Games

[icycalm]

John Romero is one of the grand masters of game design. Wolfenstein 3D, Doom and even Quake (despite Romero's disparaging comments on this last one) are all of them what I call "Videogame Art", and one day I will be explaining why in great detail. In the meantime, here is Romero himself explaining why in his own way, from the viewpoint of the creator, that is to say of the artist (as opposed to that of the player, of the receiver and critic; as opposed, that is to say, to someone like me):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zeFEW7akDqI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyZlghk3Jds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgb8UxBb7og
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pq__3XNvvHI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQMtVbz_JuE

The most important thing to take away from all of this (and there are a shitload of important things to take away...) is when he says in the third video, about the creation of Doom, that "When we got together, we were experts", i.e. a group of people each of whom, by the time they got together to create their masterpiece, had been programming for 14 years straight, and were at the cutting edge of their craft. Note moreover, throught the entire series of videos, how strong and effusive Romero's enthusiasm for gaming, for simply PLAYING games is, both points of which are entirely antithetical to the attitude of the fagots: who are so crap at programming that if told to make their own engines they wouldn't know where to start, and who, as they repeat again and again, simply HATE playing games.

And now watch how these same people have managed, through their "relentless campaign of defamation and slander", to brainwash this hardcore gamer and master game designer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWVO4ounVvk

Watch him stammer in awkwardly concealed embarrassment as he tries to convey to these fags the inspiration for his masterpieces: the joy of running around and "MOWING THINGS DOWN" as he says in the previous videos, has now become some vague chatter about "movement" and "mystery". While in the previous videos he was gleefully describing how something like fucking KNEE DEEP IN THE DEAD DOOM was his "dream game", he is now so intimidated by the pseudo-intellectual airs of the fagots, that he would not even dream of uttering the word "kill" in their presence.

The funny thing is how the fags are all the while damning themselves with everything they say, without even realizing it. Rohrer downright SAYS that the reason he stopped trying to make 3D games was because HE COULDN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE THEM, so he "scaled back" (his own words) to bungling primitive 2D genres. Another reason was that, in order to make something as complex as a 3D game, you are more or less forced to work with other people, and since, like all artfagots, Rohrer is an insufferably pretentious prick that no one could possibly put up with for any length of time, any complicated (let alone cutting-edge) game development is simply out of the question for him. Hence why he turned to "messages".

The funniest part comes, aptly enough, right at the end while, despite all the slandering and lying going on, Romero is still not fully brainwashed, and tells them right to their faces that "perhaps you should take all those ideas of yours and try to make a GAME out of them, you know, something that people might perhaps find entertaining", lol.

This is a perfect case-study in the brainwashing tactics of the pseuds, and I urge people to watch these videos carefully with my commentary in mind. It is very easy to miss what is going on if you are not as wired into this culture as I am, but I hope that my comments will help to open the eyes of a few more people, and perhaps eventually also of the designers themselves. In fact I am emailing a link to my Genealogy and this thread to Romero right after I post this on the frontpage.

[icycalm]

Here it is:

Hi John, this is Alex Kierkegaard, a freelance philosopher, passionate game lover, and great fan of your work.

I am going to cut straight to the chase as I do not want to undermine in any way the importance of this link I am sending you:

http://insomnia.ac/commentary/on_the_ge ... art_games/

Please read this. It is the most important essay on the subject of videogames that will ever be written.

I have more to say to you (and, more importantly, more links to give you), but there'd be no point in doing so before I get your reaction to this first link.

I look forward to hearing from you...

Your sincere fan,

Alex Kierkegaard

I should probably start doing this with all my videogame heroes (at least the ones who speak English), since there is no way in hell the journlolist and pseudo-academic cartels will ever help spread my writings around to these people.

[abe]

I googled Jason Rohrer and this was one of the first results:

http://www.esquire.com/features/best-an ... ign-1208-2

The first person to cry playing Passage was Rohrer himself

Clint Hocking, a designer at Ubisoft best known for Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell, was so blown away by Passage that he made it a focus of his Game Developers Conference talk earlier this year. In front of an audience full of the industry's most influential game designers, Hocking growled, "Why can't we make a game that fucking means something? A game that matters? You know? We wonder all the time if games are art, if computers can make you cry, and all that. Stop wondering. The answer is yes to both. Here's a game that made me cry. It did. It really did."

According to Jason Rohrer, the reason for this is simple: "Ebert's right." Games suck. Game companies have spent so many years trying to make skulls explode complexly and water ripple prettily that they haven't invested any time in learning how to make games that are as emotionally dense as the best novels and films. Most games are a waste of time. Soulless. Empty. Rohrer is far from the only game-maker who believes this. In fact, a growing number of game-makers in positions of power at large companies -- Electronic Arts, Ubisoft, etc. -- aren't interested in continuing to defend the industry against its critics. Because, one, it's hard to see how the critics are wrong, hard to see how Halo 3 and Grand Theft Auto IV aren't what they seem to be. Murder simulators. Really fun murder simulators. And, two, if you're a middle-aged game-maker and you're going to see Children of Men on the weekend with your wife and kids and getting your mind blown, you hit a point where you want to do something better, more important, than making blood flow realistically.

In truth, ambitious game-makers want it to be true that games are polluting the minds of our youth, because that means games really are touching our brains in sophisticated ways, and therefore games have room to grow. Like Passage, they can be art.

