Why games feel irrelevant?

[AndyB]

I'm not saying that games *are* irrelevant or that they cannot say anything.

But it seems to me that so many games are irrelevant except in terms of being short-lived fun to pass the time with, no matter how good the game. Because, they do not speak of anything particularly relevant to our society. 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.

Games can certainly act as a form of speech, but not many say much of interest*. Even Metal Gear Solid 1/2 which push some interesting philosophical points doesn't make very relevant ones, you aren't determined by your genes? information is power? / can be controlled.

You don't feel that you have come out with a new understanding of life in the slums, or the nature of extreme capitalism, the working of a romantic heart (like Ally McBeal) or what-have-you.

[vimes]

Does it bother anyone if I post a fucking long answer?

[Roderick]

Has it occurred to you that games are entertainment? They don't have any specific obligation or duty to do anything more than entertain you. This doesn't mean they can't become more than that, but it's not something that is asked of them.

It would be nice to see more done with the medium, but as is much discussed; it is still in its infancy from a culturally contexted point of view.

[vimes]

I hate those kind of post 'cause I can't seem to summarize what I want to say in a short post ... anyway... about the games not conveying messages and what stops them from doing so :

• Games are to be fun and are to be wish fulfilment: it’s kinda seen as a genetic feature that Video game is an entertainment thus must be enjoyable, must be fun and must put the player in a situation he could wish he’d be. But relevant messages don’t emerge from (dull) point of view taken the sunny side of the street: Kafka, Orwell, Wells, Zola, Maupassant, Palahniuk … none of them ever wrote success stories. In that way, current video games are very limited in what they can say. Max Payne and Grim Fandango gives a good glimpse at what games could be if the main characters would reach success through multiple failure.

• Proper Video game grammar doesn’t exist yet: Nowadays, video games take ideas from here and there but failed to invent its own grammar. In fact, the gaming community has lost the lot of hints of its particularity in that matter when the gaming industry finally reached the mainstream market publishers had wished for years. In reaction, the publishers felt they had to meet the main public where it stood and so, they went for the recipes of movie making. What nobody really realized at that time is that experiencing a movie is totally different from playing a game : watching a movie is merely accepting to be told a story filtered through the eyes of its creator; as a spectator, you’re taken by the hand (or not, in the case of a Lynch movie) and brought to a certain point… the only thing that is required from you is an open mind and the will to sort out what you’re shown. If developers apply that technique to games – and Call of Duty and its lot did that – they end up restraining the player in its freedom, the core of a Video game experience. They recipe can be successful once, not twice and conveying a message without frustrating the player is nearly impossible

• In other media the creator is the centre of his work, in games the player is the centre of the creator’s work. Most of the time, catharsis in games can’t be achieve because the quality of a game depends on the player’s investment… and it’s difficult to integrate subtle underlying discourse when the player – in a good game - is free to interrupt things and leaving the scene at any time.

However there are also games conveying messages. Yeah, more than often, their storyline hammers this message so hard that the gamer must be blind, retarded and socialist not to get it. In those games, a message is conveyed but it is not the core of the game…. I mean, MGS sucks in every way in terms of storytelling; at least for the dialogs and cutscenes I saw.*shivers while reminiscing*

Still, being the elitist gamer bitches Idle Forumers are, we know that some games adopt points of view with subtlety using the few tricks acknowledged (or not) by the industry:

• Meaningful supporting characters: Psychonauts is astonishing in terms of supporting cast adding depth to the game. Raz’ story as great as it is, the heart of the game truly lies the composed fates of the misfits, the monsters and the madmen…children included. The game excels in giving the player hints about character’s story whatever its investment is. The first time I finished the game, I didn’t witnessed a single scene in the Summer Camp and didn’t get that many Memory Vaults but I had lot of clues about Milla, Edgar and the others that were built in the level design. The second time around, I had the whole ride... it was impressive and moving to see what the creators really wanted me to see.

• Focusing on the world rather than on the characters : this is the field of fantasy and SF games that really enjoyed to get rid of the characters by making the population a bunch brainwashed consumer following the established order or a extinguished race. Then, the enlightenment comes from understanding how the humanity came to that situation given history clues and huge background. Myst, Riven and Uru are great examples.

