Why games feel irrelevant?

[Salka]

Erm. I think you'll find Ron Gilbert was elaborately saying how much Katamari ruled in its simplicity... the whole 'subtext' and 'deeper meaning' thing was a joke...

Please don't tell me you took him seriously or even think that yourself...

This game is a biting commentary on our vapid consumerism; our desire to acquire possessions at all cost. It's about how we can only become whole people through the ownership of things. Things we don't need or even want. We just roll over them, adding to our stature and self-worth.

KATAMARI DAMACY, EVERYBODY!

[Salka]

The only people failing to see that joke are stupid, or perhaps those that haven't played Katamari Damacy. They can be excused. Otherwise, it's unforgivable.

But more importantly... even if he wasn't joking, SURELY you don't actually think that about Katamari Damacy?

Because it is completely ridiculous. Good god. I can't believe you tried to further your argument by linking to a joke.

[AndyB]

Right and how does this give us an insight into modern life? How does this make us come away enlightened, and about what??

Yufster, when I said [You don't feel as though you have come away with a new insight into society / human nature / life / ourselves after playing a platform game or Doom 3.] I don't mean so much profound 'enlightenment' which is what it sounds like I was saying, as the gameplay is very unrealistic and abstract and doesn't much relate to life -or people- in general.

Quick unrelated side-note:

On a BG&E trip, "The title alludes to Friedrich Nietzsche's book of the same name, in which he states that "anything done out of love goes beyond good and evil"." Now that makes sense!

[Jake]

Man this thread should be titled "are we allowed to think what we want to think about the games we play, or are we supposed to be stupid and just blow everything up: apparently a debate, for some fucking reason."

[miffy495]

With regards to the Katamari thing, I'm not sure if Ron's article was meant to be a joke or not but I feel the need to put up SiN's quote from the responses:

But yes, the game does seem like a take on consumerism.

But is it? I have to wonder whether this is what the devlopers had originally intended. because, IMO the only reason Shakespeare is so great is because people over-analysed the things he wrote. I wonder whether the same thing is happening here ...

If you work hard enough at it, you can read anything from anything. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, it certainly shows you're a creative person, anyway. The only problem that I have with this is that it seems like when people do this they're just trying to justify their enjoyment of something by making the activity sound smarter. To me, it points to a type of person who can't enjoy something for it's own sake. Again, nothing wrong with that, but you may not end up leading a very fulfilling life.

(By the way, Walter. No offence intended. It seemed like your initial response took what I was saying kind of the wrong way. Sorry about that.)

[Erkki]

The way I see it, the point is: Storytelling, when present, isn't strong enough.

Yes, I think part of the point is that games with stories have subpar stories.

Of course there should always be games that are there just for fun and entertainment. Poker might be relevant in some way, but if so, it's the players who bring that relevance, not the game itself.

[baconian]

Why? Can't a game be complex and deep, like a European garden?

yep, just not unlimited. The point is that a Japanese garden is defined as a microcosm, a simpler version of reality. European gardens are generally defined as, um, gardens. Your post that I answered contained 5 uses of the word 'limited' as a negative.

You still don't understand what I'm trying to say. I'm not saying that I want all games to be unlimited in scope. I'm just saying that if a game is supposed to have even a hint of story, the player won't be satisfied until he's reached one of the predefined endings, and the nature of games dictates that you have to win ("beat the game") in order to do this.

The nature of current game genres, yes. The potential of the medium is practically unlimited.

You're right enough, Walter, Will Wright did an interview a while back talking about how observing people playing The Sims made him aware of how people were reading into it.

After seeing the advancement possibilities in The Sims, people told him that they became aware of how their own lives was a balancing act, trying to advance along multiple paths to achieve happiness. Then coming to some Zen realisation about the drives that push them along these paths. This was all unintentionally designed into the game, though.

[TMCB]

I love this comparison we are making to 'art' and computer games.

For centuries paintings and statues were generally made only of rich people or of historical and religious occasions. They were merely symbols of wealth and power, it wasn't until the advent of the industrial age, and the introduction of the camera that 'artists started to experiment with other forms of expression.

