-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Innovative, Intuitive. Meet the newest member of the Overused Word Club: Pretentious
- Thread starter Firestorm
- Start date
Same applies to journalism in general than. Whiny hard Republicans/Democrats and outlets are too dependant on the government for information. And in their case, it's a helluva lot more important. Dancing around staying on the good side of the government so you don't start losing access or exclusives in comparison to your competitors is a lot more hurtful when it's politics and not just entertainment news.Guled said:
This goes on in more than just the games media, but it just seems a lot easier to call out when it comes to games because it's so transparent. Maybe also because as a gaming forum, we follow it more closely.
MisterHero
Super Member
i like metacommentary
Jive Turkey
Unconfirmed Member
:lolDarkpen said:
Oh man that was good.
godhandiscen said:
He also doesn't post on GAF all that much. I remember peeps around here making similar comments about Shawn Elliot's writing before he started popping in more often. Peeps didn't get it, and as a result, ended up attacking it. Shawn pops in, breaks it down more here, breaks it down more on the podcast, lo and behold, peeps start getting it and start appreciating his writing more as a result.
Haunted
Member
Epic post, fellow hardcore gamer. A bit generic, but the blue ocean casuals will like it.
That said, many a successful is targeted towards juvenile macho-fantasies (tits n guns, fuck yeah!), the gaming media is simply reflecting that.
I appreciate the more thoughtful articles about gaming and the industry in general. Who cares if a couple whiny bitches can't take it - we have to be careful to not let anti-intellectualism take it away.
That said, many a successful is targeted towards juvenile macho-fantasies (tits n guns, fuck yeah!), the gaming media is simply reflecting that.
I appreciate the more thoughtful articles about gaming and the industry in general. Who cares if a couple whiny bitches can't take it - we have to be careful to not let anti-intellectualism take it away.
Suburban Cowboy
Member
Ive been using "croal" as a synonym for pretentious for months
BobsRevenge
I do not avoid women, GAF, but I do deny them my essence.
The dictionary is just a pretentious crutch to fall back on for people who can't figure out what a word really means in a certain context. Weak-sauce bro. Weak-sauce.Darkpen said:
The dictionary's verisimilitude sucks.
Jive Turkey said:
MGS actually makes quite a bit of sense. I can understand dislike for the quality of writing (specially dialog and silliness), but if you just pay attention it all connects perfectly.
zaidr said:
Sessler really had it right when he said that the word GAME is really messing with us. Game brings up images of Monolopy or something you play to have fun. Games don't have to be traditional fun. They can be thought provoking, sad, funny etc. And for me all of those emotions lead to fun. Most people wouldn't say they had fun after watching Schindler's List. Yet I would say my time viewing films like that actually is. Having to think hard, or go through an emotional roller coaster ride is for me fun.
Variety is the spice of life.
I sort of agree here. I definitely agree with you that games don't have to be traditional fun. Not sure about the word usage. Though I agree "game" has certain connotations attached, I'm not sure if there even is an alternative we can use. "Interactive Entertainment / Interactive Art" is a little long... Movies have it so easy with the word "film".Cartman86 said:
Cartman86 said:
I agree and disagree. I don't find the label of game to be particularly troublesome. I think more problems stem from the relative immaturity of the industry. We've come a long way, but we're not quite there yet. For instance, we still call comic books, well, comics, but that doesn't mean that the public's perception hasn't changed as to what can constitute a comic book and the maturity of the story contained within.
If I were to equate the videogame industry to the comic book industry, then I'd say, at the moment, we're in the early/mid-1990s. Lots of dynamic artists, flashy, overpriced, gatefold, diecut, prism foil covers, big tits and big guns. But...it's getting better.
While I really hate to bump this thread after 2 days, I just wanted to respond to this. I don't think MGS's ideas are banal at all. I think that the way the stories present its message is by constructing it over the medium, borrowing western film and storytelling styles (i.e. good guy vs bad guy), which itself is created from a Japanese viewpoint, creating a rather unique taste that attracts the fans the way it does.Worm_Buffet said:
Sure, when you condense it all, it might appear simple and "banal" to you, but to me and to many others, I think a more appropriate word would be poignant. The games bash you over the head with everything else, from WMDs to the ethics of war and science, but the underlying story seems to always be focused on the hero, and from that you can extract a very Japanese story that shows depth and care in the polish of how that aspect is presented, from where the hero begins, and where the hero finds himself at the end. There's no other game that I can think of that mirror's Snake or Raiden in terms of their character developments, and what they meant to the players.
PhlivoSong
Member
The two words that need to be added are floaty and verticality. It pisses me off anytime someone calls controls floaty. What the hell does that mean? That an object doesn't have the amount of weight you expected it to have? That it's not responsive enough? Is verticality even a word to begin with? If a game like Mirror's Edge has great verticality, does that mean a game like Mario Bros has great horizontality?
Immersive
Intuitive
Experience
Visceral
Engaging
Hardcore
Casual
Old School (now used to describe any game with any combination of 2D visuals, challenging mechanics, or showing traits of a game that pre-dates 1994)
In cases where a game is being described by the development staff, marketing, or the press all of the above words have been used to the point where the meanings are often lost, overused, incorrect, or never applied appropriately in the first place. You could pretty much make a preview in a fashion not unlike MadLibs with those items listed above. Hey, it could be fun to try!
Intuitive
Experience
Visceral
Engaging
Hardcore
Casual
Old School (now used to describe any game with any combination of 2D visuals, challenging mechanics, or showing traits of a game that pre-dates 1994)
In cases where a game is being described by the development staff, marketing, or the press all of the above words have been used to the point where the meanings are often lost, overused, incorrect, or never applied appropriately in the first place. You could pretty much make a preview in a fashion not unlike MadLibs with those items listed above. Hey, it could be fun to try!
Musashi Wins!
FLAWLESS VICTOLY!
Wait it was about MGS right?
pseudocaesar
Member
Truant said:
Sorry. But no.
wolfmat
Confirmed Asshole
The word 'pretentious' means a lot of things. So you can criticise the overuse because it's such an ambiguous term, I'd agree with you in that sense. Simply because it's a bad use of language.
However, most of the time, people associate the term, in the context of gaming, with a setup, story, metaphorical baseline and so on not actually delivering on its promises, and that while these promises are of a very ambitious nature.
And this happens a lot of times in the medium, as you can easily find out yourself by analyzing them in these regards.
What must be acknowledged though that this is a rather specific way of looking at things, and it's debatable whether or not there is any point to it in gaming today.
If you actually look at what's on the market today, you'll see that for the grand majority, even if describing games as pretentious is factually correct, it does not have any impact on what gamers expect and acknowledge.
Take Bioshock, for example. It's easy to describe the game as pretentious, and that's rather obvious. Granted, there's a lot of atmosphere and the subject matter is in fact relevant to some extent, but the game doesn't actually use this to its advantage; I'd even go so far as to describe how it handles that as amateurish.
But on the other hand, there are multiple things rescuing Bioshock despite the fact that you could say what I said above. The shooting is tight, the art and sound are of very high quality, the succession of events keeps you in the game, the messages don't disrupt the game's flow, but rather coexist with it. You could say that it's a beautifully crafted game.
What you then have to acknowledge is that in the end, whether or not the game is pretentious has no impact on its quality, particularly if you keep in mind what's on the market today.
Summing up, criticizing pretentiousness is fair, but in the end should in no way impact a game's qualitative reception. At least as long as games are as clunky as they are when stuff gets tough, when something's worth a discussion that's above graphics and shit.
However, most of the time, people associate the term, in the context of gaming, with a setup, story, metaphorical baseline and so on not actually delivering on its promises, and that while these promises are of a very ambitious nature.
And this happens a lot of times in the medium, as you can easily find out yourself by analyzing them in these regards.
What must be acknowledged though that this is a rather specific way of looking at things, and it's debatable whether or not there is any point to it in gaming today.
If you actually look at what's on the market today, you'll see that for the grand majority, even if describing games as pretentious is factually correct, it does not have any impact on what gamers expect and acknowledge.
Take Bioshock, for example. It's easy to describe the game as pretentious, and that's rather obvious. Granted, there's a lot of atmosphere and the subject matter is in fact relevant to some extent, but the game doesn't actually use this to its advantage; I'd even go so far as to describe how it handles that as amateurish.
But on the other hand, there are multiple things rescuing Bioshock despite the fact that you could say what I said above. The shooting is tight, the art and sound are of very high quality, the succession of events keeps you in the game, the messages don't disrupt the game's flow, but rather coexist with it. You could say that it's a beautifully crafted game.
What you then have to acknowledge is that in the end, whether or not the game is pretentious has no impact on its quality, particularly if you keep in mind what's on the market today.
Summing up, criticizing pretentiousness is fair, but in the end should in no way impact a game's qualitative reception. At least as long as games are as clunky as they are when stuff gets tough, when something's worth a discussion that's above graphics and shit.
Like the hat?
Banned
you forgot "surreal"
the go-to word for when you have no idea what you're talking about.
the go-to word for when you have no idea what you're talking about.
D
Deleted member 30609
Unconfirmed Member
visceral.
BobsRevenge
I do not avoid women, GAF, but I do deny them my essence.
To expect any more than that is pretentious.Firestorm said:
mambadragon
Banned
It's an offshoot of the "elitest" thing from modern politics.
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
I think that it is usually the developers who get called pretentious, not the actual games. Braid was pretty much marketed as a game only really smart people would "get", and people were falling all over themselves to "get it" better than everyone else.Firestorm said:
mikekennyb
Member
There is a difference between pretentious and meaningful. Someone can have a deeper message without being "pretentious" about it. Games like Bioshock and Shadow of the Colossus have rarely been called pretentious, as opposed to other elitist whipping boys. That's in the way that the message is delivered. The problem is with the arrogance and the way that certain people/games bash you over your head with their message, that's what can be pretentious.
Not to defend the people criticizing N'Gai, I actually agree with what he said about Killzone. But at the same time, if I feel like I'm being talked down to or someone is being arrogant with their "art" then I would probably call them elitist or pretentious.
Not to defend the people criticizing N'Gai, I actually agree with what he said about Killzone. But at the same time, if I feel like I'm being talked down to or someone is being arrogant with their "art" then I would probably call them elitist or pretentious.
Kitschkraft
Member
Cartman86 said:
Thank you...I'm so sick of the "purist fun" shit. I want something a bit more cerebral, less focused on the kind of fun that you get from building legos.
Obviously, the pickings are slim at this point, I can only hope that if I as a gamer wants and can somewhat picture more important scenario's and narratives in games, that there is developers out there doing the same.
Handycrap101
Banned
dam go worry about something important like those pigs that sniff out truffles...you could make a killing on those things.
"Innovative and intuitive" are words used by stupid people to sound clever and important.Mamesj said:
They are way to broad and hollow as terms and concepts to be of any real use.
What is really intuitive? Very few things. It's just another word for "We're used to..."
Innovative is a misnomer for "we need some of that new stuff, but I'm too stupid and blasé to think of it myself".
Similar threads
- Locked