Anyway, I think that one of the experiment would be to work on what the player has to bring and doesn’t bring to its character: most games are stuck between a dull empty character and a filled character you can’t modify and, in both cases, developing interesting thematic around the main character that would interest the player is difficult. Pfff that must have been boring

[Roderick]

Not at all, Vimes. Reading what you wrote made me long greatly again to grapple designing a game that tackles some of those very difficult things.

Damn, this is a great night for quality discussions!

[vimes]

Not at all, Vimes. Reading what you wrote made me long greatly again to grapple designing a game that tackles some of those very difficult things.

Damn, this is a great night for quality discussions!

I'd been lying if I say I'm not relieved. So.. erm.. thanks.

[Roderick]

Your point on there not being a proper 'grammar' of games is interesting. I think it would be both a blessing and a vice to have such a thing. On the one hand a proper grammar, or idiom if you will, will help in games becoming more reliable. (Now it would be idiocy to imply there is no such thing in its entirety, because genres themselves act as a set of rules designers use. But I think what you mean is that there isn't a 'grammar' yet that is strictly for games, that makes use of the interactivity and the unique properties of games instead of the stolen idiom of movies and other media.) On the other hand, whenever there's a set of rules many find it difficult or don't even think of deviating from that set path.

Games are such intricate things that it is hugely difficult to find a way to do all the things that everyone demands. A great story, yet also great interactivity, a character to relate to but also one to become ourselves. I think the medium in the end is so complex that it will always fail in any one of these. Games being inherently flawed then is something that should be accepted. And it can be overcome by becoming brilliant in some of the respects while trying to cover up or soothe as best they can the areas that they (purposely) ignore.

[vimes]

On the other hand, whenever there's a set of rules many find it difficult or don't even think of deviating from that set path.

That's true but what's peculiar with video games is that they went from being a totally different medium to mimicing the most successful ones.

When technology was archaic, games had to be simple and were nearly abstract entertainment... but the more technology progressed the more designers refered to other media :first, they raid litterature (text based adventure games) then paper based RPG (Ishar, Eyes of the Beholder) and now movies(CoD,Doom III).In a way, we're still in the time of engineer-creator witnessed in the 50's-60's by the movie industry when the art was led forward by cinemascope, 3D glasses and panavision.

Games are such intricate things that it is hugely difficult to find a way to do all the things that everyone demands. A great story, yet also great interactivity, a character to relate to but also one to become ourselves. I think the medium in the end is so complex that it will always fail in any one of these. Games being inherently flawed then is something that should be accepted.

I know that...and it's . I'd like someone to come to the Video game industry and break the rules of storytelling like Myst did in its own time. What I mean is that with people like David Cage who are in games because they couldn't find their place in the movie industry the craft of video games might stay still for a long time. In a sense, only a few games went as far as Myst in making game a new medium. I'm not a fan of those games but it's undeniable that you couldn't get what you get from playing Myst V in any other medium.

[Roderick]

That's true but what's peculiar with video games is that they went from being a totally different medium to mimicing the most successful ones.

This mimicking isn't necessarily bad. In fact, when you look at games as a 'remediation' of other media it's perfectly logical and acceptible that they would take over the characteristics of its forebears. Okay they're not really forebears but nevertheless. However, now that they've managed to incorporate the key things from movies and such, the next step should definitely be to further explore its unique abilities and expand from there on. But it shouldn't be considered lowly or wrong to keep developing the aspects it took over from other media. Nothing can exist in a vacuum, and crossbreeding brings diversity and flavour. It's just the balance that's a bit distorted still.

[EDIT]: Come to think of it, I don't think the balance is off at all. If we look at all the "game" games out right now it should be obvious there is plenty discovery on this turf. Couldn't it be true then that the 'cinematic' games, with which I mean the games mimicking movies, are simply the preferred games of the masses? Isn't what is mainly made right now just a reflection of the tastes of its audience? In the end, the market will predominantly decide what is made, and no two ways about it.

[Pulpo]

When movies where getting born back in the early 1900's, they where just entertainment for the masses.. fascinating moving pictures and visual effects. It wasn't until a couple years later that movies evolved and started saying something.. movies like Charlie Chaplin's Modern Times started appearing just in the 30's, that's one of the first long-length movies that said something, and it didn't just entertained.. Movies as an "Art" that can express something more than just irrelevant entertainment, where born after a long process of discovering their technologies and medium.

