GDC! Idle Thumbs Conf Grenade: A Fish Called Xtreme

[n0wak]

Rohrer Horror is the new Rural Juror.

[blackboxme]

The player can kill innocents only because you let it happen. Same for anything else. Doing those things is not playing the game "wrong" or stealing authorship, it's still simply doing only what the designer lets you.

The director cannot predict if someone watching a movie will pause it, ruining pacing. That doesn't make the movie any less art.

Yeah, that makes me wonder why Remo was supporting the Ebert argument.

Maybe there's a point about the argument that we're ignoring?

[Marek]

Rohrer Horror is the new Rural Juror.

Haha I made the same remark after the show. (30 Rock ftw).

[brkl]

I really like his reviews. His love of movies shows through. But for anything else... Quiet, you!

[OssK]

Those that can, do. Those that can't, become critics.

I knew that one with "those that can't become teachers, and those that can't become teachers become sport teachers" I always find it funny even if it's completely unfair

It even operates in motion picture, which makes me think that however good a critic Ebert is, he still does not fully understand even his chosen field, let alone other artistic mediums.

Making something that is static (as in a script that will always be there not a still picture) is not the same as letting something happen. When you look at a movie, at a book or at a painting, you can indeed have influence on the form, but not on the content, it would be fallacious to compare pausing a movie and controling the pacing of a game, the exact mediation of this action in games is pausing the game, which is, you would agree, not the same as stopping to look around or letting the enemies come and go.

In a video game, the argument revolves around can what you let happen be the vector of emotion, story and as such, art. Can interaction be art as in:

1)Video Games are a set of rules in which the player can interact and create events that constitute or live through a story. (you would need to narrow this definition to exclude video toys as wiimusic or spore)

2)The player creates events, interacts with the game through the information loop: the player acts the world reacts the player rereacts and so on...

3)Everything that is game specific is the exchange between the player and the game, the rest, music, scenes, 3D, graphics, characters, storytelling, is non game specific.

4)You would then reformulate the question in: "How can what is game specific generate emotion and/or melt itself so well with the rest that you can interact with what is non-game-specific that it would surely generate emotion".

That question is pretty much answered by Passage, Braid and others cited above in my point of view and the real debate would then be: can you mediate those feelings into a bigger game, into a longer game, into for instance... DANTE'S INFERNO, YOU'LL CRY... IN HELL !!!

[OssK]

He wrote Beneath the Valley of the Dolls, so I wouldn't take him too seriously or as some sort of authority on much of anything. But I guess his job is to be an authority on movies and people are going to hold him to it forever, but I wish he wouldn't make fringe comments on things he doesn't know about.

Again: if I don't know anything about cooking or architecture, if I make a comment on "Hey, you sure this will stand? It does look to me like it'll fall at the first wind" Dismissing my comment on the sole ground that I am ignorant does not make it less accurate, but as Jake remarked very nicely: it makes you a douche, either because you can't solve the problem that a idiot proposed, or because you are not able to explain to me why I'm wrong.

I would admit that he did not ask this, he just said that game are not able to generate emotion on a game specific ground, which makes HIM quite a douche to throw a comment like that without having any knowledge about video games, but he was not the first to formulate it, I came across a debate between two dudes dating from the mid 80's which mentioned that capability, I'll post it if I can find it again but I think it was in french anyway.

So no, it's not HIS comment anymore it's a question we, game likers and games makers should ask ourself. Not if it's true or not, but look in our brain to explain the emotion we know we lived with games.

[DanJW]

Another point: prior to Ebert, the authorship definition of art was not often formulated. He likely created that definition specifically because he hoped to exclude video games. If we forget about video games for a moment, is it even a good definition of art? Probably not.

Gamers often take criticism of games personally, because often it is meant personally, as a personal attack against those who like games as being less important than those who like films, or books (despite the fact that we are almost always those same people).

[elmuerte]

Sure, but the player can take out more than the author put in. I avoided hitting pedestrians in GTA IV because I felt guilty when running them over. THEY DIDN'T PROGRAM MY GUILT!!!

That's what you think. There have been quite some games that included various complex emotions like guilt, anger and frustration, paranoia (actually, this one is quite common). I have yet to find a movie that made me guilty, frustrated, or paranoid. Making people cry is like taking candy from a baby.

[DanJW]

That's what you think. There have been quite some games that included various complex emotions like guilt, anger and frustration, paranoia (actually, this one is quite common). I have yet to find a movie that made me guilty, frustrated, or paranoid. Making people cry is like taking candy from a baby.

Indeed. Things like the animation of a knocked-over pedestrian, and even moreso the sound they make - these things can be authored precisely to trigger real human reactions.