Because the video-game industry lacks something even more crucial than respect: a basic grammar of emotion. Film has it, novels have it, songs have it: heroes to idolize and imitate, codified bodies of knowledge you can soak up over a lifetime or try to have dumped into you at an M.F.A. program or film school. But a game-maker is in a different position altogether. Nowhere to look. No place to start. "We just have no idea," says Chris Hecker, who spent the last five years working alongside gaming god Will Wright on the hugely ambitious, sprawling Spore. "The question I have is, Are games in fifty years going to be recognizable? Is there a game we'll look back at in fifty years and say, yeah, that was the model?"

Here is Jason Rohrer's audacious bet: no. The models don't exist. So he's setting out to build them.

Rohrer doesn't use deodorant. He washes his hair only twice a month. He doesn't put on a new pair of clothes in the morning, because he gave most of his clothes away years ago. He owns four pairs of boxer shorts. If he owned any more, he or his wife would have to spend more time washing them, which would make them both more reliant on electricity to run the washer. He keeps his fridge unplugged for the same reason. No fridge, no meat; no meat, no spoilage in an electrical storm. Open the fridge and all you see are vegan grains.

At dinner one night, he asks his wife if she thinks it would be fun to be immortal -- she says she thinks it would get boring -- so he makes a game, Immortality, in which you're this little stick figure who has to build a tower to the heavens; the game grants you the powers of immortality, then makes you yearn to have those powers taken away. He's surfing online and comes across that YouTube video of the "Don't tase me, bro" guy, and he's so freaked out by the tyranny of the police that he cries, and when he's done crying, he codes a game called Police Brutality that puts you in the room with the "Don't tase me" dude and challenges you to organize an unarmed insurrection.

This is why video games need a figure like Rohrer so badly: an auteur. A person of great energy, courage,

Cut a lawn and it emits harmful hydrocarbons, like a car. "Here we go," Rohrer says, flipping through his files. " 'Air Pollution and the Smell of Cut Grass.' I have a scientific study."

He argued that "our ability to speak with our landscape would be drastically reduced if our desired landscape was restricted to our backyard,

Christ, can't you see this? This lush green atmosphere dying so gorgeously all around him? And Rohrer with a laptop, sitting cross-legged in the dirt, inventing a new way of showing the world what it means to be alive?

Disgusting hippie faggot who cries like a little girl.

[El Chaos]

Man... that sixth paragraph was really gross, no joke.

It would've been cool if, besides being a dirty, smelly hippie, he also held Amish beliefs, that way he wouldn't touch a computer in his whole life and would leave humanity the fuck alone.

[abe]

I like how he used the excuse of being more reliant on the electronic washer for not having more clothes. Apparently even something as simple as washing clothes by hand is too much for this retard to handle. No wonder his games come off as so lazy.

[JoshF]

Maybe John was just trying to be polite, which would make it even more insulting when the other dude tries to passive-aggressively put him down by saying he never made a 3D game on his own, as if it counts against him that he had a huge vision and sought out other talented people to help him create awesome, groundbreaking, industry standard masterpieces.

[Profanatica]

After reading the above-quoted drivel from Esquire, I decided to download Passage to see if there was a modicum of worth to this Rohrer's projects. After "playing" it, I actually found it offensive that a true fucking master like Romero and a sniveling, self-important clown like Rohrer are sat side by side in an interview as if equals. I once would have been surprised by such a farce, but after reading the Genealogy everything makes perfect sense. That doesn't make it any less of a disgusting joke, but I think I finally understand why gaming culture is so fucking backwards when it comes to shit indie games and their shit-for-brains developers.

All that out of the way, thanks for linking the Romero interviews. It was the first time I saw these ones, and it's truly a pleasure to listen to someone with enormous talent talking about something they love!

[JoshF]

Also, someone should point out that Doom is a more emotional game than Passage. Compared to the joy, fear, surprise, and enthusiasm experienced while fighting for life against hellspawn with all kinds of cool weapons, exploring the well-designed stages loaded with secrets, and listening to the heavy metal soundtrack that pumps you up, Passage is emotionally stunted.

[Icemael]

I love how according to that Esquire article it's hard to see how games don't suck, because they are really fun. Where are these people from? Bizarro World?

[Bigode]

There's an interesting book about (mainly) Romero and Carmack in the Doom years - "Masters of Doom", by Dave Kushner. Read it. It says Romero, when younger, was so obsessed about playing pac man that he could do the first level while wearing a blindfold.

By the time Wolfenstein 3D was being developed, Romero wasnt programming at all, he was mainly a map designer. He did the programming on his own games before that, mainly the "Dangerous Dave" series. John Carmack was the ace programmer and engine developer at iD (and he still is).

And, when Quake was being developed, Romero was too busy Deathmatching and being a "videogame rockstar" to work on the project. And it shows. His episode, the second one, is the worst of the bunch. The first episode, the shareware one, the main advertisement point of the game, (just like e1 of doom, romero's, you can argue about padding in shareware all you want) was designed by American Mcgee (including Ziguratt's Vertigo, The Quake Level) and Tim Willits did a map or 2, if memory doesnt fail me.

So Romero played Chrono Trigger and cried at the ending, got obsessed with frogs and storytelling or some shit like that, and worked on that trainwreck called daikatana, then hid on a hole. He gets out every 2 or 3 years to announce he is working on something that never quite gets launched.