Games, in my belief, are under that same process: We are still discovering our technology, our medium, and the potential we have in it. Plenty of this topics are discussed at GamesAreArt.com.

Byes

[vimes]

Yes, after a few minutes of reflexion, I admit you're totally right : the best way for games to find their own "way" without being influenced by a particular medium is to take inspiration from all of them. That makes sense.I mean Woody Allen said something quite similar to what you said and he can't be wrong

And to Pulpo : The Last Laugh by Friedrich Murnau was made in 1924, this is the oldest piece of art in movie I can remember and I'm not the type to remember those things; so.. I don't think art waits for technology to become stainless, it just need it to have matured. And frankly, Video game technologies have reached maturity for 3/4 year now .. it's the publishers and manufacturers who haven't...

[AndyB]

, being the elitist gamer bitches Idle Forumers are

• Meaningful supporting characters: Psychonauts is astonishing in terms of supporting cast adding depth to the game. Raz’ story as great as it is, the heart of the game truly lies the composed fates of the misfits, the monsters and the madmen…children included.

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.

[`GP]

AndyB , you should play Tales of Symphonia. It's not a large factor but all 9 of the playable characters have their only little history, and you'd need several playthroughs to learn everything about a character. Main problem is that you have to work to find out the back stories of a character other than the main heroine...

[vimes]

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.

Yeah, that would be great and KOTOR explored this a bit even though, the system was so rigid and the thing seemed so off the topic of the game that it wasn't really appealing to spend minutes trying to get information on your comrades' background who were anyway ALWAYS reluctant about it.

What would be even better would be to choose the characters you want to be friend with. Imagine a Harry potter game in which you could decide that Draco Malfoy what the guy you had to hang with... and not those Weasley freaks I think that would be fun.

[Spaff]

"a new insight into society / human nature / life / ourselves"

i think you are missing the point and also being pretentious as fuck ¬¬

having said that, playing mario kart DD taught me a lot about modern society and the structural forces beind the evil 'blue shell' coporations and the rat race of modern life, everyone struggling to be best.. first... the winner

[toblix]

In a movie, the main character(s) can die horribly in the end, and even fail at their mission, but the movie can still be satisfying and feel "complete". Doesn't the fact that the player is in control of the main character(s) preclude the possibility of making "failure" a success, without having to take control away from the character (e.g. make it an ending cut-scene)?

If you play through a game and fight the big bad boss, but right at the end he kills you with some sneaky trick you didn't expect, and as your character goes up in flames the girl is dropped into the vat of acid, that'd be a failure no matter what, right? The player couldn't just see that, and go "Oh, so that's how the story ended." If there's a possibility of success, the player'd reload and try again until the boss was killed dead before he'd feel he got closure. The girl could still fall into the vat in the end, but in order for it to work, it'd have to be unavoidable for the player to accept it, but I guess that sort of limits the freedom of the game, doesn't it?

[Roderick]

That's exactly the paradoxical conundrum of games. The pressure of theoretically limitless interactivity brings with it these crippling boundaries. That's why I said there can be no 'perfect' game and that the best of these will choose one of the sides and stick to it, rather than trying to incorporate everything and become wishywashy.

Vimes: even movies were a remediation from theatre. From the still theatre-angles of early American movies and the pioneering works of Meliés to the German expressionistic movement that clearly used cardboard setpieces and theatrical performances. I myself have on DVD The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, which is from 1919. I think these movies, even or especially those of Meliés, can absolutely be considered artful, even though they didn't specifically use a grammar strictly unique to movies. Making the shift to games; of course they still have to find their own grammar as movies did over the years, but that doesn't mean there can't be art or meaning to them yet when all they do is remediate movies. An artist can make something meaningful regardless of the tools he gets. And I think there are plenty of examples of games backing that up.

[Salka]

Serious question: AndyB, are you male/female?

[AndyB]

"a new insight into society / human nature / life / ourselves"

having said that, playing mario kart DD taught me a lot about modern society and the structural forces beind the evil 'blue shell' coporations and the rat race of modern life, everyone struggling to be best.. first... the winner

Exactly games don't have to be full of dialogue to show meanings!

What I'm saying is, do you feel that you gain anything from single-player games? Sure they are fun, but they are very insular and solitary in their nature. Unlike say a cop show, or E.R which make you think about interesting issues like inequality, fairness, consideration etc. as well as entertaining you. They make you think about things other than which enemy to shoot first, which platform to jump on, whether to invade Morocco or Abyssinia.