[blackboxme]

I know the podcast makes it seems like you are some simpleton jerk for rejecting Ebert's opinions (or not appreciating Citizen Kane)

I don't think that's what they were driving at. You have to know a lot about films and film history to appreciate what Citizen Kane does, but if you don't know about that stuff that doesn't make you stupid.

Why does anyone have to make a game Ebert approves of in the first place

Ebert isn't like, the editorial director of IGN's Gamecube website, and neither is Remo. I want to see what Ebert and or Remo or other smart sorts of people have to say.

[blackboxme]

I have yet to find a movie that made me guilty, frustrated, or paranoid.

Seriously? I think you're in the minority on that one, though it's certainly a valid experience.

[SignorSuperdouche]

Well except this isn't cooking or architecture, which is something many of us all do in one form or another, so that analogy doesn't work. Not everyone makes or even plays a video game, but we all eat food and live in structures.

Come on you're just being a dick now. The fact that we all live in some kind of building doesn't magically imbue anyone with innate knowledge of architecture. Even if it did you know as well as I do that that wasn't Ossk's point. You could substitute cooking and architecture with astrophysics and marine biology and Ossk's argument stays exactly the same and your retort becomes nonsense.

You poked holes in the details of the analogy rather than address the actual argument.

[blackboxme]

I don't think that's necessarily true about Citizen Kane

Fair enough, though I think it's a good general example of a piece of something having a barrier to entry of expertise before it can be really appreciated.

I'm maintaining that there's going to be a generational disconnect either way, no matter if games suddenly connected to nodes in your brain and could force you to cry with their ART.

My uncle's favorite games are Ico and Pixeljunk Eden, and those are pretty much the only games he's ever played, aside from like Punch Out on the NES. He's like 42. I think there are games that everyone can get and say that they're pretty interesting, so I'm not giving up on the old folks.

an Ebert litmus test or really any type of test of what makes something become a piece of great art is irrelevant.

Fair enough. The idea of an abstract test to decide merit is annoying.

My Ebert test is not about merit though, it's about what would convince Ebert, which I only care about for the sake of arguing with Ebert.

If you give video games 20 years for the older generation of critics and those who have not played games to die off, I'll bet you are going you are going to find a better mainstream appreciation of games

I want more smart people and good writers thinking about this stuff. If this corner of the world is just made up of fans of games, that's a pretty terrible intellectual ghetto to live in.

[SignorSuperdouche]

And no you can't substitute astrophysics and marine biology because if we were left in survivor mode we wouldn't be looking for ways study the stars (besides figuring out which was is north) and planets nor looking to name and classify life under the sea.

That is precisely why I picked the examples of astrophysics and marine biology. They are just two random examples of areas of expertise, which was OssK's intention when he mentioned cooking and architecture. OssK even gave as one of his assumptions:

if I don't know anything about cooking or architecture

Your refutation is that he couldn't not know about either, but that was never part of his argument. You've commited the logical fallacy, intentionally or otherwise, of creating a straw man argument.

Other logical fallacies worth knowing are poisoning the well and ad hominem, both of which you are advocating.

[toblix]

Indeed. Things like the animation of a knocked-over pedestrian, and even moreso the sound they make - these things can be authored precisely to trigger real human reactions.

Yes, but I never got the feeling they tried to do that in GTA IV.

[OssK]

Yes, but I never got the feeling they tried to do that in GTA IV.

On that note, it does no mean that it's still true but remember, you used to earn point, to be rewarded for driving over pedestrians, which is quite antithetic to making you feel guilty.

[SignorSuperdouche]

Look, I'm sorry, I don't mean to be a dick, I just get ... uh ... passionate sometimes and one thing I get passionate about is critical thinking. My tone was unnecessarily smug and I apologise for that too.

So anyway, how 'bout those video games eh? eh? ...

[OssK]

Here comes a list of emotions, taken from wikipedia, supposedly a list of all emotions available to humans:

I'm bolding the ones I felt in games.

Acceptance

Fuck I got to do this, ok I'll do it... I don't know if it's an emotion but hey, if it's one, I definitely felt it

Affection

Oooooh yeah, man I really had so much in my heart I wanted to tell Alyx Vance, to comfort her, to... ok I'm a geek I admit.

Anger

Not at a game that won't work but with a character or an enemy that is very strong or did something to me in the past.

Annoyance

Well, not an authored thing nor a good thing but I sure felt it in WoW a thousand times.

Apathy

Aherm... what's that feeling ? I don't care for that character at all ? I don't give a damn about that quest... Yes, I do feel the lack of feelings towards you mister generic henchman.

