This thread is for sharing serious experiences of works and analysis of the interactive media.
Movius, thanks for posting those links. Reading through G-H now (I've put it off until now, not having the time).
MATCH 3 STUFF:
Match 3 is not without its potentially damning narratives. For instance, one could construct a narrative which casts its emphasis of partitioning of elements into homogenious segments as a form of anti-multi-culturalism (or as a form of multi-culturalism you don't like the sound of). 'things that are the same go together'.
Conversely, ostensibly simple mechanics such as the 'MATCH 3' provide the serious artist with a rich palette of expression to juxtapose against an increasingly complex money-fueled world.
I don't fully understand the above. Maybe for a single work, a match 3 game might be effective, but I can't imagine that too much would come from a whole match 3 industry (more than the one that already exists).
The developer's social responsibility is to guide and educate the common man's experiences, opinions and actions, not to place him at the whims of the enjoyment based temptations of the power-driven and profit motivated oligarchy. To even consider allowing him to explore such areas without protection is grossly obscene.
MARIO STUFF:Nor do the minions of Bowser squabble pettily amongst each other, instead they remain firmly focused on their one task, stopping Mario.
I don't think that is the case. Most (all?) of them seem to be on permanent sentry duty, 'doing their job' guarding stuff, rather than going out of their way to stop mario. That said, the narrative you set up is a relatively effective one: I do think that it's a good idea (though not obligatory) to question mario's 'motivations'.
Often this is accompanied by a provocative fireworks display to further gloat over the destruction of foreign culture
I do not think that this is obvious. I think it more plausible that Bowser's kingdom is one ruled by an iron fist, that Mario is taking on the roll of 'liberator'. He does not, for instance, rule over any countries: he is a plumber, not a diplomat or dictator. Even given this though, narratives that valourise interventionist regimes (especially ones without any obvious support from the natives) are always a little bit suspect.
Material wealth (in the form of 'points') is distributed in the game in exchange for destructive and violent behaviour including assault, murder and frequent looting of the people's underground vaults.
I agree with you here, and think that's a good point. The only game to really challenge me in that respect was Chrono Trigger. (though many RPGs will have people attack you if you try and steal their stuff).
Super Mario Brothers is perfect in terms of gameplay and through this it was able to make a profound statement on the state of society and it's obsession with materialism.
I don't think it makes any such strong statements. But I think a lot of its features can be reasonably read as being revealing of the cultural background and ideals of the creators.
Black StuffIt has long been claimed by the Mainstream video-game INDUSTRY that black people who play games do not exist.
Any citations/evidence to back yourself up?
Unlike you or I, black people do not play games with competitive or aggressive intent.
Any citations/evidence to back yourself up?
(also, you seem to be assuming that you're speaking to a white audience...)
Unlike you or I, gays do not play games with competitive or aggressive intent. They play to resolve conflicts through gossip and fashion.
Player