It wasn't until the beginning of this century that actors were ellevated to the height that they are now considered, and saying that one was an artist/actor was tantamount to saying you were a 'whore'.

Books are a fairer comparison, but then I always find it difficult to imagine intellectual musings as 'art'.

I find it odd that gamers feel the need to justify their enjoyment of a craft, by lumping it in with the prozzies of Hollywood and the stuck-up-my own-bottom navel gazers (interesting if they could do both at the same time) painters of this century.

[Karimi]

I haven't played Katamari Damacy , but I don't think Ron Gilbert was joking. Maybe he was kidding to some extent , theres still a point there and from what i've read about Katamari Damacy it could be correct.

Do games have to have a message ? Not really, games are forms of entertainment. Just like movies, there are some deep lesson movies and some movies where people get killed and blown up. I think what games should have is good gameplay, and a decent storyline . The storyline doesn't have to be nobel prize material , but it should at least make some sense and hold the game together.

Metal Gear solid 3 is a good example of how a game can be more than just entertainment. its a fun game,has a pretty good story and theres enough depth to make you think about life. The Metal Gear series has always been one of my favorites , an example of what gaming can be when done right. The song in the beginning of Snake Eater is still in my head.

[Kwiksnax]

I was thinking the other day that games would be really interesting if they had characters that you could get to know over a period of time, and they would start letting you know bits of their life stories and their opinions. But only if you hang around with them and treat them well. You would feel as though you were getting to know that character and bond with them.

Then Baldur's Gate 2 would be just the thing for you dude. Give it a whirl.

[AndyB]

Highlights from a review by Tim Rogers:

http://www.insertcredit.com/reviews/katamari/index2.html

The collapse of an entire continent into one giant ball, which then proceeds to fester in the middle of the ocean while everyone sits silently on a sofa, depressed

....

I say this with the highest sense of admiration and honor. Yet there is a darker feeling, one I can't get out as well as I'd like. I started this review in the mood to get that point out, and I just haven't been able to do it yet. I thought that bullshitting for a couple thousand words would warm me up. It has not, however, made the grave matter any easier to disclose. I'll force it out, then:

....

I don't believe this game is art, however. It's far from that. It's a tool for teaching people something, in addition to being a Video game and a hell of an interesting programming experiment. It is also very entertaining to someone who doesn't know what it is.

....

When you do know it, however, it pushes you away, and tells you to play something else. When you play that final stage in free mode, once you're awarded free mode, and you collect all there is to collect, you roll around, free of a time-limit, looking, praying for more icebergs. None will come. Nothing a man makes can be infinite. This game, with its carefully designed world, cannot and will not go on forever. Sitting in the middle of the ocean, staring at that huge lump you've made, you'll wonder what the point is of it all. Just -- what the point is of anything. Not just Katamari Damashii, by Namco, for PlayStation2 -- gaming in general. Not just gaming in general, either -- what's the point of anything? Living? Working? Drinking Coca-Cola? Though you have the option to exit out of the stage through the menu, chances are you'll do what I did, and just turn the game console off now.

---------------------------:-----------------

AB: Isn't this kind of what Ron Gilbert was saying?

[Salka]

Just remember how many Thumbers you implicated here.

Prove it's a joke. Please.

....

We're talking about a guy who clearly has a literary instinct, who will interpret stories on a non-literal level. He's clearly saying you can do the same with games.

I can't tell you that Katamari Damacy is intentionally "a biting commentary on our vapid consumerism; our desire to acquire possessions at all cost." Maybe that's where all your animosity is coming from: you won't accept that the interpretation has any merit unless Takahashi comes right out and says so. But it's a fucking good metaphor for it regardless. I don't know if Ron is claiming that his interpretation must have been intentional on Takahashi's part. It sounds like he's saying it is, but if you ever study how we interpret things, you'll realize that not all interpretations of works have to be founded on the intentions of the creator. In fact, a lot of writers (like Gilbert, iirc) come right out and say they prefer to leave some room for ambiguity, because they want their readers to understand the work in a way that suits them. Which grants legitimacy to lots of different interpretations.

You are horrifically over-interpreting Katamari Damacy. I'm not going to prove Ron was joking. Who knows, maybe he's actually an idiot and wasn't joking at all. But he was. And you're being an idiot. I'm sorry but to read that much into Katamari Damacy... that's ridiculous.

