
Videogames: The Unfashionable Fine Art - boot
http://musicandmythology.com/mm14.html
======
beloch
Compare films made in the 1940's to those made in the 1910's, or earlier.
Until the late 1910's, film was basically tech demo's. Brief shots of regular
life, or maybe something a little titillating. No real plots or structure. By
the 40's, most of the basics still in use today were established. Plot
structure, as well as lots of little technical details, such as the 180
rule[1], were developed, and viewers instinctively rely on these even today.

However, film was not viewed as art in the 1940's. Stage was art. Film was
just disposable mass entertainment. Studios churned out massive amounts of
film and, in many cases, didn't bother to preserve anything. The idea that
somebody would want to see Casablanca again in a few decades was alien. Even
today, many films aren't seen as art. Somebody who says they're a lover of art
films, especially Michael Bay's Transformer series, is going to be laughed at.
However, nobody disputes the fact that films can be art today, thanks to
classics like "Rashomon" or "Once Upon a Time in the West", and also thanks to
more contemporary art films that challenge as much as they entertain, even if
they may not prove to have lasting appeal.

Now take a look at the history of gaming. The early games of the 70's and 80's
were, at first, basically tech demos. As the 80's wore on, game designers used
challenging game mechanics to wring maximum engaged playtime out of extremely
limited resources. Games like Pacman or Donkey Kong could certainly eat your
time (and quarters), but they seldom provoked an emotional or intellectual
response aside from frustration, not at all unlike a Michael Bay film.

We are entering an era in video gaming equivalent to film of the 1940's. The
core mechanics are established and people know them. There now exist games
that have appeal beyond the latest technology. If people are still playing
Donkey Kong now, how long will games like the Stanley Parable hold up? Despite
this, as for film in the 1940's, we still think of games as disposable and
_not_ as art. This is going to change, as it did for film, but _slowly_.

The important thing right now is for game producers to realize that their
source code may be _valuable_ in the future. Preserve that stuff!

[1]In many scenes with two participants, such as dialogue, duels in action
scenes, etc., most film-makers avoid cutting back and forth between angles
that exceed 180 degrees in difference. Breaking this rule usually confuses
viewers, as it becomes unclear who is on which side.

------
andrewclunn
Movie: 2 hours passive absorption. Must know how to speak the language.
Creators have full control of the narrative.

Book: 8 hours intellectually engaged. Must know how to read. Creators have
control of the narrative, but not the pacing at which it is consumed.

Video game: 30 hours actively participating. Must have skills specific to the
medium, which often vary by genre. Creators have to allow for disruption and
variation of the narrative, often in ways they cannot predict.

It's not that games can't be art in the modernist sense (where the intention
is to either convey an idea or evoke an emotion). It's just that video games
are a less accessible and more complex (and therefore harder to get right)
medium. Want to do something only an interactive medium can do? Games are a
good choice. Want to tell a story? Games are then an objectively inferior
choice.

~~~
pdkl95
> Want to tell a story? Games are then an objectively inferior choice.

Absolutely incorrect. Games are simply a _different_ way to tell a story, with
different advantages and disadvantages. One particular advantage that might
not be obvious initially is that non-interactive mediums such as video can
(with rare exceptions) onlyt induce in the audience _sympathetic_ emotions.
Something tragic happens to an important character, you feel sad _for them_.
Interactive storytelling can utilize direct emotions because _you_ are the
actor. Consider the tragic death of a character in a movie that makes you feel
sad, yet you continue to watch. A similar tragedy happening to the player
character (permadeath) in a video game may make you _rage quit_.

For a very discussion of these ideas about storytelling in an interactive
media, I recommend watching at least the last (4th) episode[1] of Innuendo
Studio's video essay "Story Beats"[2].

> Creators have full control of the narrative.

You (and anybody else interested in the theory of storytelling) should also
watch "The Artist is Absent"[3] by the same person. It's technically an
analysis of Davey Wreden's "The Beginner's Guide", but it's really an amazing
30 minute crash course in semiotics, death of the author, and enunciation
theory as applied to The Beginner's Guide.

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyhrKPLDCyY&index=4&list=PLJ...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IyhrKPLDCyY&index=4&list=PLJA_jUddXvY4f8-eoY0mg7gzXoqhBYN6y)

[2]
[https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJA_jUddXvY4f8-eoY0mg...](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJA_jUddXvY4f8-eoY0mg7gzXoqhBYN6y)

edit: I somehow forgot to include this link

[3]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N6y6LEwsKc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N6y6LEwsKc)

~~~
Fricken
I don't know where this idea of games being a storytelling medium even comes
from. I've never seen a game that tells a story. I've only seen games that are
interrupted by story. Or maybe they're stories that are interrupted by gaming,
if you want to look at it that way.

~~~
pdkl95
You're probably confusing where the story is.

> I've only seen games that are interrupted by story.

A common misconception is that "story" in a video game is like a movie or
book. A video game may also contain storytelling in the style of a movie" or
book, but that's not what I'm referring to. Interactive storytelling in a
video game _is the mechanics_.

In addition to [1] in my post above, I strongly recommend watching this[4]
Extra Credits video about narrative mechanics, which discusses the _story_ of
the classic game Missile Command. Maybe you don't like the story, or you think
it's simplistic, but it's still a story. Missile Command is inherently a story
about the futility of war. Video games are an interesting medium for
storytelling because they get you, acting as an actor in that story, to
realize some aspects of the plot _on your own_. Everybody that plays Missile
Command realizes the futility of the situation without having to be told that
directly; it comes from the mechanics directly.

For a very good example of a more detailed story that is told primarily
through the mechanics, I highly recommend playing Undertale[5]. The story in
Undertale cannot be told in a non-interactive medium. A movie or book telling
the same story can tell part of the story, but it would be a different story
that wouldn't have nearly the same impact.

[4]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQJA5YjvHDU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQJA5YjvHDU)

[5] DO NOT watch or read anything about the game first. I'd even recommend
against even watching the trailer. Undertale has a serious problem with
spoilers, and like a traditional "who did it" murder mystery, you should
experience it as the author intended.