Well, sometimes he host a party with other old game developers, there's a google video of him interviewing nasir gebelli.


[Banned for dozens of grammatical errors. --icy]

[icycalm]

Via email:

Someone just introduced me to your Insomnia site, and I spent much of the evening reading stuff there.

I really like what you have to say, and I agree with a large portion of it.

What's interesting is that the thing that happened to modern planar and plastic arts DIDN'T seem to take hold in film. I'm sure you have your theories about why, and so do I. When Kael talked about the "boring art films that we should be watching" (paraphrase), what she was describing was largely a temporary phenomenon. It's not like film got more and more jumbled and fell all the way down the rabbit hole the way that painting did.

When I go back to that era and try to explore the French New Wave or whatever other "important" transition movement, I find a collection of really terrible, boring films. Still, they were shocking and noteworthy at the time for their contrariness, and they *did* have a positive impact on the rest of the film world. Auteur theory alone, which was subsequently adopted throughout the mainstream film industry to great effect, was worth it, no? It's one thing to observe the hand of Hitchcock operating in his studio pictures made with contract actors. It's another thing to intentionally make room for the authorial hand in film the way we do today. I mean, no applied auteur theory, no Natural Born Killers for sure.

Likewise, I don't see the modern art derailment happening in the world of video games. I think the "artgame" thing has pretty much run its course at this point. But it was a necessary development. It couldn't have not happened, as you have pointed out. But we won't go down the rabbit hole of modern art. Instead, the whole artgame thing will have a small, positive impact on the industry---highlighting the need to make room for an authorial voice, and *hopefully* inspiring a bit more experimentation and risk-taking design-wise.


One thing that I don't see you talk about much on your site is the state of the CURRENT game industry. When someone like me complains about video games being artless and worthless, I'm not complaining about what Romero was doing back in 1992. I'm not shitting on the whole history of video games. I'm complaining about the hundreds of games that have simply repeated his/Carmack's brilliant formula (and all the other brilliant formulas), with small variations, over and over and over in the decades since then. It's great to get all starry-eyed about the classics. But I walk into GameStop today. There is nothing there that I want to play.

If you look at this list:

http://www.ign.com/index/upcoming.html ,

don't you feel as sick as I feel? Something like 80% of the listed games are sequels to sequels of not-so-interesting games. Or maybe to games that WERE interesting 5 sequels ago. GTA III was amazing, I agree. Red Dead 2 is not interesting at all.


Do you go to GDC ever? If so, it would be great to meet you in person.

I'm giving a microtalk there this year that essentially tackles artgames for being boring. Reading your stuff has set a new bar for me, I think.


Also, after reading your scathing, laser-sharp review of Spelunky (what I've often reported as my "game of the decade"), I'm eager to read your honest review (not your "Leigh Rogers" review) of Braid. Have you played it? I'm assuming you have.

Oh... and have you ever thought about designing/programming some games yourself?


Keep up the good work, sir!

Jason
--
http://hcsoftware.sf.net/jason-rohrer

I will be replying to this after I get a shower and some food in me. Suffice it to say, for the time being, that it's full of reeking horseshit.

[Worm]

In the meantime, since you didn't delete or move Bigode's post, I'm going to correct some things he said because they're rather insulting.

By the time Wolfenstein 3D was being developed, Romero wasnt programming at all

I guess him being listed as a programmer in the Wolfenstein 3D and Doom credits are just mistakes, huh? Sure, Carmack is the genius that made the engines possible, but it wasn't all done by him alone. Romero also programmed significant portions of the map editors DoomEd and QuakeEd.

And, when Quake was being developed, Romero was too busy Deathmatching and being a "videogame rockstar" to work on the project

If you've read Masters of Doom--which is corroborated by the videos linked in icycalm's first post--you'd know that everyone put in long hours to get the game finished after having to wait so long for the engine to be ready. You'd also know that Romero's original plan for the game was scrapped in favor of Doom-esque weapons.

And, although most of Romero's levels did get pushed to episode 2, he designed E1M1 and DM3. According to the Quake manual, American McGee designed the last two levels of episode 1 and Tim Willits did the rest.

If you want to talk trash, start by getting your facts straight.

[icycalm]

First off I'll debunk his sham-friendly, reconciliatory attitude. It's a standard artfag tactic (and generally a tactic employed by weaklings) to paralyze enmity in the adversary.

Hospitality. -- The meaning of the usages of hospitality is the paralysing of enmity in the stranger. Where the stranger is no longer felt to be first and foremost an enemy, hospitality decreases; it flourishes as long as its evil presupposition flourishes.

You can see this tactic in action in the rare occasions when some journlolist grows some balls and common sense and calls the artfags out on their bullshit -- e.g. that Jim Sterling dude. Soon afterwards they patch things up with some fagotry about "different strokes for different folks", or "agreeing to disagree" or some such nonsense, and everything goes back to business as usual. But this shit won't fly with me. I am not out to let off some steam and then patch things up -- I am out to fucking destroy you.