Anxiety

Mostly in oblivion, caring for what will happen and feeling the world is going to shit, or a troll is going to rape me in a hole (IGN.com)

Awe

Aaaaaerrr... I don't really know if I ever felt respect for anyone in a game, yeah maybe in FF5, I was so amazed to be able to control powerful characters like that old man that could kick every enemy's ass, or maybe in valkyrie profile when you control Freya at the beginning... OMAGAD SHE KICKS ASS THE SEXY WAY, ETHER STRIKE !!

Boredom

Same thing, World of Warcraft...

Compassion

That one, I don't know, never really came to me

Contempt

Man, that boss was to huge but I guess I'm even bigger... And you should've seen me when I was in japan !

Curiosity

A thousand times.

Depression

Again, World of Warcraft was a very rich experience in manners of negative feelings: fuck this world, there's nothing to do here anymore, I might as well kill myself, everything is sad everyone is a dick... I hate myself

Desire

Most definitely

Despair

I don't really know... No I think at any point, I was despaired, because at this very second, my suspension of disbelief would shatter and I would find a way out, but again, it has to be in the game (IGN.com) to count, not the "aaaw I'll never beat this boss" rather "man, I'll never save the world, there's too much to do..."

Disappointment

Oops, the princess is in another castle, oops, you thought this was over ? Think again biachte

Disgust

Did I ?

Ecstasy

The list having euphoria and ecstasy in it, I guess the subtle nuance between them would make me say I have not known ecstasy anywhere out of sexual activity, sport or food.

Empathy

Poor little girl don't cryyyaaa** BITCH SHE BIT ME !

Envy

Man, that gear is sweet, I wish I could kill you and take it but... me and what army ?

Embarrassment

not really...

Euphoria

FUCK ILLIDAN FUCK ILLIDAN FUCKFUCKFUCK WE KILLED HIM WE KIIIILLED HIIIIIIM !!!

Fear

That hill is quiet... too quiet...

Frustration

English's not my native language, sorry, I don't really get the difference between frustration and Disappointment.

Gratitude

I might want to quote that "thank you game for being sweet", can someone tell me where this piece of wisdom came from ?

Grief

Not really, that's it, a game never made you cry outside of it's story-telling elements.

Guilt

Yes, Oblivion again made me really feel guilty as a person for doing some things.

Happiness

Such a bullshit word... of course I've been happy pla... wait, have I ? Have You?

Hatred

You killed me a thousand time, through me smashing my buttons so hard I hope you feel my wrath !

Hope

Not sure

Horror

Midway between fear and disgust... I don't know what it means really...

Hostility

Is that a feeling ?

Hysteria

Well, Hysteria is the strong and crazy expression of a bunch of feelings if I'm not mistaken... So yeah, which kind of hysteria ?

Joy

Happiness... Joy... Don't you have another dull feeling to put in that list ?

Jealousy

Which is different from envy in what way ?

Loathing

Despising something in a video game... I don't really know either

Love

Not really, but I don't know if I ever felt a stronger love towards a fictional character than the one I felt for Alyx or Yorda... Some particularity of a game: first person man, there ain't much medias that convey stories in the first person mode as strongly as video games. Books written in that person are often creating a narrator character.

Pity

Not really, and again it's very close from compassion isn't it ?

Pride

Yeah, that's a sure one, and I guess anyone could say the same.

Rage

Once more: can't really tell the difference between that one and a few above

Regret

A thousand times and a thousand more FUCK why didn't I do that, why didn't I think of that...

Remorse

Not really, in today's games, you don't really influence the world around you in a very direct way, that would be a fucking sweet game: look, you developed industrialization to upgrade your army, congratulations, you won the war: now look at the landscape you created...

Sadness

Not sure if a game ever made me sad again.

Shame

hum.... not sure either

Suffering

Surprise

Wonder

Yes and yes again and again

Worry

Yooooooooorda, fuck I hope she's all right....

[Obscurity]

I want to see a Turing/Ebert Combo Test. A game that makes a machine cry so much that we recognize it as intelligent.

Also, I am even angrier that I missed out on GDC this year now that I know about those awesome Idle Thumbs newspapers!

[brkl]

Come on you're just being a dick now. The fact that we all live in some kind of building doesn't magically imbue anyone with innate knowledge of architecture. Even if it did you know as well as I do that that wasn't Ossk's point. You could substitute cooking and architecture with astrophysics and marine biology and Ossk's argument stays exactly the same and your retort becomes nonsense.

You poked holes in the details of the analogy rather than address the actual argument.

If I design a delicate structure, calculating its strength carefully, and have you questioning its durability without having any expertise on the matter at all, it is not me who's the douchebag for not teaching you architecture to understand the whole matter, it's you who is the douchebag for thinking you know better than people who've spent years studying something.

