• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Are video games shallow?

Heyo

Veteran Member
I'm not a gamer but I might know a thing or two about a medium that had, for a long time, the same problem of being (or being perceived as) shallow: comix. They were smut, a danger to the youth, cheap, worthless.
And, to be honest, most were. There were some classics that today are seen as early masterpieces, Little Nemo, Felix the Cat and some which are or aren't comix. (Wilhelm Busch is considered illustrated poetry or, maybe, a precursor to comix?)
The game world has them, too. Pong, Rouge and Pacman will always be "classics".
But then came a long streak of cheaply produced mass products with no artistic value. Formulaic stories, exchangeable graphics, just the same as the one that sold before. That goes for comix as for games.
Comix only really got out of it with ambitious story tellers who intentionally didn't produce for a mass market (and subsequently weren't called comix any more but graphic novels). I don't know enough about games to say if there are graphic novels of gaming.
 

MNoBody

Well-Known Member
mostly the comix and games are shallow due to the economy they are expected to produce $$ in
a fickle market that must be courted and wooed and then quickly forgets when the new love comes to town next week or month...
tough crowd and tough ecosystem to thrive in
so games and comix get cranked out as product....did they explore the full potential....nope, not unless it was to be doled out by the spoonful later
intellectual property 'laws', are also another matter, since they have to constantly make something new that nobody has a claim on so they don't get sued...and then protect what they made so they get paid.
so instead of really thriving, the modding community cranks out basic stupid tweeks for games that the average consumer would like and not much else......., and exploring what a program can do isn't designing a new best seller which would impress the shareholders at the quarterlies
lots of potential and some games are superb in what they are capable of doing.....
too bad its typically about killing, theft and deception as the top 3 themes explored.
[ and i just recently finished playing through farcry 4]
 

HonestJoe

Well-Known Member
Is it just because games are a new medium? Can they be explored in the same manner we fight over say Shakespeare?
Or is this simply their fate?
I think there are a few distinctions to be made on the definitions. I'd argue that literature is a subset of "written art" (for want of a better term) that is somewhat equivalent to the indies games being a subset of games in general. Anything deemed literature is more intellectual by definition.

That said, I think there is also a distinction between writing and visual media (games, film, TV), because the former is generally about saying something while the latter is about doing something. Obviously writing can be mindless and other media very thoughtful but I think writing naturally lends itself more to that kind of thing so will have a greater proportion.

There is certainly a lot more thought and art that goes in to many games than is often given credit. This is especially true of the carefully crafted narrative games, which often have deeper and more complex (in the good way) plots as any film or TV show and even as many books. Part of the issues is that the casual observer (and even many players) can and will overlook that in the face of the more immediate and visceral elements. You can't really look past the story element of a novel because that is the novel.

I think one area of this where games are unique is the player input, especially with the more free-form and creative games. Even if a creator didn't intend an commentary, players can create it themselves in the way they play and, in many games, present that to other players too.

So, I'd never doubt that games are an art form but they're a new an often unique art form. They are discussed in a similar manner to Shakespeare and will continue to be in the future but that discussion will have it's own aspects, quirks and conclusions.
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
Hmm, so is it the opposite? Are games deeper than other mediums because they have extra expectations of them?

Not necessarily deeper, but getting all aspects of a game right is arguably harder than getting all aspects of a movie or novel right.

The depth of the game, movie, book, etc., seems to me more often--but not always by any means--a function of the artist's ability and vision than it is the medium itself.

Irrelevant but I prefer GTAIV over V. Though I don’t know why.

GTA IV has the best story in the series, in my opinion. I prefer its darker and more mature tone.
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
EDIT: I just read the Wikipedia article on it. Wiki seems to imply that Bioshock is more or less on the literary level of a Medieval morality play. That can't be accurate, can it?

I would say it is inaccurate. There are so many gameplay-dependent storytelling elements in BioShock that it has to be played to be properly analyzed and critiqued; a Wikipedia article or any other written description won't accurately sum it up or do it justice.

For instance, the game almost doesn't have a single cutscene--where the game pauses and cuts to a rendered sequence much like in a movie--and instead relies on aspects of the game world to tell its story. This includes details as small as individual objects inside rooms in the game.