There is no difference between discourse and the essence of war. Their aim is to destroy, not denounce, the adversary.

http://insomnia.ac/essays/exterminating_angel/

So if I am in the middle of bludgeoning you to death with a sledgehammer, and you suddenly raise your hands and cry out in surrender, I am by no means going to stop and let you walk away. I am going to keep pounding you into smaller and smaller pieces, until there's nothing left of you than microscopic specks of dust -- I am a machine that makes dust. This is what I do -- that is my calling in this life. My response to passive-aggressive behavior, therefore (evident not only in the video linked above, but also throughout his email), is aggressive-aggressive aggression -- an aggression raised to the third power. There's no way to trick me into a compromise, to sign a peace treaty -- I've said it once already: no association with these people is permissible, no reconciliation possible.

I really like what you have to say, and I agree with a large portion of it.

Would that portion include the part where I say that you and your buddies are on a mission to slander and defame the work of the greatest game designers in the history of the artform?

What's interesting is that the thing that happened to modern planar and plastic arts DIDN'T seem to take hold in film. I'm sure you have your theories about why, and so do I.

First off, no one gives a fuck what you think or what theories you have.

Second off, I don't have "theories", fagot: I KNOW, because I have studied, thought about, and comprehended the history of art better than any human being that has ever existed. As for your baseless, ludicrous assertion that artfagotry has "not taken hold in film" -- you obviously know less about movies than you do even about videogames: i.e. less than nothing. Artfagotry is everywhere -- it is a disease, and indeed a highly contagious one, and no artform has been spared. That it manifests itself differently in each artform is only natural -- that's what the concept "mutation" means. Moreover, in the case of the higher artforms, such as movies and videogames, the reason that artfagotry has not, and in the latter case will never, dominate to the extent that it dominates the primitive artforms, is that NO ONE REALLY GIVES A FUCK ANYMORE ABOUT PRIMITIVE ARTFORMS, so the artfags have the field all to themselves. But movies and videogames are still very exciting arts, hence why they are still relatively healthy. Bottom line is that, no matter how many ludicrous screensavers you cobble together with Game Maker, or how many absurd lies you vomit in the journlolists' and pseudo-academics' faces, none of that fagotry will prevent people who love videogames from having a collective orgasm every time a REAL auteur such as a Meier, or an Ikeda, or a Mikami, or a Bleszinski releases a new game.

When Kael talked about the "boring art films that we should be watching" (paraphrase), what she was describing was largely a temporary phenomenon.

There's nothing "temporary" about artfagotry. It is a necessary concomitant of the democratic movement, and will go nowhere as long as this movement retains the upper hand.

It's not like film got more and more jumbled and fell all the way down the rabbit hole the way that painting did.

It's early days yet. Wait until everyone plays games and no one gives a shit about cutscenes any more, and you'll see.

When I go back to that era and try to explore the French New Wave or whatever other "important" transition movement, I find a collection of really terrible, boring films.

There's nothing "terrible" or "boring" about the French New Wave. You are just trying to pass off geniune film masters as being somehow part of the decadent movement you represent.

Still, they were shocking and noteworthy at the time for their contrariness, and they *did* have a positive impact on the rest of the film world. Auteur theory alone, which was subsequently adopted throughout the mainstream film industry to great effect, was worth it, no? It's one thing to observe the hand of Hitchcock operating in his studio pictures made with contract actors. It's another thing to intentionally make room for the authorial hand in film the way we do today. I mean, no applied auteur theory, no Natural Born Killers for sure.

Absurdly underhanded tactic: he's turned the entire history of French cinema into artfagotry! As if artfags created the auteur theory! As if Goddard, Truffaut and the rest of them were artfags! As if the Cahiers du Cinema was an artfag publication! As if Natural Born Killers, or anything by Stone, let alone Hitchcock lol! have anything to do with artfagotry! His shamelessness simply knows no bounds!

Likewise, I don't see the modern art derailment happening in the world of video games.

It's not an issue of "derailment", fuckface -- it is an issue of contagion. You are infecting master game designers with the suspicion that pathetic "messages" can somehow elevate their games in the eyes of the public and substitute for cutting-edge complex mechanics -- then giving them an excuse, when the mechanical deficiencies have been exposed in expert reviews like those on this site, to come out and say "but I am making art -- it's all about the 'message'" -- see for example David Cage. Your poison is seeping, slowly but surely and inevitably, throughout the entire industry, DEVALUING the ENTIRE HISTORY OF THE ARTFORM, then LOWERING THE QUALITY OF PRESENT AND FUTURE WORKS FOR ALL TIME, then DESTROYING THE CRITICAL ABILITY of those who wish to provide criticism (by messing their criteria to such an extent that criticism simply becomes impossible, and any deficiency whatsoever can be defended by the retarded excuse "but it's art"). And if all that were not enough, you are LOWERING THE LEVEL OF INTELLIGENCE OF THE ENTIRE HUMAN RACE, by spreading and increasing the level of pretentiousness and unconscious hypocrisy, to the point where ENTIRE GROUPS OF PEOPLE BECOME FOR EVER UNRECEPTIVE TO CRITICAL EVALUATION, REASONED ARGUMENT AND PHILOSOPHY, losing entire chunks of their lives among cheap simulacra, not even getting any enjoyment out of them but desperately trying to uncover some "meaning" in them, INSTEAD OF LOOKING FOR IT IN LIFE, INSIDE THEMSELVES, effectively MENTALLY STUNTING ENTIRE GENERATIONS OF HUMAN BEINGS... and you have the nerve to contact me in order to tell me that your diabolical schemes will not "derail videogames" -- WHEN YOUR WRETCHED, VENAL SHENANIGANS ARE HELPING TO DERAIL THE ENTIRE HUMAN RACE!

I think the "artgame" thing has pretty much run its course at this point.

It has barely even begun.

But it was a necessary development.

Of course it was -- a concomitant, as I said, of the democratic movement.

It couldn't have not happened, as you have pointed out. But we won't go down the rabbit hole of modern art. Instead, the whole artgame thing will have a small, positive impact on the industry---highlighting the need to make room for an authorial voice, and *hopefully* inspiring a bit more experimentation and risk-taking design-wise.

Same old bullshit. As if we did not have "authorial voices" before the fagots arrived. Do the titles "Sid Meier's Pirates", "Sid Meier's Railroad Tycoon", "Sid Meier's Civilization" say anything to you, liar? As for the whole "experimentation" excuse, I've got you covered here too:

http://insomnia.ac/commentary/on_the_ge ... art_games/

"WE WERE NOT TRYING TO MAKE ANYTHING BEAUTIFUL BUT": "to create an impression" (as if all art did not create an impression), "to express something" (as if all art did not express something), "to experiment" (as if any given masterpiece did not contain more experimentation, and at an immeasurably higher level, than all artfag abortions ever put together), "to convey a message" (as if everything in existence did not convey messages, and in fact an infinity of them; also, as if the most effective way to convey a message was not to actually write it down), "to make art for art's sake" (as if this phrase actually meant anything), and so on and so forth.

http://forum.insomnia.ac/viewtopic.php?p=14115#14115

The whole "experimenting" excuse of the indie bums and the artfagots is simply absurd. There is more experimentation in a Civilization sequel (or even in a Madden update for christsake) than in all indie abortions ever put together. Cave takes something like six months to simply BALANCE each shooter they make (never mind the fighting game makers): the indie bums do not even spend that much in the BASIC MECHANICS, let alone in balancing anything.

Or perhaps the above were part of the things you didn't agree with? And I suppose we'll get to read the reasons for your disagreement and your counter-arguments sometime after hell freezes over?

One thing that I don't see you talk about much on your site is the state of the CURRENT game industry.

Yes, if you have the attention span of a gnat I can see how you could have missed the fact that THE ENTIRE SITE IS FILLED WITH COMMENTARY ON THE CURRENT GAME INDUSTRY.

When someone like me complains about video games being artless and worthless, I'm not complaining about what Romero was doing back in 1992. I'm not shitting on the whole history of video games. I'm complaining about the hundreds of games that have simply repeated his/Carmack's brilliant formula (and all the other brilliant formulas), with small variations, over and over and over in the decades since then.

Yes, and next thing we know you'll be complaining that basketball has remained the same pretty much since its invention.

It's great to get all starry-eyed about the classics. But I walk into GameStop today. There is nothing there that I want to play.

Who gives a shit what a fagot who hates games does or does not want to play? The point is what gamers want to play. I don't quite see why anyone should care about anyone else.

If you look at this list:

http://www.ign.com/index/upcoming.html ,

don't you feel as sick as I feel?

Sick at what? At a list of upcoming videogames, half of which are potential masterpieces? I see Gears of War 3, Uncharted 3, The Last Guardian, Elder Scrolls V, Deus Ex 3, Crysis 2 and Diablo III -- and many of the rest could easily turn out to be at least decent, if not outright great. AND THAT'S ONLY THE NORTH AMERICAN RELEASE SCHEDULE (hint to uneducated fagot: other countries also exist on this earth: particularly a little place called "JAPAN" -- google it).

Something like 80% of the listed games are sequels to sequels of not-so-interesting games.

Hint to stupid fagot: IF YOU ARE NOT INTERESTED IN THE ARTFORM, EVERYTHING IS NOT-SO-INTERESTING. As for their being sequels, the only thing it proves is that

1. Their designers have hit on AN AWESOME FORMULA (something artfags who can't program worth a shit are simply incapable of doing), and

2. Are willing to put in the effort -- guess what! -- TO TRY AND MAKE IT EVEN MORE AWESOME (something which artfags are never interested in doing, because it is a stage that PRESUPPOSES THAT YOU'VE ALREADY HIT ON AN AWESOME FORMULA -- see stage 1).

Or maybe to games that WERE interesting 5 sequels ago. GTA III was amazing, I agree.

No, you don't. You are just lying to ingratiate yourself with me because you've seen me praise it as one my favorite games.

As for games that WERE interesting, but NO LONGER ARE BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN IMPROVED, LOL, I HAVE THIS TO SAY TO YOU: LOL.

I've been playing basketball for nearly 20 years now. I could play it for ever if my body would allow me to.

Red Dead 2 is not interesting at all.

I've no idea and it makes no difference either way to any of the things we've been talking about anyway.

Do you go to GDC ever? If so, it would be great to meet you in person.

Would that be the place where you and your buddies brainwash the world's greatest game designers to think that your screensavers are in any conceivable way superior to their masterpieces? Is that what you use those grains in your fridge for? the ones next to your four pairs of underwear? Do you like mix them in the convention's center ventilation system, and then go up on the stage and recite your little artfagspeak speeches while hippie images containing subliminal messages are being projected on the wall behind you?

Thanks for the offer, but I'll pass.

