GameDreamer

Thirty Flights of Loving

Recommended Posts

I think *********s are much better than oranges. Sure, you cannot peel them as easily, but the other features are great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes/no. Ananas is family name to which the ********* belongs to. So it is an English word. Actually, ********* is even an incorrect name, because they don't grow on pinetrees.

Of course the rest of the world calls the fruit something like Ananas, only the English are weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I know it's the French word for them. Don't know about any other languages.

Idle Thumbs: Your home on the internet for ********* etymology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
(They are extinct, right?)

I think there are still as many of them as there are Estonians (1.5 M)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a game if Brendan Chung says it is a game; Duchamp.

More seriously I don't really care whether or not it is a game, but I'd argue that it is because you can click on the geese (or not, if you like).

Heh. Well interactivity doesn't equal a game. As I've said before, games have been around a lot longer than video games, but they all share several traits in common: Choices, rules, goals.

I'm just weirded out that everyone seems to refer to this (rather interesting) experiment in story-telling as a game. It's something new, different and exciting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to get too deep into this, but a thing that's been on my mind...

As I've said before, games have been around a lot longer than video games, but they all share several traits in common: Choices, rules, goals.

You know that shooting sequence in the game? The one where you do nothing? I keep thinking about how if that sequence actually allowed the player to shoot the targets (thus, robbing us of that great moment) more people would likely consider this a game. Would you agree? If not, how many shooting sequences would it take to make this a game?

Facetious question, I know, but the point I'm getting at is this: why does "aiming" equate to choice, whereas navigating the world does not? In most FPSes, the "choice" of which enemy to aim at/shoot first is about as meaningful as the "choice" of how to navigate the world. Why does one get special treatment over the other?

As for rules and goals, TFOL is actually not that different from a platformer. (rules = collision & physics, goal = reach the end)

I'm just weirded out that everyone seems to refer to this (rather interesting) experiment in story-telling as a game. It's something new, different and exciting.

I'm not sure why the term Video game can't encompass this "new, different and exciting" stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I printed out Jake's soundtrack cover art and whipped up a back cover.

Ahh, so classy.

And one step closer to playing this game with Red Book audio...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I kinda want to warn everyone not to read the Rock, Paper, Shotgun interview with Brendon Chung, dedicated to the references in the game.

The article nearly dissolves 30 Flights of Loving from existence, replacing it with a bulleted list of films, games, and directors.

Overall I didn't like 30 Flights of Loving nearly as much as I wanted to because there was no story, story frame, or setup for the game to work against. At times it was just a bunch of cool-looking stuff. An article that reduces the game to an index of its cool stuff actually makes me like it less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno. I looked at that article a bit, without reading the whole thing because it's long and boring, basically a list in paragraph form, but it reminded me of this video intended to show Kill Bill's numerous homages and lifted ideas. I think it's a great testament to these artists to show how they can borrow so many little details to make the world that much richer. Whether you're a huge fan of old kung-fu flicks and adventure games, a trivia hound, or just an average viewer, TFoL and Kill Bill are both far richer for what they borrow.

Even though there wasn't a "point", figuring out the plot and the proper order of events from the little visual clues was still a great joy for me. The first playthrough was definitely the richest for me, but I still love it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know that shooting sequence in the game? The one where you do nothing? I keep thinking about how if that sequence actually allowed the player to shoot the targets (thus, robbing us of that great moment) more people would likely consider this a game. Would you agree? If not, how many shooting sequences would it take to make this a game?

What would the goal be in the shooting section, and how would not completing it hinder you reaching your ultimate goal (reach the end)?

TFOL isn't a game in the same way a book isn't a game (unless it is). You just keep reading the words in the correct order until you reach the end. That's not a game.

I've given pretty explicit examples that should answer any questions you have, so if you don't want to get too deep into it, I suggest going back and reading what I read when I first brought it up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck. TFoL is ostensibly a Video Game. I think it is, the Thumbs think it is, Steam thinks it is, Wikipedia says it is. It is a game because that's what we think it is.

If you want to use special rigid definitions of what is a game versus what is a toy or a race or an interactive story, you'll have to define that from the outset, but just because you think the definition should be one thing or another doesn't mean that people will agree with you or that your definition is relevant to the discussion. In this case, sure, you can talk about what makes TFoL different and why it shouldn't be discussed in the same way, but I think it's more interesting to accept that TFoL broadens the scope of what a video game is and can be and to think about the implications.

It's like the fuss over whether a tomato is a fruit or a vegetable. Well, it's both, but not within the same discussion. Biologically it's a fruit, but the distinction between fruit and vegetable is purely culinary, so for the purpose of cooking, a tomato is a vegetable because it tastes and acts like a vegetable, just like eggplant an okra.

Edit: accidentally wrote "biologically it's a vegetable" which is silly because vegetable isn't even a biological term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think TFoL is a Video game, but it is interactive digital entertainment (and Video games is a subclass of it)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, because if I were to define a hierarchy (which I don't), I would intuitively put interactive digital entertainment under the umbrella of Video game. What makes video games a subset but not vice versa?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck. TFoL is ostensibly a Video Game. I think it is, the Thumbs think it is, Steam thinks it is, Wikipedia says it is. It is a game because that's what we think it is.

If you want to use special rigid definitions of what is a game versus what is a toy or a race or an interactive story, you'll have to define that from the outset, but just because you think the definition should be one thing or another doesn't mean that people will agree with you or that your definition is relevant to the discussion. In this case, sure, you can talk about what makes TFoL different and why it shouldn't be discussed in the same way, but I think it's more interesting to accept that TFoL broadens the scope of what a video game is and can be and to think about the implications.

It's like the fuss over whether a tomato is a fruit or a vegetable. Well, it's both, but not within the same discussion. Biologically it's a vegetable, but the distinction between fruit and vegetable is purely culinary, so for the purpose of cooking, a tomato is a vegetable because it tastes and acts like a vegetable, just like eggplant an okra.

Look everybody! It's Mr Troll! Hi, Mr Troll!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now