Comments on: Just a game

By: Sparky Clarkson

Sparky Clarkson — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 12:39:02 +0000

So, I ended up elaborating my view at my site. On the off chance you are interested, you can take a look and call me an idiot.

By: Dan Bruno

Dan Bruno — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:28:06 +0000

Sparky: I think we’re on the same page and disagreeing on semantics. I was trying to sidestep the “are games art?” question, and focus instead on why some people are not interested in discussing games seriously, whatever we consider them to be. Naturally there is a lot of overlap in those discussions, and I could have been clearer about what I was getting at.

Daniel: Thanks for the kind words. Your analysis about negativity in the gaming community resonates with me, and I suspect that part of my disappointment stems from my remove from those things. I avoid most mainstream game reviews, I’m primarily a solo game player, and I don’t subscribe to the fanboy culture. It seems that I haven’t taken in quite as much pessimism as the average gamer.

By: Daniel Primed

Daniel Primed — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 13:30:35 +0000

Firstly I must complement you on your fantastic blog, you write a very pleasing read. I also feel very strongly on this matter. I think that a significant contributor to these rather uninspired opinions is perhaps the overlying influence of pessimism culture towards games. I’ve written some thoughts down on this before. To summarise though, I feel that the reviewing structure of games (with lack of room for critical thought and focus on negatives), dominance of competitve play (and lack of co-operative play) as well as the negative dismissal of subjetivity and fanboy culture all condition us as to how we feel about games within a community context.

Well that is just my overally bloated attempt to justify the situation.

By: Sparky Clarkson

Sparky Clarkson — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 02:41:51 +0000

Abbott’s discussion of the sports simulators is very interesting, but in my view it would continue to make sense and be interesting whether we believed those games were art or not. By a similar token, we can dissect whether and why a particular house is warm and homey without taking any stand on whether architecture and homebuilding are art. However, if we were to take the design and materials of a house to be a commentary on the concept of “homey-ness” then we could not legitimately do so without believing that the architect and builder were creating art. The idea that a particular piece of software is more than just a game is not a prerequisite for an illuminating discussion. It may well be that Halo is art; because this proposition does not admit of proof, the only test of it is to see if using it as a premise leads us anywhere interesting (and I’ll certainly be reading some of the articles linked here so I can find out). My experience is that there are some games where that premise is a dead end, so I view these as “just games”.

While I accept the proposition that there are such games, I agree with the other commenters here that “it’s just a game” is not any kind of argument; it is especially not a rebuttal to intelligent analysis.

By: Dan Bruno

Dan Bruno — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 17:45:19 +0000

Yeah, I see those comments coming from the same IP address. I’m on to you guys. ;-)

Glad you’re enjoying the posts, Fashigady, and Ben, keep plugging away at that thesis!

By: Ben Abraham

Ben Abraham — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 06:13:11 +0000

I appreciate what Roger Travis is doing with his attempts to compare and contrast games like Halo with many of the classics, but I’m a bit undecided about it, to be honest. I kinda like to think that there are certain unique qualities about games that are un-reproducible in other mediums, so I’ll do a Michael Abbott and sit on the fence with this one (just kiddin’ Michael =D).

Getting back to your dislike of the argument of “It’s just a game”, I have to say that I strongly concur with the view that it’s generally a cop out. As has been said, there really isn’t anything wrong with not wanting to interrogate a game for its deep meaning or authorial statement, but just because many people may not want to does not render the project invalid.

That would be my only concern with much of it’s use - that it is somehow intended to “shut up” people like yourself, who genuinely are interested in taking apart (lovingly) these often amazing new (and old) games.

Thanks for the link-love Fashi, I appreciate that you’re keeping abreast of my work. ;-)

By: Fashigady

Fashigady — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 05:51:24 +0000

@Sparky Clarkson
If I understand what you’re saying, you believe that not all games are “just games” but that some are, and that “Halo is just a game”. But I would argue that no game is “just a game” - so long as there is sufficient complexity to be analysed. Any ‘text’ is a product of the creator(s) and their society and values, but even without taking this into account (whether because you think its wrong or otherwise), we can still look at videogames and discuss how they work, what they may or may not be saying and simply what we think of them. A good example of what I’m talking about is Ben Abraham’s thesis on Halo 2.

@Dan Bruno
Another great post, keep ‘em coming X)

By: Dan Bruno

Dan Bruno — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 04:35:17 +0000

Well, to play devil's advocate with the examples you gave, here are two pieces from Michael Abbott about sports games which I found pretty reasonable. I don't think a game has to be social satire, have a philosophical underpinning, or otherwise rest on "big ideas" to deserve intelligent, reasoned discussion. Or, put another way, there is room for criticism of both Finnegans Wake and The Da Vinci Code, regardless of their comparative artistic merit.

By: Sparky Clarkson

Sparky Clarkson — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 03:11:21 +0000

I have to disagree with you; I think we can say with relative certainty that some games really are “just” games, although we may disagree on some particular examples. I’m sure you could write a treatise on the themes of Madden ‘08 or Nascar ‘09 if you really wanted, but doubtless almost everyone would find it a stretch. Of course I’m willing to listen to anyone’s try at the ring, but it’s not unfair to go in with your own opinions. It would take more to convince me of Halo’s artistic (as opposed to artisanal, which I do not dispute) merit than say, Portal or Half-Life 2. Then again, my brother and I have had almost this exact argument about Katamari Damacy, so there you go.

I agree that plenty of people with actual lives just want some mindless entertainment. I think, however, that most of them would be significantly less dedicated than the forumers to the proposition that games are JUST entertainment.

By: Dan Bruno

Dan Bruno — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 02:08:43 +0000

Thanks for your comments, guys!

xiong: I agree that it’s not “wrong” to want purely entertainment out of video games, and I don’t intend to change anyone’s mind; I’m just personally disappointed that more people are not interested in probing deeper. Maybe I have a skewed view of the gaming community because I spend so much time reading people like Leigh and Stephen, but I thought there would be more interest in critical discussion. Perhaps there isn’t.

Grobstein: Very well said. I don’t think waiting for gamers to mature is enough, though; as I said back when the Resident Evil 5 trailer was making headlines, the level of discourse isn’t gonna raise itself. We need to engage in critical discussion ourselves. I didn’t think we were doing that badly, but evidently we can do better.

Sparky: I’m wary of making absolute judgements about a game’s worthiness for further study. To take one of your examples, Professor Roger Travis of the blog Living Epic has tried to link Halo to the Homeric oral tradition. (Whether he is successful is of course open for debate, but it would be a shame to preemptively dismiss his work.)

Regarding your last paragraph: In my experience, there are just as many people (perhaps more) who want to relax after a hard day’s work with something mindless and easily digested, whether it’s a television show, a video game, or a beer. I doubt the games-as-pure-entertainment crowd is exclusive to forum posters; as Grobstein says, I think it’s endemic to the gaming community as a whole.