I'm giving a microtalk there this year that essentially tackles artgames for being boring. Reading your stuff has set a new bar for me, I think.

i am lol

Also, after reading your scathing, laser-sharp review of Spelunky (what I've often reported as my "game of the decade"), I'm eager to read your honest review (not your "Leigh Rogers" review) of Braid. Have you played it? I'm assuming you have.

It will be debunked in due course, along with every other indie abortion worth debunking. Also, btw, the fact that a subpar platformer such as Spelunky is your "game of the decade", in a decade that saw Deus Ex, GTAIII, Halo, Gears of War, Civ IV and V, Far Cry, Ketsui, and so on and so forth, is nothing less than AN ADMISSION THAT YOU DON'T GIVE A SHIT ABOUT THE ARTFORM.

Oh... and have you ever thought about designing/programming some games yourself?

For those not in the know, the above is a standard defense mechanism among indie bums. Every criticism is ultimately rebuked with the following last-ditch defense measure:

"Well, in that case why don't YOU make the game you want to play?"

The equivalent in the film world, for example, would be answering one of Kael's criticisms with the following:

"Well, in that case why don't YOU make the movie you want to watch?"

In the same vein one could say:

"Well, why don't YOU build the jumbo jet you want to fly in?"

Etc. etc.

But to answer his question: I find game design boring. Playing games is more fun than making them: and this is no mere opinion, but a philosophical truth of the first rank -- as I will one day get around to explaining. An intelligent Insomnia reader should have already figured out the reason anyway. I've pretty much already given it away.

The only way game design could be redeemed is if one saw it AS A GAME. As a creative activity, demanding skill and effort, etc. Seen in that light, though still inferior to other forms of game-playing, it can be redeemed. But I ALREADY AM engaged in a creative activity that demands skill and effort: and indeed the most demanding such activity that a human being can engage in. So I am all sorted out in that respect. What I look for in videogames, then, is to enhance the enjoyment of myself on my downtimes: to brighten up an evening, for example, after a hard day's surfing. Or thinking and writing. Or travelling and reading. Etc. etc. Which by the way is the only healthy way to engage in videogames, or any other artform for that matter. Not looking for "meaning" in them, but for enhancing the enjoyment of your downtimes, your rest periods from the serious business of life: which is war.

Keep up the good work, sir!

Jason

Oh, you'll know it. My "good work" will be haunting you from now on and for the rest of your life. If anything of your name accidentally manages to pass into the pages of history, it will pass with the stigma of the CHARLATAN attached to it -- and I will be the cause of it.

[icycalm]

He sent me a further email with some bullshit, none of which has anything to do with any of the stuff that we are arguing over. Here it is for the morbidly curious:

Wow, my little email made quite a splash, eh? Front page and everything!

>>>>>>
Or perhaps the above were part of the things you didn't agree with? And I suppose we'll get to read the reasons for your disagreement and your counter-arguments sometime after hell freezes over?
>>>>>>

I only disagree with a few points that you made in response to my email. Well, except for obviously ridiculous stuff that no one takes seriously. I understand that you use "fag" to mean "weak person", but it is an overloaded term, yeah? I have a wife and three kids, and I find women much more attractive than men.

(Also, Romero, if you ever have the pleasure of meeting him in person, is extraordinarily shy and reserved and quiet and sweet. Almost meek. Not the type of guy to steamroller someone in an argument or anything like that. Which is why he sorta got "brainwashed" at that conference, and also by some friends that he's been hanging out with recently. I think he's currently making an artgame, actually.)

Your position on the weak reminds me quite strongly of:

1. Ted Kaczynski (where "liberal" is closely connected with "weak person")

2. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold

I admire both of their positions in many ways.

So when I say, "mostly agree with you," the places where we diverge is primarily in calling everyone fags. Oh, and I never was into comic books and sci fi novels. I don't make my main games with Game Maker... my school training is in computer science. I came at games as a programmer. (I have used Game Maker for prototyping, but never for a released game). But those are obvious things that are just rhetorical insults---I agree with the heart of what you say, with the important points. There are also some simple holes in your knowledge. Because you've never been to GDC and talked to the people who are making the games that you love. Like... you know Romero by watching YouTube. I actually know him.


I'd love to respond in your forums.

So ANYWAY, if you're half as fearless as you claim you are, you'll approve my account before hell freezes over.

Jason

Then he registered in the forum and I banned his account, the reason being that this forum is FOR INTELLIGENT ADULTS WHO HAVE A BURNING PASSION FOR VIDEOGAMES -- all of which are qualities which he obviously utterly lacks.

So, Mr. Rohrer, if you have anything to respond to my criticisms of you, your work, or your convictions, I am sure you have dozens of channels open to you to publish them: any old blog or message board will do. And I am sure that someone will be nice enough to send me a link to them once they've been published -- or if you are in a hurry you can do so yourself. And THEN, when I look them over, AND IF I DEEM THAT THEY ARE WORTH REPLYING TO, you will receive your reply in due course via the usual channel (hint: you are currently reading it). There'd be nothing to gain by letting you run loose in my forum, posting off-topic fagotistical bullshit that would only force me to delete it and ban you. "Direct dialectics", as Nietzsche has already pointed out, "are noisy and unpleasant". It is always preferable to take your time and think things through, delivering a complete and comprehensive response, instead of wasting time and energy in chit-chatting about everything and nothing in particular (as you are trying to do in the above email, by bringing in a dozen unrelated topics in order to draw attention away from the substance of the matter at hand).

[Nybble]

It isn't much of a surprise that John has been tainted. Just look at his newest creation. He has come out of retirement to create a game on Facebook. It is called Ravenwood Fair. It punishes you or your wallet for actually wanting to play the game. You run out of energy quickly, and the only way to continue playing is to come back later or to pay more money to get your energy back if you do not wish to wait. What makes his game so much different than FarmVille and all the other similar games? Well, I'll let GamaSutra puke out their description:

Built under the creative direction of industry notables Brenda Brathwaite (Wizardry) and John Romero (Doom, Quake), Ravenwood Fair has a completely different atmosphere from the sims you typically find on Facebook: Players create and maintain a fairground, entertain woodland creatures with different attractions, and explore and complete quests inside a sinister, magical forest.

Ravenwood Fair's offbeat premise and dichotomy between cute critters and menacing woods not only transforms the game into something more than a FrontierVille clone; it also afforded LOLapps the opportunity to add more character and flavor to NPC interactions than one typically expects from social games, and to present the world with a distinct visual style that's both adorable and ominous.

The NPC interactions are completely worthless and provide flavor one would expect from expired jelly placed on moldy bread. (Moldy bread being the type of game they are creating in the first place.)

I think Brenda has most certainly tainted John when they worked together on this project. I wonder how much of the "ominous" (it isn't) features were merely allowed and tolerated by Brenda when John most likely presented them. One hopes that he would have liked to have seen the woodland creatures slaughtered, but his ideas were shut down in favor of the money they would make instead from the people that would pay for a Facebook game in the first place.

[nothingxs]

I find it absolutely distressing that two people who worked to build some of the games I most loved in my youth (in this case, John Romero with Doom and Quake, and Brenda Brathwaite's involvement with Wizardry) could manage to buy so far into this ridiculous notion of "social gaming" so as to shovel out this... tripe.

Ravenwood Fair? Really?

[icycalm]

Thanks to Cactus for a tl;dr version of this thread:



http://forums.tigsource.com/index.php?t ... #msg479313

[icycalm]

That thread, by the way (the above hilarity notwithstanding), is a window into the subhumanity of the indie bums. Look through it if you want, but don't look too long otherwise the imbecility might drive you insane. Every single post in that thread (with a single exception, on the first page -- see if you can find it), is more astonishingly idiotic than the last. Here's a random line, for example, from the currently-last post on the thread:

http://forums.tigsource.com/index.php?t ... #msg479566

not every indie game is made with love, but every mainstream game is made under a whip.

So Platinum Games' lineup was made "under a whip"? Mikami and the rest STARTED THEIR OWN STUDIO so that they can work "under a whip"?

Every single statement of theirs can be debunked with a simple example in a single line like this. Every single statement of theirs is A HARD, COLD, CRUEL AND MALICIOUS ATTEMPT AT SLANDER.

[icycalm]

Every single post in that thread (with a single exception, on the first page -- see if you can find it)

LOL, they deleted it! The only non-imbecilic post in the entire thread, and they somehow found it and deleted it! Here it is, quoted from memory:

icycalm is a butcher, no one can defeat him.

[icycalm]

Message to indie bums from TIGSource thread:

ID SOFTWARE CONSIDERS ITSELF AN "INDEPENDENT GAME DEVELOPER":

http://www.idsoftware.com/business/

id Software has relentlessly provided technical, design and artistic leadership as an independent game developer

THIS MEANS THAT DOOM 3 WAS AN "INDIE GAME". AND YET I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING IT MENTIONED ON ANY "INDIE" WEBSITE OR ANY "INDIE" AWARDS SHOW. MOREOVER, DOOM 4 WILL ALSO BE AN "INDIE" GAME, AND YET YOU FAGS WILL IGNORE IT TOGETHER WITH ANY OTHER REAL GAMES THAT ID SOFTWARE WILL PRODUCE.

MORAL: THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN "INDIE" GAME, ANY MORE THAN AN "ART" ONE. "INDIE" IS A SPURIOUS CATEGORY OF GAMES SET UP BY INCOMPETENT GAME DEVELOPERS IN ORDER TO AVOID HAVING THEIR BOTCHED CREATIONS COMPARED ON AN EQUAL BASIS WITH THE WORKS OF COMPETENT GAME DESIGNERS, IN MUCH THE SAME WAY THAT WOMEN AND CRIPPLES CREATED THEIR OWN CATEGORIES TO COMPETE IN ATHLETIC EVENTS -- IN THE KNOWLEDGE THAT WITHOUT THIS STRATAGEM THEY'D NEVER WIN ANYTHING.

CONCLUSION: THERE IS NO OTHER WAY TO CATEGORIZE GAMES THAN BY GENRE: A PLATFORM GAME IS THEREFORE A PLATFORM GAME REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE FAGS ARE INCESSANTLY BLEATING, AND ANY OTHER SCHEME OF CATEGORIZATION IS NOTHING BUT A FRAUD, A SCAM EMPLOYED BY THE INFERIOR IN THE CONSCIOUS (OR MORE USUALLY UNCONSCIOUS) KNOWLEDGE OF THEIR INFERIORITY.

In short, the indie bums do not have a leg to stand on, and never really did. More on this in the third essay of my Genealogy.

[icycalm]

http://forums.tigsource.com/index.php?t ... #msg479864

The problem is that I love cheap little games as much as I love the highest end games.

Here, Zarathustra has you covered:

Truly, I dislike also those who call everything good ... I call such people the all-contented.

All-contentedness that knows how to taste everything: that is not the best taste!

I honour the obstinate, fastidious tongues and stomachs that have learned to say ‘I’ and ‘Yes’ and ‘No’.

But to chew and digest everything—that is to have a really swinish nature! Always to say Ye-a—only the ass and those like him have learned that.

Not to mention that, when he says that he loves the little games as much as the big ones, he's obviously lying -- a quick skim of his blog and Twitter will prove that. How many times does he mention SFIV? How many hours has he put into that? How excited was he with his new PC that could run Crysis? How knocked out was he by Blazblue?

And yet he doesn't feel ashamed to come out and say that "The Marriage" (which in all probability he hasn't even loaded up, let alone played for any length of time), "is art" whereas SFIV, Blazblue and Crysis aren't.

If he had any humanity in him (which he doesn't, like all the other subhuman flotsam that post in his forum) he would hang up a banner at the top of every page of his site taking back all of his insults to Capcom, ArcSys and Crytek and asking for the forgiveness of the EXTREMELY TALENTED, INSANELY DEVOTED, AND INCOMPARABLY HARD-WORKING ARTISTS who made SFIV, Blazblue and Crysis.

But yeah, a man has to make his way and a living in this world, and the indie bums have "chosen" to go down that road ... because no other road is open to them.

[icycalm]

So, icycalm, you're telling me that there's no class of games that are produced without a publisher? Wow, you're totally right! I hereby bow to your awesome vulgarity!

THE PERSON WHO PUBLISHES SOMETHING IS THE PUBLISHER, FUCKFACE, LOOK IT THE FUCK UP!

I swear to god every single post there is on this level. And they've managed to get people like Romero to actually pay attention to them :(

[Masahiro9891]

Which by the way is the only healthy way to engage in videogames, or any other artform for that matter. Not looking for "meaning" in them, but for enhancing the enjoyment of your downtimes, your rest periods from the serious business of life: which is war.

Our ultimate gratitude to art.—If we had not welcomed the arts and invented this kind of cult of the untrue, then the realization of general untruth and mendaciousness that now comes to us through science—the realization that delusion and human error are conditions of human knowledge and sensation—would be utterly unbearable. Honesty would lead to nausea and suicide. But now there is counterforce against our honesty that helps us to avoid such consequences: art as the good will to appearance. We do not always keep our eyes from rounding off something and, as it were, finishing the poem; and then it is no longer eternal imperfection that we carry across the river of becoming—then we have the sense of carrying a goddess, and feel proud and childlike as we perform this service. As an aesthetic phenomenon existence is still bearable for us, and art furnishes us with eyes and hands and above all the good conscience to be able to turn ourselves into such a phenomenon. At times we need a rest from ourselves by looking upon, by looking down upon, ourselves and, from an artistic distance, laughing over ourselves or weeping over ourselves. We must discover the hero no less than the fool in our passion for knowledge; we must occasionally find pleasure in our folly, or we cannot continue to find pleasure in our wisdom. Precisely because we are at bottom grave and serious human beings—really more weights than human beings—nothing does us as much good as a fool’s cap: we need it in relation to ourselves—we need all exuberant, floating, dancing, mocking, childish, and blissful art lest we lose the freedom above things that our ideal demands of us. It would mean a relapse for us, with our irritable honesty, to get involved entirely in morality and, for the sake of the over-severe demands that we make on ourselves in these matters, to become virtuous monsters and scarecrows. We should be able also to stand above morality—and not only to stand with the anxious stiffness of a man who is afraid of slipping and falling any moment, but also to float above it and play. How then could we possibly dispense with art—and with the fool? —And as long as you are in any way ashamed before yourselves, you do not yet belong with us.

The Gay Science, 107

[Nybble]

It appears this trend is not just limited to John Romero. It really is a shame. I feel like this could be compared to Beethoven and Bach deciding that it wasn't worth their time to write more symphonies, but to start making ringtones.

There was a time when Brian Reynolds was best known for his work on epic computer strategy games like Civilization II, Rise of Nations and Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri. But nowadays he's the poster child for the casualfication of gaming.

It was Reynolds and his work on FrontierVille that proved to a lot of people, both game players and game makers, that Zynga and its steady march of Ville games, could deliver meaty, fun gaming experiences.

It was Reynolds' FrontierVille that convinced Bruce Shelley, Civilization designer and the father of Age of Empires, to jump ship and make his way over to the world of casual and social game making. Folks like Ultima's Richard Garriott, Dante's Inferno's Jonathan Knight and Doom's John Romero all seem to be following suit.

Kotaku Source: http://t.co/guJlw0T

[icycalm]

1. You do not need to type "Kotaku Source" -- a simple link will do. We realize that the fucking link is your goddamn source.

2. Why on earth would you bother encrypting the goddamn url? What exactly do you gain by doing that? (besides making it impossible for us to tell where the link will lead us without you adding "Kotaku Source" next to it).

Don't change anything. Just stop being such a fucking imbecile for fuck's sakes.