next »

[gunmaggot]

'comics are for kids, they're mostly about superheroes'. that's a largely true statement, even though there are comics that aren't for kids and aren't about superheroes.

Just to clarify:  That's a more of a plausible but false statement.

[Gnarf]

Okay so you have no interest in experiencing things that maybe slower or more contemplative than being a WWII soldier.

Dude, that's not even close to having a thing to do with what I posted. It was just a random example of some typical vidyagame thing I consider more compelling than a walk in a graveyard. I can very much enjoy a day of contemplating my next move in an ongoing game of correspondence chess.

[KM]

I just thought of this. Realistic sniper game. You'd have to sit very still for days at a time, pee in a jar and just watch for movement... Wouldn't that be a simulator?

Either way, I imagine it'd be quite boring. Imagine the video play through and game log of that. 'Today I peed in a jar and watched trees move. It was a good day.'

[Nate Kling]

Okay so you have no interest in experiencing things that maybe slower or more contemplative than being a WWII soldier.

Dude, that's not even close to having a thing to do with what I posted. It was just a random example of some typical vidyagame thing I consider more compelling than a walk in a graveyard. I can very much enjoy a day of contemplating my next move in an ongoing game of correspondence chess.

Okay but I mean, I think you would admit that you don't care to experience what it's like to be an old lady in a cemetary or similar experiences.  That's totally fine but apparently ToT does not want the kind of  experience you want.  It's still nothing to be really mad about.  I can understand how you would get defensive about something you believe to be of value being attacked.  But I think you are taking it to seriously.  People have different views on what they think is good and bad in video games.  I appreciate ToT not trying to candy coat what they say as to not offend anyone.  They speak what they believe and I think they exaggerate their claims to make a point.

[gunmaggot]

They speak what they believe and I think they exaggerate their claims to make a point.

I think it obscures their point and poisons the discussion.

[jwk5]

I don't have too much of a problem with the software ToT makes (though I don't care to play them beyond the occasional bout of morbid curiosity) but ToT reminds me of a bad politician. The more they try to shoot down the works of their peers and competitors the more it just seems like they are painfully aware of the shortcomings of their own works and are just trying to divert attention from it. "What, our games are lacking in content? No, no, nooo! It is our competitors, they make childish games! Our games are real art because their games are only male power fantasies!"

[Nate Kling]

Im not sure how many of you have watched the whole video until the very end but I think they fix some misconceptions about them that a lot of people here are having ( watch the last 5 minutes) .  They talk about how they like games and they like game developers but they are just trying to do something different, not objectively better but only different.  Also when they say that "games are not art" they are not using that as a way to devalue games.  They just think that art is a separate category and games are a separate category.

[Gnarf]

It's still nothing to be really mad about.

I'm not mad at ToT. I think they make bad games and write bad essays. Big fucking deal. But yeah, it's just big enough of a deal so that I write about it some on the internet. Much like ToT did in the first place.

I appreciate ToT not trying to candy coat what they say as to not offend anyone.  They speak what they believe and I think they exaggerate their claims to make a point.

I'm totally with you on that. But apparently the attacks made on ToT are not subject to the same understanding as the attacks made by ToT. For those it's just "why are you so mad/hostile/disrespectful/offensive/defensive" over and over.

"Our games are real art because their games are only male power fantasies!"

And here's a female weakness fantasy. Fuckenawesome.

[AshfordPride]

Im not sure how many of you have watched the whole video until the very end but I think they fix some misconceptions about them that a lot of people here are having

I sure wish I could write completely sensational, stupid stuff and then add a little postscript that contradicts everything I wrote on my website to make it seem like I'm not a gigantic tool.

Who came up with the word music?  Maybe this is the beginning of some sort of new intellectual media!

Humble.

[Gamers] keep themselves inside while skipping other stuff.  Games are only a tiny slice of everything you can do with a computer, not games are everything else.  It should be a very big thing, but most people are not trying to do those things.

Again, let's never define notgames.  Let's just make it everything else that video games aren't.  Think of everything a carrot isn't.  THE POSSIBILITIES ARE ENDLESS.  By only ignoring a few key components of what makes a carrot a carrot, I can allow myself to turn that carrot into a sports car!  Of course that there's a lot of potential for something when it's defined as everything that something else isn't, but you don't describe something like that!  Why don't you make something called notbooks, which is everything a book isn't.  Or notmovies, which is everything a movie isn't.

The possibilities are only limited by your ability to think!

You could call it interactive entertainment or something.  You could.  It's, uh...  Eeeeeeeeeeh...  You could...  But notgames is kind of a better word because it's very inclusive.  It takes everything that is notgames.

Yes, don't call them interactive entertainment.  Call them notgames.  Because notgames are included in the definition of notgames and fall under the umbrella of notgames and are rather similar to notgames.  Call them notgames because they are not games, get it?

It's not about definition!

Apparently not, or we would've gotten a decent one.

We're so used to thinking "I'm making a game, I need to add game mechanics"

Christ.

I think, I might add game mechanics if they fit.

Yeah man, wherever you can squeeze in a game mechanic or two!  We shouldn't think about building games around what makes them up, we should just make what we feel.  Let's all hold hands and make what we feel, maaaaaan.

This communistic hippie attitude is obnoxious.  See, it's about what notgames don't have.  They don't have game mechanics because they don't need them to be notgames.  Everything is fine as long as I invent a term for what I'm doing!  Then you guys can't say I'm making a bad video game, you can say I'm making a notgame!  Listening to this guy state his case is just more points against him.  He seems to just sort of "uh, um" his way out of answers and then just tell them that it's because it's notgames!

If you make notgames people get very mad.  Because they're adults and this is what a video game is.  But, children, don't, uh...

SPEAK UP.  

YOU'RE MUMBLING.

Am I one of those starving adults?  Too busy stranding a polar bear on a single piece of ice and fighting wars to see how beautiful The Graveyard was?

Games is a very old word.  But video games is very new.  It's not just about games.

Yeah, because it has the video part in front of it, we can ignore the game part, I guess.  PLEASE DONT ASK ME TO EXPLAIN THIS I WILL SIMPLY STATE MY FEELINGS ON THE MANNER AND HOPE YOU ARE LIKEMINDED ENOUGH TO GET IT.  

Also when they say that "games are not art" they are not using that as a way to devalue games.  They just think that art is a separate category and games are a separate category.

But what makes this hilarious is that notgames ARE.  Not just any old art, though, oh no.  The ONLY art left in a world!  Did you forget that shit they said about restoring the standards of papal-commissioned masterpieces or some bullshit like that? 

[Carrie Nation]

All I know is I have a young (under 10) cousin who I play wii games with all the time. She loves Mario Kart, New Super Mario, that sort of "traditional" game.

Also I had her play "This is How Bees Work" by bentosmile on my computer and... get this... she loved that too!

Why the fuck do you have to argue over this? Why can't both types of games coexist? This is like claiming that since Independent films exist then THERE SHOULD NEVER BE ANY BIG BUDGET ACTION MOVIES.

Sure both sides will be smug and superior to the other but in the end they both play their part and neither really brings the other down.

So let's just let some people make traditional games and some people make experimental games and shut up about it alright?

And now to quote Ashford:

Christ.

[AshfordPride]

Sure both sides will be smug and superior to the other but in the end they both play their part and neither really brings the other down.

But ToT does have the potential to bring other people down.  For an aspiring Indie Dev, isn't it infinitely easier to take the easy way out with a nongame?  To not worry about making something exceptional when they can just make something purdy?  I'm worried about this community.  The Western indie game community has all these dumb hang ups caused by these artistic fops who are recruiting more and more Western indie devs and making them think like them.  

It IS dangerous for these ideas to grow unopposed, because the indie community is all too eager to accept them so they can all hold hands in a big circle and sell Sleep is Death for twenty dollars.  

Case in point, Limbo selling over twice as much as Monday Night Combat. 

[Carrie Nation]

Sure both sides will be smug and superior to the other but in the end they both play their part and neither really brings the other down.

But ToT does have the potential to bring other people down.  For an aspiring Indie Dev, isn't it infinitely easier to take the easy way out with a nongame?  To not worry about making something exceptional when they can just make something purdy?  I'm worried about this community.  The Western indie game community has all these dumb hang ups caused by these artistic fops who are recruiting more and more Western indie devs and making them think like them. 

It IS dangerous for these ideas to grow unopposed, because the indie community is all too eager to accept them so they can all hold hands in a big circle and sell Sleep is Death for twenty dollars. 

Funny thing about doomsday prophets is they're always fucking wrong. Same thing here, just because a few more people take an interest in Art Games doesn't mean NOBODY INDIE WILL EVER MAKE ANY REAL GAMES AGAIN!

For the record I like both sides of this ruckus, Art Games are a fun throwaway experience for me with interactive purdyness and Traditional Games are a fun throwaway experience with interactive competition...ness.

Anyways all I'm saying is that even if art games make a big push in indie for awhile, it's NEVER going to stop a ton of people from making traditional games. That's just plain unrealistic.

In other words why is anyone having this argument again?

Oh and side note: I bought Sleep is Death, cost me 14 dollars. Great experience as it sort of combines traditional and art games as you can either play it like an interactive novel... or actually play it like a game. I've played and narrated both and it was awesome. So don't pull my man Rohrer into this, he's above us.

[AshfordPride]

Funny thing about doomsday prophets is they're always fucking wrong. Same thing here, just because a few more people take an interest in Art Games doesn't mean NOBODY INDIE WILL EVER MAKE ANY REAL GAMES AGAIN!

Yeah, just most of them.  Concentrating more on how you feel about the chracter you're playing as or how'll you'll interpret the ending instead of how they're going to make an interesting video game.

Anyways all I'm saying is that even if art games make a big push in indie for awhile, it's NEVER going to stop a ton of people from making traditional games. That's just plain unrealistic.

I just think it's foolish to dedicate such a large faction of independent design to games that I consider to be complete trash, and are only enjoyed by people inside a small circle.

In other words why is anyone having this argument again?

Thanks for telling us this on page 15.

Oh and side note: I bought Sleep is Death, cost me 14 dollars. Great experience as it sort of combines traditional and art games as you can either play it like an interactive novel... or actually play it like a game. I've played and narrated both and it was awesome.

Bought two copies for two dollars.  Or two cents.  I honestly forget.

Realized that the only way I could ever play with my friend was to basically have sex with his computer by exchanging IPs.  Decided against that.

[Carrie Nation]

Ashford you just kind of never even bend a little to see the other side of an argument so I guess I'm out.


Maybe you're right, maybe the whole independent games industry is headed towards some sort of Art-pocalypse... oh well, doesn't seem likely, but if it's gonna happen it's gonna happen, no use arguing over it.

[Jonas Kyratzes]

They just think that art is a separate category and games are a separate category.

Exactly. I can think of nothing more elitist and destructive than that. And, to be honest, nothing more offensive to those of us who have been fighting for years - since long before there was a Tale of Tales - for the recognition of the interactive medium, for the idea that games are art.

[jwk5]

In its beginning stages a trend will always spread like a wildfire but it will only survive beyond that if it has any real substance to it. I don't think the whole "art game" movement will last but I do think it is the precursor to something bigger and more valid. Once "art game" has finally been done to death and its initial trendiness has passed that is when you will start seeing something truly worthwhile come of it.

I doubt it will be the doomsday scenario some people here are thinking, though. I mean look how many artistic movements have come and gone in the world of drawing and painting: expressionism, impressionism, cubism, abstract, surrealist, etc. Same with music, look how many genres have come and gone and then resurfaced again over and over. I do believe video games will go through the same (and in many ways already has, "retro" game styles resurface constantly, for example).

[Nate Kling]

Case in point, Limbo selling over twice as much as Monday Night Combat. 

The disagreement is here.  You want more games like Monday Night Combat to exist other people flip right past the game and say oh great another game with big guns about blowing stuff up. (That's what I did).  It's not that I think people must stop making games like that but just that I want a more broad range of games.  I hate to make analogies to other mediums but this has been said before.  Books have lots of different stories and subject matter, games however do not.  Many times the only difference between subject matter is only a facade laid on top of the very same game weve seen a million times before.

They just think that art is a separate category and games are a separate category.

Exactly. I can think of nothing more elitist and destructive than that. And, to be honest, nothing more offensive to those of us who have been fighting for years - since long before there was a Tale of Tales - for the recognition of the interactive medium, for the idea that games are art.

Yeah I would disagree with that statement.  I don't believe all games are art but I think there are definitely a good amount that are.  I dont think it's necessarily insulting, its just their view.  I mean I dont think that chess is art, its a game.  Equally amazing as masterpieces of art but its just different.  I think some videogames are Art though because they are more than just a mechanic and more than just a "Game".

[Carrie Nation]

That whole Limbo-Monday Night Combat point is kind of... well... pointless.

They're both tried and true genres, as in Monday Night Combat is clearly inspired by Team Fortress 2's style of cartooney online team based shooters and Limbo is clearly inspired by Braid's style of artsy puzzle platformers.

Neither are vastly new or different it just turns out that in the XBLA market, artsy platformers tend to be more popular as they catch your eye and stand out from the other games Xbox owners tend to already have. I know, for one, that I tend to buy that sort of game over the Arcade as I already have box copies of a ton of online shooters.

It's not an issue of art games overtaking tactical/traditional games, it's just that the artsy medium sells better over downloadable impulse buy markets and competitive shooters tend to sell better in stores where people spend more money and expect a deeper and more competitive experience in return.

So once again it's not a point of the Art-pocalypse happening (and yes I plan to overuse that term now that I've invented it) but just a case of which games sell on which markets.

[Jonas Kyratzes]

Yeah I would disagree with that statement.  I don't believe all games are art but I think there are definitely a good amount that are.  I dont think it's necessarily insulting, its just their view.  I mean I dont think that chess is art, its a game.  Equally amazing as masterpieces of art but its just different.  I think some videogames are Art though because they are more than just a mechanic and more than just a "Game".

The problem starts when people like ToT essentially dismiss everything that's been done in the medium that didn't take their approach to being art. Game mechanics are as much a tool of artistic expression as words or film; more importantly, people have argued for computer games as a form of expression for years, and many amazing works have been created. And then ToT show up, claim it's all "games, not art" and go on to claim their despicable Frankfurt-School-type standards are the One True Path.

And no, this is not the fricking Apocalypse of Indie Games. But I feel obliged to speak out against this form of elitism because I think it's harmful, just as it is in other artforms. ("Only European movies about people arranging matches are art!" "Stephen King isn't a real writer!" etc.)

[Nate Kling]

haha I like the term Art-pocolypse.  I think its funny though that any game that isn't about destroying things with weapons is labeled an artsy game.  Also I dont see Art games as being some hip fad like some people are making it out to be.  It's the total underdog minority.  Any mention of art games in this forum gets beat down and criticized by tons of members.  At least that's how I see it.  It always looked like to me that art games were a huge minority and to not expect much appreciation if you make one and release it online.

@Jonas Kyratzes :  Yeah I definitely see your point there.  I don't know if I view it as much of an offense to me but your concern is definitely valid.