Article said:Feats, but relative ones. Writing about Gone Home upon its release, I called it the video-game equivalent of young-adult fiction. Hardly anything to be ashamed of, but maybe much nothing to praise, either. If the ultimate bar for meaning in games is set at teen fare, then perhaps they will remain stuck in a perpetual adolescence even if they escape the stereotypical dude-bros basement.
Again, because it limits the medium.
It's not about what I like and what I don't like. I like plenty of games with cutscenes. It's not like I avoid them.
What it's about is video games exploring unique ways to convey emotions and stories. And that progress is constantly lessened the longer the industry sees "Let's just imitate movies." as the standard.
It would be odd to expect them not to borrow from other mediums. Film borrows from theater, tv from film, and so on, and games contain elements from every other medium - film, music, literature, art, etc.I feel it's necessary for video games to borrow from other mediums by design because A.) Games inherently share basic characteristics with other mediums despite the interactive element, and B.) Other mediums have a better grasp upon narrative through design than games do, and as a result, reference is necessary.
He is on point.
It would be odd to expect them not to borrow from other mediums. Film borrows from theater, tv from film, and so on, and games contain elements from every other medium - film, music, literature, art, etc.
Maybe if I said this type of story telling shouldn't exist then I would. But I didn't.
I didn't say any of what you're saying. I said something shouldn't be the baseline. That's completely different than saying something shouldn't exist or that people shouldnt try to do things in certain ways.You don't need to say they shouldn't exist. Simply making proclamations about what games should and should not try is more than enough to limit the medium.
I just don't get how you can think that taking a prescriptive stance about what games should be is somehow an argument for removing limits.
Don't see a lot of movies?Negative.
I love vg game stories, most of the time more than movies
I didn't say any of what you're saying. I said something shouldn't be the baseline. That's completely different than saying something shouldn't exist or that people shouldn't try to do things in certain ways.
Video games shouldn't be striving for cinematic moments as the baseline for its storytelling. All it does is limit the medium. It would be like if you were reading a comic book and when you turned the page, there was no art. Just a bunch of paragraphs explaining what is happening. At that point, the person isn't playing into the visual aspect of comics, and instead of using those pages to let an artist convey the authors words, they decide to imitate novels and literature and just write a few paragraphs.
Doesn't change the fact that they're both experienced and informed individuals within their fields, and the guy who wrote this article isn't
Not that you have to be in a field to critique said field, but when you start making broad statements on the nature of a medium and its innerworkings, having hands-on experience and knowledge matters
If you think Inside doesn't have a story or narrative, you should play it again
Yup, that section is especially pretentious and, frankly, snobby. Young adult fiction isn't some lower form of literature than adult fiction, the distinction is based on audience, not on quality. Doubt he knows much about YA fiction anyway since he's making statements like that, but maybe don't generalize if you don't know what you are talking about.I'm on board with some of the ideas - just swapping out "all games" for "some games," as the medium has the space for both traditional narratives and games that entirely eschew them - but he lost me when he started talking down to young adult fiction.
Dude is like to run into something with his nose held so high in the air.
Think More_Badass is suggesting he is inexperienced when it comes to writing/storytelling/narrative, which, based on some of the comments he makes in the article, is likely true.Bogost is a co-founder of game studio that's made quite a few mobile games. Can't speak for their quality, but he is a game developer.
Yup, that section is especially pretentious and, frankly, snobby. Young adult fiction isn't some lower form of literature than adult fiction, the distinction is based on audience, not on quality. Doubt he knows much about YA fiction anyway since he's making statements like that, but maybe don't generalize if you don't know what you are talking about.
Later on he goes on to say poetry isn't really a storytelling medium either...ignoring thousands of years of poetic story telling. Ever heard of Gilgamesh, Beowulf, The Odyssey, The Aeneid, Paradise Lost?
Poetry has been used to tell stories for as long as we've recorded the spoken word in writing. It shows an ignorance of poetry and its history to suggest that storytelling is secondary to poetry. His comments about YA fiction are just plain insulting.I feel like I read a different article than you. He says stories come later, after the foundations of the medium. According to you, then, he also thinks that film, painting and tv don't tell stories either?
Think More_Badass is suggesting he is inexperienced when it comes to writing/storytelling/narrative, which, based on some of the comments he makes in the article, is likely true.
Even further back. Humans were telling stories before writingPoetry has been used to tell stories for as long as we've recorded the spoken word in writing. It shows an ignorance of poetry and its history to suggest that storytelling is secondary to poetry. His comments about YA fiction are just plain insulting.
Poetry has been used to tell stories for as long as we've recorded the spoken word in writing. It shows an ignorance of poetry and its history to suggest that storytelling is secondary to poetry. His comments about YA fiction are just plain insulting.
I was mistaken in not researching the guy before making such a claimSo a guy who has authored or co-authored ten books and has a Ph.D. in comparative literature is "inexperienced when it comes to writing/storytelling/narrative"?
Wow.
These are remarkable accomplishments. But they are not feats of storytelling, at all. Rather, they are novel expressions of the capacities of a real-time 3-D engine.
No I see a lot of movies.Don't see a lot of movies?
Or is it due to the interactivity games provide?
I was mistaken in not researching the guy before making such a claim
But the claim isn't inaccurate even in light of that info.
Just like I wouldn't go to a biologist for evidence and discussion about climate science, him being well-studied in literature doesn't give him the knowledge or experience to present such a broad thesis on the storytelling and narrative of games, and thus game design (because aesthetic, level design, gameplay, controls, etc. are as much avenues of storytelling as the actual words and characters)
I mean, he does mention how the visual aspect of games is not really a means of storytelling (it's nothing more than a technical feat of the 3D engine and so on)
You can't read.You said:
You are saying what games should and shouldn't do. You are saying that if games don't comport themselves in the way that you approve, that they are limiting themselves. You also drop some good stuff about what comic books should and shouldn't be as well, so I guess this is just a natural thing for you?
Considering he doesn't even accept that the visuals and level design of a game is a means of storytelling (which is ridiculous because set design, lighting, and so on are absolutely means of storytelling in other visual mediums), and prefaces his argument by essentially saying everything else is better so why do games even try....what makes his argument genuine criticism?He is also a game developer.
If games are art that tell stories, they should be subjected to actual criticism. We can't have it both ways. I feel like the typical reaction to this type of criticism actual sets back the argument that games are art (not pointed at you). If games are art, then we shouldn't be so quick to dismiss genuine criticism.
I do wish there were more games that use the unique aspect of games - interactivity - to tell their stories, rather than the Naughty Dog school of barely interactive cinematic games.
Less Uncharted, more Nier Automata please.
Considering he doesn't even accept that the visuals and level design of a game is a means of storytelling (which is ridiculous because set design, lighting, and so on are absolutely means of storytelling in other visual mediums), and prefaces his argument by essentially saying everything else is better so why do games even try....what makes his argument genuine criticism?