Yufster, when I said [You don't feel as though you have come away with a new insight into society / human nature / life / ourselves after playing a platform game or Doom 3.] I don't mean so much profound 'enlightenment' which is what it sounds like I was saying, as the gameplay is very unrealistic and abstract and doesn't much relate to life -or people- in general.

Yeah but it's Doom 3. You're not SUPPOSED to feel enlightened after playing it. That's a ridiculous example. If you want to be swept away emotionally by games, okay fair enough. But don't think that games such as Doom 3 are bad for not doing this: they're games, and games are essentially about playing and having fun. Why do games have to be like other media? I play games to have fun. If you want to play games to reflect on human life on the modern age, go for it I guess. If I want that, I'll watch a movie or read a book.

[miffy495]

That is some Zen shit there, man. I've played the eternal final level a few times through now, and though I do prefer the timed mode, I've never got that emptiness that the writer seems to have. I just say "Ok, well, that's that. Back to whatever I was doing that I needed this half-hour break from," and shut the machine off.

I just think that, given how full of crap the world is, it'd be pretty selfish to slip into escapism and just pretend all that other stuff doesn't matter.

Oh, I completely agree man. I'm not saying that we should stop looking for meaning, just that we should be aware of when we're starting to look too hard for it. There is some real meaning out there in every kind of media, but we have to be able to just relax and enjoy a good time when the opportunity presents itself as well. Not all the world has meaning, and too many people try to trick themselves into believing that everything is meant to impart a deeper message.

[baconian]

The game doesn't end. It breaks up with you.

great line.

[baconian]

That's awesome. I've never seen the interview before, but that's really cool to hear.

it's here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3645552.stm

[baconian]

Also, this:

The roaches symbolise our mundane problems - credit card debt, bills, the dog next door that just won't shut up - and the roach mothers the root of these problems, which is yourself. The evil eyes represent those problems that you never plan for but should. There are plenty of people who will help you if you let them once you've sorted out the mundane, but are soon followed by those that are vindictive just when you don't need it. You may feel like you're in the rat race, but some smart maneuvering will ensure you keep out of the way of the larger problems that restrict so many. Let your affection grow, don't get trapped by the small things, and keep a careful eye out for things that don't spring up onto you until it's too late.

What? You say you'd rather just see some screenshots? Well, if you want...

[Jake]

You are horrifically over-interpreting Katamari Damacy. I'm not going to prove Ron was joking. Who knows, maybe he's actually an idiot and wasn't joking at all. But he was. And you're being an idiot. I'm sorry but to read that much into Katamari Damacy... that's ridiculous.

The guy who made Katamari Damacy gave a talk at GDC about why he made the game. It wasn't a comment on consumerism, but he did have some pretty serious reasons for making the game other than "rolling up things makes me giggle.*" Idealistic artsy-fartsy type reasons that seem to make you get aggrivated for no reason.

Yufster you need to calm the fuck down about this. The fact that you're spinning around wildly about this in a way that sounds like you're borderline yelling at Walter about it says more about you than him.

There's nothing wrong with seeing things in something like a game or a film that aren't there... I don't even mind taking it where some people might claim is "too far." As long as the interpretation si really something you've genuinely naturally thought up, and isn't something you've forced into your own brain to try and prove to yourself how smart you are, causing you to unconsciously reach down into your pants and start fondling yourself, I think it's perfectly fine. Walter doesn't seem to be arguing this point because he wants to be a pretentious wanker, he seems to actually think about these sorts of things all on his own without worrying how it will reflect on him or who will respect his mind because of it. What the fuck is wrong with that?

I don't know why it bothers you so much, but it really shouldn't, because it's got jack shit to do with you or what you think about the game.

* Now, "Rolling things up makes me giggle" was of course a part of why he made the game, but that was one piece in a larger reason which was all related back to projects he had made while at art school, his thoughts on the happiness of society, and world peace.

Yeah, the happiness of society, and world peace. He was serious too. Are you going to say that he was reading too much into his own game which he made and start yelling at him on a web forum too, or can you just be content with the fact that maybe while he has his own take on the game, he's also perfectly content with people seeing more or less in it than that, and be done with it?

