Not all non-art games are created equal, and not all art games are created equal. Should the people making the experiences that don’t quite cut it just stop trying altogether, stop showing their works to people to avoid generalised backlash like this (which means they get no feedback, and cannot improve), or what exactly would make you and Jim happy in your fight against uh, whatever this is a fight against since apparently it’s not against art games… The majority of games, not just art games, or indie games, are shit. It comes with the territory. But without them, you likely wouldn’t have the good experiences either.

To add to my last post, if this is about giving them a “free pass” I don’t think TIGS ever stopped people from posting their criticism and often includes criticism of its own in the news posts, while leaving the final judgement to the end user. And I didn’t hear of any indie dev becoming a millionaire by a *shitty* art game so they definitely don’t get a free pass by anyone. The majority criticises them (mostly by way of ignoring them) so there’s absolutely no need for an article that, in an inflamatory way, creates stereotypes out of the blue and claims they get more praise than they deserve. They do not.

@Sinclair I was about to verbally tear you a new one because Monster Hunter absolutely fucking ROCKS (and I never liked anime, I don’t think MH looks much like anime even, oversized weapons aside). But then I saw you were trying to make another point :-P