Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

999641 Posts in 39235 Topics- by 30649 Members - Latest Member: 7yp

April 24, 2014, 02:00:47 PM
TIGSource ForumsPlayerGamesTale of Tale's "Over Games" Presentation
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 17
Print
Author Topic: Tale of Tale's "Over Games" Presentation  (Read 25822 times)
Christian Knudsen
Level 10
*****



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #30 on: August 27, 2010, 03:54:31 AM »

Yep, people/studios making new and different stuff should always be welcomed. What can -- to me -- seem a bit annoying with Tale of Tales is that they seem to believe that just because their stuff is different it's automatically better...
Logged

Laserbrain Studios
Currently working on Hostile Takeover (TIGSource DevLog)
cactus
Makeout King
Level 5
******



View Profile WWW
« Reply #31 on: August 27, 2010, 04:59:54 AM »

I think it's good that people like Tale of Tales exist, but this is the most ridiculous thing I've read.

Quote
We are not rebels. What we make is perfectly logical to us. We are not reacting against games. We just don't find them entertaining enough, not beautiful enough, not interesting enough, not immersive enough. We realize that this is a matter of taste. But we believe that many people share our taste. So we make games for them.

How can they start with this, then explain that they make games as a reaction against everything they dislike about games? How can they then use pictures of war with stupid captions like "You cannot stop us. No longer will you program computers to tell us what to do." and claim that they're not trying to be rebellious?

I think that they have a noble idea, trying to expand games into something more interesting and less weighed down by arbitrary rules, but they don't have any actual work to back that up. None of their games or projects are interesting enough to stand on their own without some pretentious explanation that takes the pointlessness of it all and turns that into something "deep". And they are all games with rules, no less.

This presentation is the most pretentious, self-indulgent and hostile one I've ever seen. I have nothing against Tale of Tales for trying to do something different, but giving yourself acclaim over systematic failure to do something new with games is just bullshit. If they want people to make "not games" or explore what can be done with interactive experiences then why not be a bit humble and try to create interest in that movement by saying something more constructive than "you and your games suck, look at us and our beautiful creations and you'll see how it's done!".

I was really interested in the whole idea of "not games" since I saw Erik Svedäng's presentation at No More Sweden, but this has left me with a bad taste in my mouth that I won't be able to wash away for quite a while.
Logged
jwaap
Level 9
****


JW


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #32 on: August 27, 2010, 05:46:50 AM »

I agree. I was just wondering if what they say is just to provoke and get attention, or if they really mean it...

I think it's time to rise the price of the gutter again.
Logged

ExciteMike
Level 0
***



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #33 on: August 27, 2010, 06:50:58 AM »

When reading something like this, mentally insert phrases like "this is just my opinion" and "but of course there are obvious exceptions".

Makes it much harder to get needlessly upset at something that was clearly personal opinion and has obvious exceptions. Smiley
Logged

Dustin Smith
Level 10
*****


Eskimo James Dean


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #34 on: August 27, 2010, 06:59:56 AM »

ToT's games are all machinima that require you to hold down the forward key for them to work; I think Dessgeega said that they're games that don't require a player, or something to that extent. Their rhetoric -- which is inflammatory and vitriolic towards anything that isn't theirs -- is pretty daft. Nonetheless, there's got to people somewhere out there that enjoy it, and that's enough for me.

If one person gets inspired by them to make another game in the vein of LSD, Windowsill/Feed the Head, etc their whole series of 'games' is worth it. I don't intend on paying them money or supporting them, though. If they just shut up and made games there wouldn't be any problem.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2010, 07:05:36 AM by TheDustin » Logged

Joaquim
Level 2
**


an island of such great complexity


View Profile WWW
« Reply #35 on: August 27, 2010, 07:02:15 AM »

We are not rebels.


 Cheesy

that's as far as I could read.
hilarious material they got there!
Logged

cactus
Makeout King
Level 5
******



View Profile WWW
« Reply #36 on: August 27, 2010, 07:09:46 AM »

What's the most annoying thing for me is that I thought the idea of "not games" was interesting, and I had hopes it would lead to something great, but if this is how they promote the idea then Facepalm

Why can't someone take a radical stand and do it with style so that something new and cool actually happens instead of taking this stupid approach? Sure, be an asshole, that's probably necessary, but a self-glorifying presentation that says that it's them against us just doesn't seem to have any purpose other than to upset people.

