default header

Theory

Kotaku: "Has Gaming Grown Up?"

Moderator: JC Denton

Kotaku: "Has Gaming Grown Up?"

Unread postby Demaar » 25 Apr 2008 10:53

So who else has read this? Personally, I felt it was a wanky "LOOK AT ME IM SO SMART!" piece of crap that failed to answer the question it posed. Hell, it didn't even ask the question properly. I'd say it's as bad (if not worse) than asking if games are art.

Hi, by the way.
Demaar
 
Joined: 25 Apr 2008 10:50
Location: Australia

Unread postby Molloy » 25 Apr 2008 15:05

I always like to compare games to sports, rather than movies or other types of media. A gameworld has rules and it's up to you to exploit them to the best of your ability and overcome the competition.

Is rugby mature and grown up? God only knows. It's a stupid question.
User avatar
Molloy
 
Joined: 29 Mar 2006 20:40
Location: Ireland

Re: Kotaku: "Has Gaming Grown Up?"

Unread postby icycalm » 25 Apr 2008 17:32

Demaar wrote:So who else has read this?


I like to think that the people who post in this forum have better things to do with their lives than read Kotaku and its ilk, and besides in this forum we link Kotaku articles in the lol thread, because we don't believe that they deserve their own threads.

Now as for the article in question, I agree with Molloy: The question is stupid, hence any answer one might come up for it will also be stupid. I only want to correct one thing:

Molloy wrote:I always like to compare games to sports


Games are sports. Or, to put it more correctly, since games are the general concept: sports are games.

The writer hasn't yet realized this, therefore any comments he might have to make on the subject of their treatment will likely be miles off the mark. And they are.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Re: Kotaku: "Has Gaming Grown Up?"

Unread postby Demaar » 26 Apr 2008 04:16

icycalm wrote:besides in this forum we link Kotaku articles in the lol thread, because we don't believe that they deserve their own threads.
Ah, right. Sorry about that. Hopefully a mod will merge it or something...

As for both of your points, I can't help but agree. The aspects that make games games are definitely more in line with sports than movies and books. The article completely ignores that and focuses on (what I think is) the least important aspect of a game, the story. Doesn't really matter how much Chinese film you've studied or how many OMG INTELLECTUAL books you've read, doesn't change the fact that game mechanics come first followed by presentation of graphics and sound, then story.
Demaar
 
Joined: 25 Apr 2008 10:50
Location: Australia

Re: Kotaku: "Has Gaming Grown Up?"

Unread postby icycalm » 26 Apr 2008 13:36

Demaar wrote:The aspects that make games games are definitely more in line with sports than movies and books.


You are still not quite getting it. The above quote is, strictly speaking, wrong. Read this one more time:

icycalm wrote:Games are sports. Or, to put it more correctly, since games are the general concept: sports are games.


So games are not "more in line" with sports -- sports are in line with games, because sports are games. That is how we have defined them.

Demaar wrote:game mechanics come first followed by presentation of graphics and sound, then story.


I don't see any reason why your hierarchy should be considered valid. What comes first is the game. Then the presentation. That's it. Graphics, sound and story are part of the presentation, and it would be pointless of us to try and prioritize them. Sound is more important to Rez than story. Graphics are more important to Crysis than sound. Story is more important to Deus Ex than either graphics or sound. Et cetera.
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Unread postby raphael » 26 Apr 2008 18:12

I don't get how works your corrected hierarchy.

I thought by presentation you pointed to cut scenes, title screens, menus and such, nothing "in-game". Because otherwise it wouldn't make sense to me as the word videogame makes it clear the game can't be separted from its video presentation.

But then you talk about Rez's sound, Crysis's graphics, Deus Ex's scenario ... and without the et caetera I am already confused.

While I get your point about these games specific "mechanics", your assertion that game always comes first is puzzling me.
Last edited by raphael on 26 Apr 2008 18:45, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
raphael
 
Joined: 04 Mar 2008 19:31
Location: Paris

Unread postby icycalm » 26 Apr 2008 18:19

raphael wrote:I don't get how works your corrected hierarchy.
Well there's no hierarchy now. You have the essence and the flavor:

-In books the essence is the plot and the flavor the setting and the quality of the writing.

-In movies the essence is the plot and the flavor the cinematography, acting, music, sfx, etc.

-In games the essence are the rules and the flavor the graphics, sound and story (with one exception which I will explain at length in a future article).

I hope the above will help clear up your confusion.

raphael wrote:the word videogame makes it clear the game can't be separted from its video presentation.


Oh, and the above is a joke, right?
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands

Re: Kotaku: "Has Gaming Grown Up?"

Unread postby Demaar » 27 Apr 2008 05:12

icycalm wrote:So games are not "more in line" with sports -- sports are in line with games, because sports are games. That is how we have defined them.
I'm pretty crap at getting what I mean across. What I meant was, that even if sports are games (which it is, people say football game just as often as they say football match... if not more often) and video games are games, sports and video games most definitely have more in common than books and movies, being that they're both games of some sort. That's what I meant.

I don't see any reason why your hierarchy should be considered valid. What comes first is the game. Then the presentation. That's it. Graphics, sound and story are part of the presentation, and it would be pointless of us to try and prioritize them. Sound is more important to Rez than story. Graphics are more important to Crysis than sound. Story is more important to Deus Ex than either graphics or sound. Et cetera.
Hmm, I suppose that's true when you look back at certain games. What I meant in the first post is that it's quite possible to put no effort into graphics/sound/story and still have a game, but pretty darn difficult to have a good game with no rules/mechanics. But then I suppose you could argue that when you're playing poker or whatever the deck of cards is a visual representation of what's happening and the conversation between players/the dealer is the audio feedback. I guess I haven't put enough thought into it...
Demaar
 
Joined: 25 Apr 2008 10:50
Location: Australia

Unread postby JoshF » 27 Apr 2008 05:31

but pretty darn difficult to have a good game with no rules/mechanics

Make that impossible!
User avatar
JoshF
 
Joined: 14 Oct 2007 14:56

Unread postby Demaar » 27 Apr 2008 07:55

I was gonna say impossible but I didn't want to commit myself :lol:
Demaar
 
Joined: 25 Apr 2008 10:50
Location: Australia

Re: Kotaku: "Has Gaming Grown Up?"

Unread postby icycalm » 27 Apr 2008 12:05

Demaar wrote:But then I suppose you could argue that when you're playing poker or whatever the deck of cards is a visual representation of what's happening and the conversation between players/the dealer is the audio feedback.


Now we are getting somewhere!
User avatar
icycalm
Hyperborean
 
Joined: 28 Mar 2006 00:08
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands


Return to Theory