Modern Computer Games and their artistic merit

Thu Jan 02, 2014 10:41 pm

Since you play to earn money and trainer points, I think it's a game.

Actually, yov, whatever you think it should be classified as, I'm fine with.

P.S. As long as those dogs keep staring at me, thirsting for my blood, I plan to just agree with everything you say.

Post by **Alatar** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:02 am

I don't really get hung up on labels as I said, but I would consider it a game. Tamagotchi were considered games weren't they?

Post by **yovargas** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:09 am

Alatar wrote:I don't really get hung up on labels

Alatar wrote:As such I get annoyed when people tell me "Thats not a real game".

Hmmm....

Post by **Passdagas the Brown** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 1:38 am

That's not a real post, yov.

Post by **Alatar** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 1:38 am

Its not contradictory. I object to labels because they try to tell me what I should think. My point is that I consider any type of game a game.

Post by **Passdagas the Brown** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 1:42 am

I see your point, Al. In terms of the quote yov posted, such a statement essentially implies: "It's a fake game," or "not a game as I label a game" and your reaction is essentially to get annoyed with such narrow-minded "labeling."

Alas, semantics have been known to start wars. If only we didn't get so hung up on silly words!

Post by **axordil** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 2:47 am

There are no silly words, only silly people. Except "flibbertigibbet."

As far as electronic interactive entertainment and artistic merit goes: obviously some games are quite nice to look at, or have decent music. The question mark seems poised by the story elements, for those games having any. Bradbury's assertion, from Fahrenheit 451, that allowing the viewer into the decision tree trivializes fiction raises its pre-Pong head here, at least for me. Can we call any interactive story literary? If not, is there (forgive me) a label we can attach to it that allows its evaluation as art?

Post by **yovargas** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 3:11 am

Alatar wrote:Its not contradictory. I object to labels because they try to tell me what I should think. My point is that I consider any type of game a game.

Maybe I'm not understanding what you're saying but aren't you essentially saying you're annoyed with the "it's not a game" label because you want to use "game" as the label?

Post by **Passdagas the Brown** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 3:35 am

I believe Alatar mentioned he was annoyed by the "real game" label, as in "it's not a real game."

If I am not mistaken, he is objecting to how people label a "game," and then dismiss something that doesn't fit that label as "not a real game."

Help me out here, Al!

Post by **Alatar** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 9:52 am

What PdG said.

Post by **eborr** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 11:47 am

Hmm I was really looking forward to the idea of discussing artistic merit in video games, instead of which we have what seems to be a pretty silly discussion on what constitutes a game and what doesn't.

If I consider something to be a game, and you don't it still happens to be a game, for example if you played golf and I told you my view was that it was not a sport, but a activity for people with too much time and too little imagination, would it be any less a sport in your eyes.

Having spent a lot of the last two years teaching on computer games courses and being an admirer of the really beautiful games I would really have enjoyed other folks appreciation so please return to the topic /[end pompous mode]

Post by **Alatar** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:31 pm

Well, instead of lecturing us Eborr, how about contributing something?

Post by **Passdagas the Brown** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 6:37 pm

But eborr is a lecturer by profession. And by the looks of it, he's quite good!

Post by **Alatar** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 6:38 pm

Yeah, I was going for the pun there...

Post by **Passdagas the Brown** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 6:43 pm

Oh, I got that. But I just had to participate in extending the pun. The irony of eborr's statement was too rich to pass up!

ETA: eborr - you don't happen to teach at UCONN, by any chance?

Post by **Passdagas the Brown** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 7:28 pm

Al and eborr,

Thought you might appreciate this. There was once a poster at TORC named Amphiaraus Bis, who participated in a LOTRO kinship of ours. He was also a professor of games and myth at the University of Connecticut.

Here's the description of a course he taught in the latter part of last decade:

http://livingepic.blogspot.com/2008/04/ ... e.html?m=1

Part of that course involved actually playing LOTRO, and much of his research took place on the Landroval server.

An interesting guy. And his work is especially relevant for a thread on the artistic (and educational) merit of games.

Post by **Passdagas the Brown** » Fri Jan 03, 2014 7:34 pm

Here are also his more recent blogs:

http://www.playthepast.org/?author=7

http://livingepic.blogspot.com/?m=1

Post by **Alatar** » Sat Jan 04, 2014 1:04 am

Looks interesting PdG. Will have a look later. Of course, its worth noting that most of the really good games are original concepts. Film and Book tie-ins rarely hit the mark.

Sat Jan 04, 2014 10:47 pm

Alatar wrote:Looks interesting PdG. Will have a look later. Of course, its worth noting that most of the really good games are original concepts. Film and Book tie-ins rarely hit the mark.

I think that's generally true. But I have a soft spot for Middle earth-based stuff (especially if it's not connected to the films!)

It's fun to get lost in LOTRO's Moria for a while...

Post by **Alatar** » Sun Jan 05, 2014 5:32 pm

I enjoy it more for its connection to Tolkien than for its quality as a game. There is no question that World of Warcraft is a far superior game, but I don't get to travel through Middle Earth in WoW! Also, in my personal experience, the online community in LotRO are much more friendly and helpful than in WoW.