The word that comes to mind is pointless, and inane. These games are often just toys, (for adults) which is no bad thing, but we should be able to do more.

---

Can anyone specify what they mean by gramm(a/e)r of cinema? give some examples of what you mean, so that it makes it clearer what you mean and what the equivalent would be in games.

[Roderick]

I think Spaff may not have been serious with his Mario Kart analogy.

Just as not all movies are profound and thought-provoking (in fact, most of them are not), so not all games are. I wonder if you may have missed a lot of the games of recent make that are considerably meaningful. I get the impression from your posts that you're fairly young still, and maybe you've only been exposed to the most commercial of games and extrapolated the whole of the landscape from there. While there really are a nice few games that go beyond 'mere' entertainment. Most of these you'll find reviewed on the Thumb, as we seem to have no business with games that don't touch us in one way or the other.

The grammar of movies would be semiotics and the way movies are directed and choreographed in a way that would not be feasible in other media. Movies have certain unique properties such as the ability to use different camera-angles and cuts, editing and visual control. Over the decades everyone learned through trial and error what 'worked' and what didn't. This is that grammar, see it as a guidebook to what could work in certain situations and what couldn't. Games don't really have this yet, but it's slowly coming together I think. Now I'm not condoning a rigid set of rules or anything, but in this conversation we're using the word grammar as a hypothetical book of semiotics that tells you what would work in a game and what wouldn't. For instance, if you make a first person horror shooter, how to effectively scare the player, or how to make a solid layout for a multiplayer level. That sort of thing.

[AndyB]

I think Spaff may not have been serious with his Mario Kart analogy.

I get the impression from your posts that you're fairly young still, and maybe you've only been exposed to the most commercial of games and extrapolated the whole of the landscape from there. While there really are a nice few games that go beyond 'mere' entertainment. Most of these you'll find reviewed on the Thumb, as we seem to have no business with games that don't touch us in one way or the other..

1. I know that, but I believe that games don't have to be laden with Planescape Torment / Metal Gear Solid / or Final Fantasy dialogue (or worse cut-scenes).

2. Probably all about touching!

3. Funny that you got the impression that I'm fairly young still, I'm actually closer to thirty than twenty, and getting disillusioned with games !. Having owned most things from a Spectrum +, through SNES, N64, PS2, several PCs. It seems that Idle Thumb-ers are interested in the kinds of games that try to be distinctive and offer something fresh. The kind that are looking forward to Okami, who've picked up Sphinx and the Cursed Mummy, SOS: The Final Escape, and Beyond Good and Evil.

[`GP]

Tales of Symphonia again -- the big 'thing' behind the story is racism.

[Erkki]

I think there have been some games that have given us insight into things... Sim City. Maybe games like Civilization? They may have made us think about how our civilization functions. And maybe this sounds crazy (and I'm probably biased because I've been playing San Andreas exclusively for quite some time), but also the Grand Theft Auto series. Not really on the same scale as a good sci-fi book, but the radio stations have pushed some of our modern ideas to limits that expose their ridiculousness quite well (or not, that's probably personal. anyway, they have depth beyond their funniness) -- dormatron, petsovernight.com etc. The conflict between Sweet & CJ in San Andreas has also made me think about related stuff, although that story has most likely been done better in literature or film (can't think of an actual parallel immediately).

[Salka]

Can I just say that comparing VIDEO GAMES to ER and Ally McBeal or 'a cop show' is the awful thing I have ever heard. What the hell are you talking about!?? Seriously.

[AndyB]

Can I just say that comparing VIDEO GAMES to ER and Ally McBeal or 'a cop show' is the awful thing I have ever heard. What the hell are you talking about!?? Seriously.

:

Well, you have a choice of how you want to spend your entertainment time, do you want to watch ER, The Simpsons or play a video-game?

Anyway, don't get too het up over this thread it is only theoretical, I'm not saying that games -suck- because they aren't as thought-provoking as other medium, games are like toys come to life, Army Men toys that play back with you and try to run your Micro-Machines car over while shooting at it (GTA). Castle Greyskulls, with living henchmen in. Dolls that pretend they have feelings. etc. ETC.

Maybe it is enough that some of them try to reawaken our inner child? (pretention-on-a-stick).