[brkl]

On that note, it does no mean that it's still true but remember, you used to earn point, to be rewarded for driving over pedestrians, which is quite antithetic to making you feel guilty.

Getting points for driving over pedestrians could make you feel guilty. Do you need to be rewarded for this?

[OssK]

Getting points for driving over pedestrians could make you feel guilty. Do you need to be rewarded for this?

I don't begin to understand what you meant here...

If I design a delicate structure, calculating its strength carefully, and have you questioning its durability without having any expertise on the matter at all, it is not me who's the douchebag for not teaching you architecture to understand the whole matter, it's you who is the douchebag for thinking you know better than people who've spent years studying something.

Two things not to get carried away from the example and staying on the matter:

-You are an architect, you might have spent a long time calculating if it will work or not, it does not matter in the argument over the validity of an exterior remark. You know fully well why it works.

-I come in and I do not say that "it will not work" or for that matter question your skills in the matter, all I say is "With little knowledge I have, it seems to me that this building will fall if there is too much wind"

Then you can either:

-tell me that you made very difficult calculations and that it will be all right, although we might be aggregating architects and engineers there, I was more talking about the very creative process as in the design phase only.

-explain to me, lower yourself to my knowledge, develop and simplify everything so you share with me your passion.

-tell me that I just don't know what I'm talking about.

And the last one is the one architects often wish to use but their clients always ask questions, and if they want to keep the money coming, they have to explain themselves, although they don't like it because they often feel like having to lower their grand scheme to the dumb people who should just pay and shut up...

As a former architect student, I can't begin to express how much foreign questioning can enrich your work.

To go back to the analogy: if the question asked is fair no matter how dumb I am, how much of a dead baby rapist I am, my question is not me, it is formulated out of me, and my remark is not more or less accurate.

So the whole point of it is: you should not consider how much of a douche Ebert is, or if he is good or bad at video games, because it does not matter in the process of thinking, of resolving that question WHO said it.

And if it still bothers you here

"Games are not and can't be art because the designer surrenders authorial control to the player by letting the player can interact in ways that diverge from what the designer intends" (as formulated by Chris in the podcast).

So here, call it the OssK conjuncture if you like, I will only make me famous (mwahaha) even if I don't fully agree with that.

Now the validity of the author is not questionable anymore, just argue over the point: can games be art?

[elmuerte]

Seriously? I think you're in the minority on that one, though it's certainly a valid experience.

maybe, but could you elaborate on what movies gave you those emotions.

because I know I am dead inside/a robot/a saitek cyborg

[OssK]

Emotions that affect you can hardly be transmitted through content of which you do not participate, if you're not part of an action, I don't really see how I could make you feel guilty or in love with someone, or I would have to be a real master at communicating emotion through empathy, and even then I can't see how you would do it...

[brkl]

I don't begin to understand what you meant here...

Don't you ever feel uncomfortable if you get substantial returns for practically nothing? What about getting paid for a bad thing you did?

Then you can either:

-tell me that you made very difficult calculations and that it will be all right

So why aren't we taking this route?

-explain to me, lower yourself to my knowledge, develop and simplify everything so you share with me your passion.

This is a job for teachers.

-tell me that I just don't know what I'm talking about.

I think that's perfectly valid when someone wanders in from the street and starts asking stupid questions.

And the last one is the one architects often wish to use but their clients always ask questions, and if they want to keep the money coming, they have to explain themselves, although they don't like it because they often feel like having to lower their grand scheme to the dumb people who should just pay and shut up...

Ebert's our client now? Oh fuck, I hope I didn't upset him.

Funny thing is, the clients (the people who buy games) have been convinced long ago. It's only the people who don't actually have anything to do with the project who keep butting in.

As a former architect student, I can't begin to express how much foreign questioning can enrich your work.

You're an architect. I claim your work is trash because making building can't be art. Do you feel enriched?

To go back to the analogy: if the question asked is fair no matter how dumb I am, how much of a dead baby rapist I am, my question is not me, it is formulated out of me, and my remark is not more or less accurate.

Obviously ad hominem arguments are terrible and all... But no one has time to take every child (like Ebert!) seriously and go through every piece of minutiae to make sure all issues have been exhausted. I am currently no-one's dad, and unwilling to serve that function.

"Games are not and can't be art because the designer surrenders authorial control to the player by letting the player can interact in ways that diverge from what the designer intends" (as formulated by Chris in the podcast).

See previous posts. The player of a Video game does not have the power to wrestle authorial control away from the designer. (The illusion of this power is what makes games what they are)