next »

[Fuzz]

I don't think this game is in reference to indie art games. I believe it's in reference to big budget AAA titles that gamers put unnecessary meaning into where there is none.

I think I agree with this, and we are just being hypersensitive. I've seen discussions about games like Bioshock, Fable 2 and Fallout 3, that border on the deeper meanings about various gameplay elements. Honestly they all are just kill the shit out of almost everything, every other description might be trying to wring more out then what is there.

As evidenced by:

Description (Game published on 2009-05-18)
JumpBox is a computer game short that has all the trappings of a major next-gen game: sandbox gameplay elements, moral decisions, immersion, collectible item, a deep plot, mysterious characters, and metaphors!

[Captain_404]

I don't think this game is in reference to indie art games. I believe it's in reference to big budget AAA titles that gamers put unnecessary meaning into where there is none.

I think I agree with this, and we are just being hypersensitive. I've seen discussions about games like Bioshock, Fable 2 and Fallout 3, that border on the deeper meanings about various gameplay elements. Honestly they all are just kill the shit out of almost everything, every other description might be trying to wring more out then what is there.

As evidenced by:

Description (Game published on 2009-05-18)
JumpBox is a computer game short that has all the trappings of a major next-gen game: sandbox gameplay elements, moral decisions, immersion, collectible item, a deep plot, mysterious characters, and metaphors!

What, come on, do you actually expect me to read the game's description?

I guess this makes sense for Bioshock then, but I didn't even know people were doing the same kind of thing with Fallout 3/2. The whole fps genre in general has never really interested me apart from multiplayer with friends.


So... I feel a bit silly now.

[Duckmeister]

I don't understand why some of you, when you realized it was a slam of triple-a games rather than indie "art games", think it points to Bioshock.

I think that shows a misunderstanding of Bioshock.  At least to me, it purposely set up a deep story, with the "terrible aftermath in a humanist-communist state", and then proceeded to say that stories mean nothing in games, because no matter how many dialogue trees, you still have no true freedom.  Bioshock, again IMO, itself was criticism of "art games" and "player-drive stories" and "emergent gameplay", and trying to be one itself at first just further solidified that point.

Now, on this game, I think the same argument applies.  Trying to be an "art game", or maybe, watching someone make it an "art game" when it really wasn't further solidified his point.  For example, the one statement which was supposed to copy a "next gen immersion game"  made you realize how much you hate those kinds of statements, and the one which then said that immersion (false immersion, that is) is a total ruse was riding on the momentum of the first one.

However, it still has to be taken into account that next-gen triple-a titles are not Jumpbox in quality nor construction, but only in hype and description.  Parodying something, then shoving in your face that the parody is exactly like the thing being parodied is both untrue and unfair.  Unless you yourself make mountains out of molehills, the last statement saying how absurd your beloved pastime looks to others does not apply to you.  He's making connections between things that don't connect.  Yes, Jumpbox and the recent next-gen title have in common one part (the hype and description), but not the other two (quality and construction), and therefore cannot be said to be the same, but that is what he himself says, however, that may in itself be a parody, which leads to my next point.

I think the real "attackee", if you will, is the guy at the beginning, he who made mountains out of molehills.  He's really attacking fanboys, and not the games they play.  He's criticizing those who believe the first artist statement, those who really are impressed with the "graphics update", those who dream up philosophical metaphors for simple game mechanics.  The games themselves have nothing wrong with them, and I think this guy is too smart to set up such an obvious straw man.  It's the fanboys he's after, and that attack is something with which I wholeheartedly agree.

This game really made me think.  Please, read my whole post if you immediately decided it was too long, I'd appreciate to hear what you think of it.

[WNF]

If this is about Bioshock (or whatever a triple-A game is): I didn't think Bioshock was all that crazy and deep and I didn't write a fucking essay about it like some bloggers, but I also didn't sit down and craft a game around a message I could've copy-pasted into a blog anyways. I get the point but it's sort of a big package for such a little gift. I wouldn't call his argument hypocritical, but I do think that games sometimes do have a deep meaning to them. The insinuation that most gamers take a game's message seriously because of the graphics is kind of... I don't know. I've never seen it. Where does this features-to-philosophy school of thought usually pop up?

I've been reading this forum for only a couple of weeks and I've already seen the terms 'meta' and 'straw man' more times than I care to count.

[ChevyRay]

What do people mean when they say "meta", anyways? I have a feeling it's one of those terms that's just being used way out of context, like "surreal" for quite awhile.

[PGGB]

What do people mean when they say "meta", anyways? I have a feeling it's one of those terms that's just being used way out of context, like "surreal" for quite awhile.

It's meta because it is a game about games.

[Kingel]

I feel like I've read a story where the main character describes the book he's reading with statements such as, "these metaphors are really striking!" and, "this pun is hilarious!". Would that be a message about how there's something wrong with books or people who read them? I know you can read books word for word to someone else, but you can with games too in a way. That's what interactive fiction does.

I feel like I've missed the point.

[ChevyRay]

What do people mean when they say "meta", anyways? I have a feeling it's one of those terms that's just being used way out of context, like "surreal" for quite awhile.

It's meta because it is a game about games.

No, I mean what does the term actually mean. What do they mean when they say it, not why do they say it.

I feel like I've missed the point.

It's okay; the point wasn't a very strong one, and felt mostly like a hateful projection of a recent self-discovery rather than an idea actually designed to better anything.

I know you can read books word for word to someone else, but you can with games too in a way. That's what interactive fiction does.

I know that when I explain a game I'm playing to somebody that doesn't play games, I almost always actually turn their interest right around and make them understand what I'm seeing in it. If what I'm seeing wasn't actually there (which I think is what this game is trying to imply?) then I doubt it would work, but that's clearly not true in my case.

[jstckr]

I really like this, how it makes a point, only to ridicule this point a few moments later, and then do it again. Good fun how it constantly works against itself to a point where the whole thing borders on schizophrenia.

I didn't get the feeling that it would have "a message" on whether 'art games' are dull or not, since it mocks and pseudo-mocks everything it does. It pretends to be an art game only to ridicule itself for that, which in turn makes it an art game again. Fun fun fun.

[PGGB]

What do people mean when they say "meta", anyways? I have a feeling it's one of those terms that's just being used way out of context, like "surreal" for quite awhile.

It's meta because it is a game about games.

No, I mean what does the term actually mean. What do they mean when they say it, not why do they say it.

Well when you apply the term meta it means that it is an abstraction of the term you apply it to.

[Curseman]

How do you get to see all of the fake artist statements anyway?

[pen]

How do you get to see all of the fake artist statements anyway?

you have to explore the level.

spoilers:
there are a few achievments:
murder everyone
get all the (3) artist's statements
complete the game the normal way.

uuhhh... I think there might be a few more, but not sure.

[Curseman]

spoilers:
there are a few achievments:
murder everyone
get all the (3) artist's statements
complete the game the normal way.

uuhhh... I think there might be a few more, but not sure.

There's also an achievement for pushing 'r' to feel remorse after you kill someone.

I don't get it though.  I thought that the statements that were lying around were the "real" artist statements and the fake ones were elsewhere.  I mean, in the statements themselves they talk about the fake artist statements, so if these are the statements that explain the fake statements wouldn't that make these the real ones or...?  Now I'm just confused.

[JamesGecko]

My personal opinion was that the game was boring, the opposite of fun, and not a great commentary on much of anything.

I do not feel that my life has been improved by finding out this guy's opinions. He could have at least made them entertaining, unlike that thing I just played.

[William Broom]

I think you guys are analyzing this way too much. It's like when people said YHTBTR was a commentary on modern gaming being too easy. It's just a joke game.

[Kingel]

[Eclipse]

crashed after a bit, it sucked

[Radix]

Yeah, that was pretty shit. If it's a commentary, he fucked it up. If it's a joke, the delivery sucks balls. It also ran pretty horribly on my work laptop, which is by no means a beast, but should be able to handle a piece of crap like this they way it handles 95% of the stuff I find here.

[Alevice]

yeah, the immersion section, if i enebaled Hifi graphics, the game slowed like hell

[pen]

what? I had none of those problems!