So it doesn't help to insert "this is just my opinion" anywhere since they're representing something that might actually be important, and somehow seem to feel that the need to boost their own egos is greater than that of bringing (good) attention to their ideals.

Quote
ToT's games are all machinima that require you to hold down the forward key for them to work; I think Dessgeega said that they're games that don't require a player, or something to that extent. Their rhetoric -- which is inflammatory and vitrolic towards anything that isn't theirs -- is pretty daft. Nonetheless, there's got to people somewhere out there that enjoy it, and that's enough for me.

If one person gets inspired by them to make another game in the vein of LSD, Windowsill/Feed the Head, etc their whole series of 'games' is worth it. I don't intend on paying them money or supporting them, though. If they just shup up and made games there wouldn't be any problem.

If they took a better approach to the subject, they would inspire more people to create things like that. They don't mention a single game that isn't theirs that they like and the only thing that presentation does is telling people that they rule and then say that other people should be like them. I doubt they'll inspire anything other than idiots who will make shallow shells of games that are "meaningful" because of some stupid excuse they've thought up to justify all the flaws in their creations.
Logged
Jonas Kyratzes
Level 1
*


Yes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #37 on: August 27, 2010, 07:24:38 AM »

I found that entire presentation to be both silly and destructive; it's like they're desperately trying to take the art out of games. It did motivate me to write a detailed reponse, though, which I thoroughly enjoyed.
Logged

"Moderate strength is shown in violence, supreme strength is shown in levity." - G. K. Chesterton
http://www.jonas-kyratzes.net
Alistair Aitcheson
Level 5
*****


"Ali" for short


View Profile WWW
« Reply #38 on: August 27, 2010, 07:51:53 AM »

Quote
We are not reacting against games.

And then they go on to explain how all of their games have taken out traditional elements of video games, and then to explain why videogames are unsatisfying and something needs to be done about them. Oh wait. "Video games are not games." Now I get it...

The fact is, there's nothing wrong with being dissatisfied about a product or a medium and wanting to redesign it with all the unecessary elements pulled out. Take out the axioms that we feel damage the experience, in hope that we will create something better. But that's not exactly news. We all do it! Every single creative does it!

They seem to be expressing an idea that the whole medium is a disappointment, and that makes me wonder what exactly they expected from it. After all, a medium is just a way of categorising a product, not a product in itself. How can you feel let down because a medium did not make its promises? A medium is an inanimate object, and it's not even tangible!

Again, this is not a new idea, this is not profound, every creative person does this. So you feel there is more that could be done with a medium, but how does that mean that the medium is at fault? Are people stupid for enjoying that medium?

Ultimately, their ideas are not nearly as profound as they think they are. The only thing that I feel offended by in this lecture is that it implies that people are stupid for enjoying videogames. And also that the people who make videogames are stupid for making them in the first place.

I agree with them about wanting to create something different in reaction to perceived shortcomings. But that's not a profound idea, and I am not a fool because I enjoy games or make games with game overs.
Logged

Anarkex
Level 1
*


Still dope.


View Profile Email
« Reply #39 on: August 27, 2010, 08:02:52 AM »

Quote
Yep, people/studios making new and different stuff should always be welcomed. What can -- to me -- seem a bit annoying with Tale of Tales is that they seem to believe that just because their stuff is different it's automatically better...

Sort of. I'm not trying to STOP ToT from making the games they want to. Indeed, I think it's hilarious. But when they're parading said trashy games around as the only true art that exists in modern culture, I need to step in. As idiotic as it sounds, someone might believe them.

Quote
Why can't someone take a radical stand and do it with style so that something new and cool actually happens instead of taking this stupid approach?

Cactus, I'd like to know what you find so intriguing about the idea of "notgames". Don't think of this as confrontational or anything. The way I see it ToT is just praising game design with emphasis on aesthetics (and not just any aesthetics, obviously [I'm sure they hate Bioshock] it's emphasis on pretentious, artsy aesthetics they like) and disregard for mechanical complexity, because as I said, they are still making games whether they want to call it that or not. If I'm mistaken and it really runs deeper than that, I want to get to the bottom of it, and your input can help me do that.


