See? This is why I call all of the stuff I have on Kongregate things like,
"an interactive computainment" or "a thrilling electrodiversion"
See? This is why I call all of the stuff I have on Kongregate things like,
"an interactive computainment" or "a thrilling electrodiversion"
Wot I Think: The Game : an ongoing collaborative game-design experiment / comedic disaster here on the RPS Forums!
Kata vs. Kata : a game of simultaneous round-based predictive martial arts (like frozen synapse, but with punches)
My Games on Kongregate : "computainments" for your world wide web experience
I outlined that games also have non-abstract rules and goals. These are vital parts of any game and they determine the interactivity. Dance has nothing in common with that or else it becomes a game.Originally Posted by deano2099
Naturally, but you can apply subjectivity to anything in the world and have the same result: nothing is the same to two different people. This discussion is not about art.Actually I think every player's reaction to the experience will be different.
Any game with a focus on set narrative is, inadvertently or not, very closely connected with cinema. The ability to juggle chunks of linear narrative is not the strength of the medium. That goes for emotional attachment to a character as well, because good books and films (since they usually have a clearly defined narrative) do that unquestionably better. What you usually do in games like that is very much like turning over the pages or pressing stop and play on a remote control.No, Walking Dead plays to other strengths of the medium. The ability to put the player into the shoes of the person involved.
You can't be serious with this.And I'm sure when films came out people were saying "Why just use them to tell normal stories when a book can do that?
Why does it matter what it would be called? The important part is that the distinction is made.
'Game' is a clear concept, I'm just arguing against obfuscating it.
'Unquestionably?' Many of us would *heavily* question that.
It's not a clear concept at all. The fact that people have been arguing about it for decades is proof of that.Why does it matter what it would be called? The important part is that the distinction is made.
'Game' is a clear concept, I'm just arguing against obfuscating it.
And no, the 'distinction' is unimportant. The recognition of the existence of distance, for example, can exist without a precise agreed upon definition of at what point a distance is short, or long. Similarly the recognition that a game can be more, or less gamic/otherwise mechanically driven, can be done, and done less contentiously with more honesty regarding the subtleties of the issue, without a precise, firm, dividing line between what is, and what isn't a game.
Last edited by Fhnuzoag; 29-11-2012 at 07:02 PM.
Games have entirely different priorities.
I'm sure one side of this argument also believe that games are art.
Such as? How can you be certain every games designer designs with those priorities in mind?
So I guess this Dev has only likes pong? FUK OFF M8 is all I can say. Grrgh.
The ways in which I play games are generally to create or be told stories. Wether it be in that moment to moment survival of a multiplayer match with friends which we reminiss on years later or to listen to or read or watch interesting... stuff.
Games are essentially experience generators, experiences become memories, recited memories become stories and histories.
Urgh I can't even comment further on this idiot dev without annnoying myself. Makes perfect sense he is a friend of the Fez developer.
Perhaps the other side believes that 'art' can be precisely and uncontroversially defined.
Lots of stuff people call "video games" today are really just adventures. That's a nice word to use - adventure. Computer "RPG" games are simply adventures 99% of the time. Just because point&click puzzles were once called that doesn't mean we have to cling to the ghosts of the past.
What is Secret of the Monkey Island ? 3 parts puzzle, 2 parts story. Or similar. Planescape: Torment ? 2 parts story, 2 parts puzzle, 1 part game (battles).
My definition of a game: it's a test, conducted either for fun (usually), or to determine something. Many games are tests of skill, others are tests of wits, there are also tests of imagination and empathy or knowledge (Dixit). The "something" being determined can be "who takes out the trash today", the method is by playing Rock Paper Shotgun, and it's a game of... luck, and bluffing. Don't discount games to determine luck. Games of dice and others are descendants of magic rituals, and ancient people deeply cared about magic, luck, and favor of the gods. Olympic games are tests of training and natural talent.
I stay away from claims like "games are an art form, which..." because saying something is art is like saying something is foozle. Art is one of most vague and poorly determined terms. Art doesn't even have a purpose. Not even aesthetics.
Do you want to know what is a terrible way to market a game ? The trailer of GTA V.
Is it pretty ? Yes. Is it polished ? Certainly. But as a presentation of a game, it's a fucking DISASTER. There's not a single moment in the video which gives you a hint that it's an interactive program, let alone showing how you can interact with it. It looks like an animated movie much like Toy Story. It looks exactly like a movie trailer. Trailers are for movies, not for games. When I say "exactly", it's not a hyperbole. I mean that literally. This could be a movie advertisment playing in a cinema before the movie proper, and no one would distinguish it unless they heard the name "Grand Theft Auto" or "GTA".
I'll remember this example for the next argument "mouse + keyboard is the best control method for everything". A very elegant example. This doesn't mean I like console controllers, not at all.
Last edited by b0rsuk; 29-11-2012 at 07:09 PM.
Diablo3 is not PvE or PvP, it is PvAH. -- Tei
Who's been arguing about it for decades, exactly?
And as much as I don't like anything that comes under this, I don't get why does 'not a game' have to be an exact term with a derogatory definition.
I like this guy.
The conversation's devolved into our regular stupid nonsensical bullshit where certain grognards tell everybody to get off their metaphysical lawn, but for fuck's sake, when you're saying "vidja games aren't even technically games," why the fuck are you even on this forum?
This is like listening to Right-Wingers blather on about "real America," defined as suburban White home-owning Protestant gun-toting family men who secretly think they're John Wayne, and anybody who doesn't fit that measure is clearly an imposter.
Okay, let me stop you here. Why is battle "game" but puzzles aren't? Aren't battles fundamentally just puzzles where you apply different set of logical skills (sometimes combined with reflexes) to achieve a goal?
A puzzle is characterized by a single solution, or very few solutions. The more solutions there are, the farther from puzzle and closer to a game. Battles in P:T can be fought in many ways - but not as many as in Baldur's Gate, for example. Hence I only gave it 1 point out of 5.
Also, battles have clear win and loss conditions. Puzzles - not so much, often just winning.
Diablo3 is not PvE or PvP, it is PvAH. -- Tei
Where would something like SpaceChem rank? Would it be more of a game or a puzzle, seeing that the first task has somewhere around 650 different solutions (sorted by symbols in descending order)?
...is wrong!
Thread started: today. 4 pages. Oh u guize.
He's entirely right, but I've long since learned this is a pointless argument to have in these parts. People want their authorial narratives, even if that is fundamentally opposed to what games are and even if it inherently limits what they're capable of. There's no sense bitching about it, it's better to just go find games from devs that understand these things and support them.
Buying games you aren't going to play is a waste of money (no matter how cheap they are). Forcing yourself to play games you wish you hadn't bought is a waste of time. Both are best avoided.
I don't think "wot is game" is a refreshing change from "wot is RPG." Really just more of the same; especially when the line is drawn on exactly the same boundary as the "wot is RPG" clusterfuck was fought.
Other terms we can fight over because we're sadomasochists who specialize in self-flagellation:
FUN
ENTERTAINMENT
JOY
INTERACTIVE
DISCUSSION
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