It does touch on why objectivism doesn't work, and given the interactive nature of a video game, I think it uniquely does so, even. The writer of its plot (Ken Levine) has a degree in liberal arts and is well-known for his story-driven games, so I think if anyone can use a video game as an art form, it's someone like him.
 

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
I'm not a gamer but I might know a thing or two about a medium that had, for a long time, the same problem of being (or being perceived as) shallow: comix. They were smut, a danger to the youth, cheap, worthless.
And, to be honest, most were. There were some classics that today are seen as early masterpieces, Little Nemo, Felix the Cat and some which are or aren't comix. (Wilhelm Busch is considered illustrated poetry or, maybe, a precursor to comix?)
The game world has them, too. Pong, Rouge and Pacman will always be "classics".
But then came a long streak of cheaply produced mass products with no artistic value. Formulaic stories, exchangeable graphics, just the same as the one that sold before. That goes for comix as for games.
Comix only really got out of it with ambitious story tellers who intentionally didn't produce for a mass market (and subsequently weren't called comix any more but graphic novels). I don't know enough about games to say if there are graphic novels of gaming.
Well I suppose the story and characters Red Dead 2 are still being discussed ad nauseam. So there’s ambition to be seen. But there is the “crunch.” Devs being made to work unnecessarily long hours in the final lead up to launch that can arguably affect whatever ambition the devs had in the first place. (Not to mention being rather ethically dubious at best.)
 
Last edited:

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
Not necessarily deeper, but getting all aspects of a game right is arguably harder than getting all aspects of a movie or novel right.

The depth of the game, movie, book, etc., seems to me more often--but not always by any means--a function of the artist's ability and vision than it is the medium itself..

Hmm that is true. Games are more complex, “structure wise” but they can be mindless or engaging.


GTA IV has the best story in the series, in my opinion. I prefer its darker and more mature tone.
I wholeheartedly agree. Although I do take issue with it’s lack of options compared to its brethren. I like the RPG lite elements of San Andreas, which feels like a step backwards with IV doing away with them. And in comparison to V, IV feels almost empty in terms of customisable options. Also I just slightly prefer SA overall, but that’s probably more to do with nostalgia than any legitimate reason. I mean I literally grew up playing SA. On multiple systems no less.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
Well I suppose the story and characters Red Dead 2 are still being discussed ad nauseam. So there’s ambition to be seen. But there is the “crunch.” Devs being made to work unnecessarily long hours in the final lead up to launch that can arguably affect whatever ambition the devs had in the first place. (Not to mention being rather ethically dubious at best.)
Is there anyone like a director on a developers team?

It may be that there are too many (different, uncoordinated) individuals involved with a game. A novel is written by one person, a comic is written by one writer and, under the writers direction, an artist, inker and maybe a letterer, a film is, in principle, the work of the director.
Games? I know of Sid Meier's Civilization. Any other that are "directed by"?
 

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
Is there anyone like a director on a developers team?

It may be that there are too many (different, uncoordinated) individuals involved with a game. A novel is written by one person, a comic is written by one writer and, under the writers direction, an artist, inker and maybe a letterer, a film is, in principle, the work of the director.
Games? I know of Sid Meier's Civilization. Any other that are "directed by"?
Yes, typically there will be a director in the dev or production team. Sort of like the lead overseer who shapes the overall project. It’s just that they may also be responsible for other aspects like production, design or other developer duties. It sort of depends on the game and how large it is.
Unlike something like a movie, a video game is typically expected to be at minimum an 8 hour experience. Something more ambitious like Red Dead 2 promises at least I think like a 10 - 12 hour story campaign and over 100 hours of (optional) original content. Not to mention literally hundreds of customisable options, from hair and moustache/beard length, to clothes to horses to admittedly an extremely intricate clothing/saddle/bag design option list. You can even craft your own unique weapons.
But an indie game like say Undertale, that relies on more basic design choices for aesthetic and artistic value may only offer like 8-10 hours of game play and a few options. But involves a much smaller collaborative team than a AAA title (gaming equivalent to a big Hollywood movie.)
 

Yerda

Veteran Member
I'm not an avid gamer but I seek from games what I seek from films, books, paintings, musics. Entertainment and something to fixate on for a short while. If it moves me in some way then that's a bonus.
 
Top