[MrHoatzin]

Let's keelhaul her.

[Salka]

There's nothing wrong with seeing things in something like a game or a film that aren't there... I don't even mind taking it where some people might claim is "too far."

I don't see why there's nothing wrong with that. Why even bother? Why not just enjoy games for what they are, and not how many billion levels of meaning they might have underneath the surface? I honestly don't see the point in seeing things that aren't actually there.

Walter doesn't seem to be arguing this point because he wants to be a pretentious wanker, he seems to actually think about these sorts of things all on his own without worrying how it will reflect on him or who will respect his mind because of it. What the fuck is wrong with that?

I find what he is saying extremely pretentious, whether he means it to be or not.

[Jake]

I find what he is saying pretentious, whether he means it to be or not.

Because it's about thinking?

I don't see why there's nothing wrong with that. Why even bother? Why not just enjoy games for what they are, and not how many billion levels of meaning they might have underneath the surface? I honestly don't see the point in seeing things that aren't actually there.

If Walter sees these things as being there - if what's going on in the game reminds him of broader issues, or serves as an analogy in his mind for something more complex than rolling - but that has no bearing on the fact that he really likes that the gameplay is beautifully simple, and that it's hilarious when you run over Grandma, or engulf a city, does that still annoy you?

I really don't think that seeing other things in a game makes you like it less (unless like I said earlier, you're going out of your way to do so so that your art student friends think you're deep), and it's weird to me that you're so against it just because it's not something you like to do, or rather it's just not something you do at all.

[MrHoatzin]

I don't see why there's nothing wrong with that. Why even bother? Why not just enjoy games for what they are, and not how many billion levels of meaning they might have underneath the surface? I honestly don't see the point in seeing things that aren't actually there.

I find what he is saying pretentious, whether he means it to be or not.

You're such a philistine.

Why not notice, for example, that the American Army game forces you to play always as the good guy (i.e. American soldier) against the bad guy (the terrorist) in multi-player. When you join a game against someone, you will both see each other as the evil guy. That surreal point of view shift carries some sort of aesthetic weight and engages, completely accidentally, in a nice little cross-civilizational political commentary. It was completely unintentional, but according to you it is not worth noticing because noticing that is not superficial enough.

[Salka]

No, because he's saying things like this:

The Sims is (maybe inadvertently) insightful in terms of reproducing a narrow mental model of how many people in modern, capitalistic societies view the possibilities of their lives and their notions of progress, weighted extremely heavily towards materialism.

That's not something the game sets up the average Joe to notice, though.

[MrHoatzin]

What I said. It was posted in the interim as you were answering Jake and you may have missed it.

[Salka]

You're such a philistine.

Why not notice, for example, that the American Army game forces you to play always as the good guy (i.e. American soldier) against the bad guy (the terrorist) in multi-player. When you join a game against someone, you will both see each other as the evil guy. That surreal point of view shift carries some sort of aesthetic weight and engages, completely accidentally, in a nice little cross-civilizational political commentary. It was completely unintentional, but according to you it is not worth noticing because noticing that is not superficial enough for you.

So you're saying that in a multiplayer game, just like in real life, opposing sides see each other as 'the bad guys'.

WELL DONE THERE, KINGZJESTER.

Why is it necessary for the American Army game to have to tell unintentially tell us this? Didn't we know that anyway? Does it make the game better? Does it 'enlighten' you in some way? Are you thinking about the unintentional political commentary whilst playing (Well, you probably would be)? What does this have to do with the gameplay? Does the underlying political commentary make it a better game?

When you are PLAYING the game, and having fun, which is what games are about... did the social commentary make it better?

The social commentary that's not actually there? Unless you're actively trying to find social commentary in there?

[eljay]

Ok while I agree with Yufster's last point, (the enemy is the bad guy.... shocking), I have to say that ,yes, realising there is an underlying metaphor or something similar can make the experience better if done subtly. I can enjoy such a thing, it will make me smile, but if you don't then fine, quite why you think there is something wrong with that is very bizarre to me....

LJ

P.S. I just noticed that your last post was evil