Oh yeah, and alistairaitcheson, you're very right. The only thing you're screwing up is calling games a "medium", which they are not. This isn't just arguing semantics, I think this is crucial in many of the misconceptions about video games today. Video games are simulations, not media. They can contain media, but they are not media. They don't "communicate" anything except by way of the media they contain. Video games essentially just simulate a possibility space and let the player do whatever he wants in it according to the rule set.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2010, 08:11:35 AM by Anarkex » Logged

I had an idea for a game once.
AdamAtomic
*BARF*
Level 9
*


hostess w/ the mostest


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #40 on: August 27, 2010, 08:14:00 AM »

What's the most annoying thing for me is that I thought the idea of "not games" was interesting, and I had hopes it would lead to something great, but if this is how they promote the idea then Facepalm

I am so deeply, fundamentally in agreement with you that it's not even funny, ESPECIALLY because their stance specifically requires an absurdly narrow definition of what "games" are that has NOTHING to do with the actual history of games and play and THE EARTH and civilization, and a lot to do with like the last 10 or 20 years of video games.  It's astonishingly narrow minded (if well-intentioned).

Anyways, rock on bro.
Logged

cup full of magic charisma
Nate Kling
Pixelhead
Level 9
******


Caliber9

nkling00@gmail.com n8klng
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #41 on: August 27, 2010, 08:46:31 AM »

I feel like I'm the only one who likes Tale of Tales here haha  Wink .  I'd have to say that I like the article a lot.  When I read their writings I don't get the same sort of self importance feeling that you guys seem to get from it.  To me their writing is made to provoke and get people to think about ideas past what videogames have been. I don't necessarily agree with everything they say but I don't get the same outraged anger as a lot of members are feeling here.  Even the stuff I don't agree with I think is still quite interesting to ponder and consider.  I see the article as some sort of call to arms or motivational speech.  Basically I think their critique on videogames is pretty dead on but I don't think the games they've made so far are the perfect answers to them. 
Logged

cactus
Makeout King
Level 5
******



View Profile WWW
« Reply #42 on: August 27, 2010, 08:55:51 AM »

Quote
Why can't someone take a radical stand and do it with style so that something new and cool actually happens instead of taking this stupid approach?

Cactus, I'd like to know what you find so intriguing about the idea of "notgames". Don't think of this as confrontational or anything. The way I see it ToT is just praising game design with emphasis on aesthetics (and not just any aesthetics, obviously [I'm sure they hate Bioshock] it's emphasis on pretentious, artsy aesthetics they like) and disregard for mechanical complexity, because as I said, they are still making games whether they want to call it that or not. If I'm mistaken and it really runs deeper than that, I want to get to the bottom of it, and your input can help me do that.

I thought it sounded very interesting when I heard Erik Svedäng's take on it that he expressed during his talk at this year's No More Sweden:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=darnJjsoptU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fROgFJRLUsg

I especially like the idea of not seeing video games as a subgroup of games, but something that doesn't need goals or rules. I think that if more and more people look at games this way, then something fresh and new will surely come about. But we still need people to show everyone else how to do this, as the concept (while simple) is hard to grasp without having any good examples of these "notgames".

Edit: I sent a message to Michael Sämyn and asked for an explanation of what they were hoping to accomplish with their presentation, and as I sort of expected it's written the way it is for rhetorical reasons (it was supposed to be presented at a museum (for non-game people I'd guess)). I totally approve of self aggrandizing at such events, since if you are modest people will just think that you're insecure and subsequently they will belittle your work.

I'm not angry anymore. If I had it in me I would've liked to be able to make myself sound/seem important as well.
« Last Edit: August 27, 2010, 09:08:03 AM by cactus » Logged
Zaratustra
Level 7
**



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #43 on: August 27, 2010, 09:01:50 AM »

OK, for those of you in the audience that can't keep track:

1) Games are not art
2) Videogames are not games
3) Indie games are not videogames

With this information, who was in the third train car and who owns the goldfish?
Logged

Nate Kling
Pixelhead
Level 9
******


Caliber9

nkling00@gmail.com n8klng
View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #44 on: August 27, 2010, 09:02:41 AM »


I especially like the idea of not seeing video games as a subgroup of games, but something that doesn't need goals or rules. I think that if more and more people look at games this way, then something fresh and new will surely come about. But we still need people to show everyone else how to do this, as the concept (while simple) is hard to grasp without having any good examples of these "notgames".

I completely agree.  I think that we're going to have a lot of necessary attempts and failures at "notgames" while people try to figure out how to do them.  So while Tale of Tale's games are not my favorite games, I still respect them as an attempt at something greater even though they didn't quite make it there.
Logged

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 17
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic