Extra Credits: “Art” Is Not the Opposite of...

This week, we address the common claim that advancing games as an art means making them less fun.

Show Notes:

This week's artist: Annelie Gab Kretzschmar, who was the one who accepted the guy's proposal on an earlier episode's credits

Audio Version:
Download

Recent Comments:

  • I'm so lost and confused trying to follow your logic on this one, I'm sorry. You're saying that these games are being SHOVED down your throat? I've done a pretty damn good job at not playing Call of Duty since the original Modern Warfare and I'm still always playing some new, fun game. I don't see the same industry you do, I think.

    I can go on and on but your attitude is so heavily entrenched in this idea of "us versus them" and the elitism that goes along with it, like you are somehow more deserving or entitled than the rest of the world, that makes me think it'd be fruitless. Times change, get with it or get lost in the past, bud.

    I never said games could not change. I said people who don't know anything about the industry should not be the ones being in charge of those changes. And when I say something is being shoved on me, I mean me as a consumer. Yes, I don't have to buy them, and I don't. But I'm still sick of the constanst crap that is being thrown at me to buy because it's what the "common" consumer wants.

    And I'm sorry it is us vs them. Only reason they want in now is because it's suddenly profitable and cool. Just look at how actually geeky or nerdy girls have to keep fighting agaisnt models that pose with consoles and fake glasses just to make them have the "sexy geek" image. Are there sexy geeky girls out there? Hell yeah there are, but they have to fight out all the fakers that pretend to be them. We have to do the same thing.

    Also for other agurments about first coming into something that is interesting. Coming into something with a healthy interest is completly fine. However, asking someone more knowlage about said topic is a much better path to go instead of just buying whatever is on the "cool" list of whatever that might be. You also don't want to be coming into a intrerest and somehow pretending you know what you're talking about. Blocking unwanted people out and blocking EVERYONE out are two different things.

    Same with every medium. You like Dark Knight? Fine, but don't be boasting about how much of "batman nerd" you are. You like Avatar or Twlight? Fine, but don't go telling me what a "movie lover" you are. Etc etc.

    It's all about getting undiserables out who are making the bad choices by compaines seem like good ones.

  • I'm so lost and confused trying to follow your logic on this one, I'm sorry. You're saying that these games are being SHOVED down your throat? I've done a pretty damn good job at not playing Call of Duty since the original Modern Warfare and I'm still always playing some new, fun game. I don't see the same industry you do, I think.

    I can go on and on but your attitude is so heavily entrenched in this idea of "us versus them" and the elitism that goes along with it, like you are somehow more deserving or entitled than the rest of the world, that makes me think it'd be fruitless. Times change, get with it or get lost in the past, bud.

    I never said games could not change. I said people who don't know anything about the industry should not be the ones being in charge of those changes. And when I say something is being shoved on me, I mean me as a consumer. Yes, I don't have to buy them, and I don't. But I'm still sick of the constanst crap that is being thrown at me to buy because it's what the "common" consumer wants.

    And I'm sorry it is us vs them. Only reason they want in now is because it's suddenly profitable and cool. Just look at how actually geeky or nerdy girls have to keep fighting agaisnt models that pose with consoles and fake glasses just to make them have the "sexy geek" image. Are there sexy geeky girls out there? Hell yeah there are, but they have to fight out all the fakers that pretend to be them. We have to do the same thing.

    Also for other agurments about first coming into something that is interesting. Coming into something with a healthy interest is completly fine. However, asking someone more knowlage about said topic is a much better path to go instead of just buying whatever is on the "cool" list of whatever that might be. You also don't want to be coming into a intrerest and somehow pretending you know what you're talking about. Blocking unwanted people out and blocking EVERYONE out are two different things.

    Same with every medium. You like Dark Knight? Fine, but don't be boasting about how much of "batman nerd" you are. You like Avatar or Twlight? Fine, but don't go telling me what a "movie lover" you are. Etc etc.

    It's all about getting undiserables out who are making the bad choices by compaines seem like good ones.

    1. If you don't have to buy it, nothing is being shoved on you. Also, no one is "in charge of" change, change just happens. Super Mario Bros. changed things forever, but I don't think Nintendo could ever be labelled as "in charge of change."

    2. No, it is not "Us vs. Them", because as I addressed in my earlier reply to you, "them" IS "us." There is nothing that separates us from them. To think that outside groups "infiltrating" the gaming community is a bad thing is absolute lunacy. There are no "fakers", you either play games or you don't. And people who "pretend to be geeky but really aren't?" Doesn't matter. If people want to "fake" for any reason we can tell the difference, but if you play games or make games, ANY games at all, and you say you're part of the gaming community, you are not a "faker", simple as.

    3. "Batman Nerd" and "Movie Lover" are not "cool lists", they're just labels, they're arbitrary. Someone being a Batman savant and someone who likes The Dark Knight could have equal appreciation for Batman, and frankly, it doesn't matter. "Gamer" is just another arbitrary label. Frankly, I want a world where everyone can be a gamer. I want that label gone. If we exclude others from our community, we're just excluding ourselves from the rest of the world. There is so much out there that games haven't explored. A whole world outside of the "geek culture" you so adamantly worship, all of which could be explored by games if we let it happen. Don't you want to see more?

    Your elitism helps nothing. I'm not even going to bother going further, because given that you seem obsessed with wearing the "geek gamer" label as a badge of honor and don't want to see your precious little world changed or put beyond your own control, there's clearly no convincing you that anything better than your own preconceived notions of "retro games for nerds" could possibly exist. Someone who truly loves games would see their potential and look at the possibilities for improvement, be able to criticize them constructively and make some tough changes based on that, and want to share their love of games with EVERYONE, and make it so games FOR everyone could exist. Someone who truly loved games wouldn't want them to be nothing more than some exclusionary niche for geeks who just bully out everyone who wants to contribute and label them as "unwanted people." As far as I'm concerned, there are no "unwanted people" or "undesirables" to "keep out" of the gaming community. This is a form of artistic expression that belongs to the world, to all humanity, and everyone should be welcome to enjoy it, not just elitists who think that being "with it from the start" somehow has any significance.

    You don't love games. You may think you do, but you don't. If anybody is a "faker", it's people like you.

  • I'm so lost and confused trying to follow your logic on this one, I'm sorry. You're saying that these games are being SHOVED down your throat? I've done a pretty damn good job at not playing Call of Duty since the original Modern Warfare and I'm still always playing some new, fun game. I don't see the same industry you do, I think.

    I can go on and on but your attitude is so heavily entrenched in this idea of "us versus them" and the elitism that goes along with it, like you are somehow more deserving or entitled than the rest of the world, that makes me think it'd be fruitless. Times change, get with it or get lost in the past, bud.

    I never said games could not change. I said people who don't know anything about the industry should not be the ones being in charge of those changes. And when I say something is being shoved on me, I mean me as a consumer. Yes, I don't have to buy them, and I don't. But I'm still sick of the constanst crap that is being thrown at me to buy because it's what the "common" consumer wants.

    And I'm sorry it is us vs them. Only reason they want in now is because it's suddenly profitable and cool. Just look at how actually geeky or nerdy girls have to keep fighting agaisnt models that pose with consoles and fake glasses just to make them have the "sexy geek" image. Are there sexy geeky girls out there? Hell yeah there are, but they have to fight out all the fakers that pretend to be them. We have to do the same thing.

    Also for other agurments about first coming into something that is interesting. Coming into something with a healthy interest is completly fine. However, asking someone more knowlage about said topic is a much better path to go instead of just buying whatever is on the "cool" list of whatever that might be. You also don't want to be coming into a intrerest and somehow pretending you know what you're talking about. Blocking unwanted people out and blocking EVERYONE out are two different things.

    Same with every medium. You like Dark Knight? Fine, but don't be boasting about how much of "batman nerd" you are. You like Avatar or Twlight? Fine, but don't go telling me what a "movie lover" you are. Etc etc.

    It's all about getting undiserables out who are making the bad choices by compaines seem like good ones.

    1. If you don't have to buy it, nothing is being shoved on you. Also, no one is "in charge of" change, change just happens. Super Mario Bros. changed things forever, but I don't think Nintendo could ever be labelled as "in charge of change."

    2. No, it is not "Us vs. Them", because as I addressed in my earlier reply to you, "them" IS "us." There is nothing that separates us from them. To think that outside groups "infiltrating" the gaming community is a bad thing is absolute lunacy. There are no "fakers", you either play games or you don't. And people who "pretend to be geeky but really aren't?" Doesn't matter. If people want to "fake" for any reason we can tell the difference, but if you play games or make games, ANY games at all, and you say you're part of the gaming community, you are not a "faker", simple as.

    3. "Batman Nerd" and "Movie Lover" are not "cool lists", they're just labels, they're arbitrary. Someone being a Batman savant and someone who likes The Dark Knight could have equal appreciation for Batman, and frankly, it doesn't matter. "Gamer" is just another arbitrary label. Frankly, I want a world where everyone can be a gamer. I want that label gone. If we exclude others from our community, we're just excluding ourselves from the rest of the world. There is so much out there that games haven't explored. A whole world outside of the "geek culture" you so adamantly worship, all of which could be explored by games if we let it happen. Don't you want to see more?

    Your elitism helps nothing. I'm not even going to bother going further, because given that you seem obsessed with wearing the "geek gamer" label as a badge of honor and don't want to see your precious little world changed or put beyond your own control, there's clearly no convincing you that anything better than your own preconceived notions of "retro games for nerds" could possibly exist. Someone who truly loves games would see their potential and look at the possibilities for improvement, be able to criticize them constructively and make some tough changes based on that, and want to share their love of games with EVERYONE, and make it so games FOR everyone could exist. Someone who truly loved games wouldn't want them to be nothing more than some exclusionary niche for geeks who just bully out everyone who wants to contribute and label them as "unwanted people." As far as I'm concerned, there are no "unwanted people" or "undesirables" to "keep out" of the gaming community. This is a form of artistic expression that belongs to the world, to all humanity, and everyone should be welcome to enjoy it, not just elitists who think that being "with it from the start" somehow has any significance.

    You don't love games. You may think you do, but you don't. If anybody is a "faker", it's people like you.


    1. Yes, people are in charge in changes. E.A is making changes trying to everything they can to kill the used game busniess with online passports and the like. If they common consumer continues without a fight, it would become permenit change. That's not a good change.

    2. Yes there are fakers out there. You just haven't found them yet.

    3.What presious things are out in the "mainstream" that are really to look forward to? The things outside of our culture (movies, music, games, etc.) are trivial in most matters. Unless your talking about something different. I'm a little confused as to what your getting at there. You can explore as much artisic creation as you want without having to pander to masses to get there.

    4. You assume that I only love retro games and think they are the greatest. You would be incorrect in that fact. I love things that are current (even if it's hard for me to keep up with them), however just because I rant about most of it being bland garbage to pander to the masses does not mean I think that all retro games are somehow always going to be better. I love my bioshocks, my mass effects, my limbos, just as much as i love my classic games. It's the content of the piece that's important, not the year that it was made.

    5. If you really think there are no "undesiriables" in any medium, then you are navie. Hell even in non geek culture there are people that should not be involed in something and just makes other people involed look worse then they are.

  • I dunno, we all came to this medium fresh once upon a time ago. Those happy memories we have of our youth with games? Those memories of those wonderful games we played? Those are memories of us learning about a new medium!

    The interesting thing about this is that... Based on my memories, and frankly the casual scene, I fundamentally disagree with the method the mainstream seems to be taking accessibility. As far as I can tell, people who are on the peripherary of the medium aren't put off by difficulty, provided it's "How do I beat this level?" style rather than "How do I shoot?" style. Casual gaming looks more like Tetris - Games that go on indefinitely until you inevitably lose - rather than any difficulty of 'you will inevitably win' that AAA gaming seems to go for and make them easier each time.

    Besides which, brutal difficulty didn't put me off games when I was 4, why would I assume it would put off someone now?

    Basically, I agree that we should be encouraging rather than dismissive of new players, I just disagree that we become accepting by making games that are easy to beat rather than just easy to start playing. (Which you didn't express, but I often see implied when people discuss making games more accessible)

  • 5. If you really think there are no "undesiriables" in any medium, then you are navie. Hell even in non geek culture there are people that should not be involed in something and just makes other people involed look worse then they are.

    Yes, yes there are...

    Casual gaming looks more like Tetris - Games that go on indefinitely until you inevitably lose - rather than any difficulty of 'you will inevitably win' that AAA gaming seems to go for and make them easier each time.

    A lot of times that's more due to their purpose, marketing model, and such - rather than because we think that's what the players 'like', you know? I agree that difficulty is not instantly as off-putting as some companies seem to think it might be to the casual market, but there are other reasons for the 'indefinite game model' besides just accessibility.

    Basically, I agree that we should be encouraging rather than dismissive of new players, I just disagree that we become accepting by making games that are easy to beat rather than just easy to start playing. (Which you didn't express, but I often see implied when people discuss making games more accessible)

    Oh agreed, I mean difficulty in games isn't off-putting by nature, only when it's instantly alienating.
    Making a game accessible doesn't mean just making it 'easier' it's more about how you chart the learning curve.

Join The Discussion: