|
by Fullofkittens 12/11/2005, 8:44am PST |
|
 |
|
 |
|
Q. Thank you for jump-starting a discussion about the relative artistic and critical merit of video games as compared to film and books. I do take issue when you argue that video games can never have the merit of a great film or novel. You say: "There is a structural reason for that: Video games by their nature require player choices, which is the opposite of the strategy of serious film and literature, which requires authorial control."
Where you see a flaw, I see promise. Arguing that games are inherently inferior because books and movies are better at telling stories and leading us through an author-driven experience is begging the question. It's like saying that photography is better than painting because photos make more accurate visual records.
The invention of photography sparked a crisis in the world of painting: "Why should we paint if pictures can do it better?" But then painters figured out that there were lots of other things that they could do, that cameras can't. Now we see an enormous explosion of creativity in the world of painting. And another different explosion in the world of photography.
We agree that games are inherently different from films and books. I believe they are at their worst when they try to mimic films and books, and at their best when they exploit this difference to create experiences that films, books, and all the other art forms cannot. No one criticizes sculpture for failing to tell a story as well as a good movie.
Many people would agree with you that there aren't yet any games that rival the best films or books that you care to list. Game makers are only just beginning to understand that games are not films/books with action sequences. I think that you'll see that the more we work that out, the more we will find ways of creating meaningful artistic works that are unlike anything anyone's seen before.
Tim Maly, designer, Capybara Games, Toronto
A. If or when that happens, I hope I will approach it with an open mind. This debate has taken on a life of its own. In countless e-mails and on a dozen message boards, I've found that most of the professionals involved in video games are intelligent and thoughtful people like yourself. A large number of the video game players, alas, tell me "you suck" or inform me that I am too old. At 63, I prefer such synonyms as "wise" and "experienced."
Today I received a message from Professor David Bordwell (retired) of the University of Wisconsin at Madison, who is generally thought of as the leading scholarly writer on film; the textbooks he has written by himself and with Kristin Thompson are used in a majority of the world's film classrooms. What he said was intriguing on a practical level:
"The last dissertation I'm directing is on video games as they compare to film. The guy is bright, so we let him do it. But he brought his games and game platform to my house to give me some experience on this medium. I lasted through 15 minutes of 'Simpson's Road Rage,' largely because my coordination is so poor. Even if I got good on the controls, what keeps me away is the level of commitment. The idea of spending hours at this boggles my mind.
"My student told me that the most sophisticated games require up to 100 hours to master. In 100 hours we can watch two Bollywood films or 50-plus Hollywood/ foreign features or 80 B-films or 750 Warner Bros. cartoons. Depending on how fast you read, in the same interval you can probably finish reading 20-30 books. Not to mention 25-35 operas or 100-120 symphonies. And that's just for one game! On the basis of my very limited experience, and given my tastes (a big part of the issue here), the problem with video games is that they're too much like life -- too much commitment for thin and often frustrating results."
"In response to your assertion that video games could potentially be an art form, I can only respond thusly: Film professors think that movies are better than video games... who can argue? "
As a side note, film professors read really fucking fast, and like to end their email messages with cries for help. |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
Ebert stands firmly on the "not art" side, dreams. by Fussbett 11/17/2005, 6:20pm PST 
It doesn't help that a retard is posing the question to him by FA-BI-OH! 11/17/2005, 6:30pm PST 
Well, Ebert himself gave Spirits Within 3 1/2 stars NT by Siskel and Ebert 11/17/2005, 6:34pm PST 
It's not really fair to make a one-to-one comparison with films or books... by Fullofkittens 11/17/2005, 8:26pm PST 
There's also the fact that Ebert is a fuck ass. by Fussbett 11/17/2005, 11:27pm PST 
Re: There's also the fact that Ebert is a fuck ass. by casual observer 11/18/2005, 11:27am PST 
Fussett doesn't deserve credit, FoK does. NT by casual observer 11/18/2005, 11:29am PST 
I don't get the "message" of this post by FA-BI-OH! 11/18/2005, 12:23pm PST 
Summary: There was no "message" in my post, just like everything else I post. by Observing Casually 11/18/2005, 1:53pm PST 
perhaps the solution is to stop posting NT by FA-BI-OH! 11/18/2005, 8:51pm PST 
Re: There's also the fact that Ebert is a fuck ass. by Creexul :( 11/18/2005, 12:27pm PST 
Re: There's also the fact that Ebert is a fuck ass. by Souffle of Pain 11/19/2005, 3:21pm PST 
EBERT CLARIFIES by Fussbett 11/30/2005, 3:40am PST 
Re: EBERT CLARIFIES by I need clarification 11/30/2005, 12:58pm PST 
Re: EBERT CLARIFIES by jeep 12/09/2005, 5:24pm PST 
Well I have no idea what you're talking about by I need clarification 12/09/2005, 5:39pm PST 
I'm standing right here! (in the background, but still in the frame!) by Alfred Hitchcock 12/11/2005, 4:49pm PST 
Yeah, and whatever happened to me? by David Lean 12/11/2005, 4:49pm PST 
Hey guys, what's going on over here? by Howard Hawks 12/11/2005, 4:49pm PST 
You fucking bastards. Always leaving me out. by John Ford 12/11/2005, 4:50pm PST 
Hello. I directed Rosemary's Baby AND Chinatown! by Roman Polanski 12/11/2005, 4:50pm PST 
I didn't do much of anything, I guess. by Francis Ford Coppola 12/11/2005, 4:50pm PST 
... by Charlie Chaplin 12/11/2005, 4:51pm PST 
What'd you just say? by Billy Wilder 12/11/2005, 4:52pm PST 
Ah, leave him alone, Billy by Francois Truffaut 12/11/2005, 4:53pm PST 
Bonjour, Frenchie! by Orson Welles 12/11/2005, 4:53pm PST 
Fuck, that fucking Jeep guy is a MORON by Coen Bros 12/11/2005, 4:54pm PST 
Hell, even I made at least once great movie. by Spike Lee 12/11/2005, 4:54pm PST 
Boy, things have changed since my day... by DW Griffith 12/11/2005, 4:55pm PST 
Speaking of change, intellectual montage anyone? by Sergei M. Eisenstein 12/11/2005, 4:56pm PST 
I can get behind that by Sergio Leone 12/11/2005, 4:58pm PST 
John Carpenter makes the list, but I don't?? by George Cukor 12/11/2005, 4:59pm PST 
Half of Kurosawa but NONE of me? by Woody Allen 12/11/2005, 5:03pm PST 
You're all fucking faggots by Kenneth Anger 12/11/2005, 5:24pm PST 
I think we can all agree on the fact that NT by Jeep is always horribly wrong 12/12/2005, 12:34pm PST 
Also, a little point about the Russians: by motherfuckerfoodeater 12/12/2005, 1:13am PST 
Re: Also, a little point about the Russians: by Don Pistacho 08/17/2007, 1:31pm PDT 
Re: Also, a little point about the Russians: by motherfuckerfoodeater 08/18/2007, 1:50pm PDT 
In fairness, this is a good point. by motherfuckerfoodeater 12/12/2005, 1:09am PST 
Re: EBERT CLARIFIES by Andrew 11/30/2005, 2:59pm PST 
Re: EBERT CLARIFIES by Don Pistacho 08/17/2007, 1:35pm PDT 
Was it Rescue Rangers Hentai? Because I think I played that one. NT by Jerry Whorebach 08/17/2007, 2:39pm PDT 
A local Big Lots has that game for $3 by Johnny Merzbow 08/17/2007, 3:21pm PDT 
Hey, remember this thread? by Fussbett 06/09/2007, 1:15am PDT 
Re: Hey, remember this thread? by motherfuckerfoodeater 06/09/2007, 1:35am PDT 
Fussbett responds (!?) by Fullofkittens 12/11/2005, 8:44am PST 
Re: Fussbett responds (!?) by Ice Cream Jonsey 12/11/2005, 1:42pm PST 
Addendum: Ebert on games, circa 1994 by Siskel and Ebert 12/22/2005, 12:45am PST 
Holy shit. by Lizard_King 12/22/2005, 12:08pm PST 
I know that we have to hate Penny Arcade because Jhoh misspells it and by because they run a charity BUT 06/09/2007, 2:03am PDT 
Re: I know that we have to hate Penny Arcade because Jhoh misspells it and by Jhoh Cable o_O 06/09/2007, 3:08am PDT 
And I said back in 2003 that they should publish twice a week by Ray of Light 06/09/2007, 5:45am PDT 
Boy I hope this one isn't too dated! by Jhoh Cable o_O 06/09/2007, 11:21am PDT 
Likewise! by The New York Times 06/09/2007, 1:32pm PDT 
Re: Likewise! by Jhoh Cable o_O 06/09/2007, 2:02pm PDT 
Re: I know that we have to hate Penny Arcade because Jhoh misspells it and by Fussbett 06/09/2007, 7:19am PDT 
Clive Barker says Ebert wrong. Ebert disagrees. by Fussbett 07/23/2007, 1:15am PDT 
In a democracy, anything can grow up to be art, provided it's popular enough. NT by Jerry Whorebach 07/23/2007, 2:51am PDT 
Ebert scores some youth-culture cred with his choice of reading material. by Jerry Whorebach 07/23/2007, 3:59am PDT 
I forgot to make fun of that. by Fussbett 07/23/2007, 9:58am PDT 
Re: Clive Barker says Ebert wrong. Ebert disagrees. by Belbo Jacopo 07/23/2007, 7:10am PDT 
Re: Clive Barker says Ebert wrong. Ebert disagrees. by motherfuckerfoodeater 07/23/2007, 9:25am PDT 
But Ebert must know what good art is because he's a movie critic. O_____________ NT by Jhoh Clbbl O_____O 07/23/2007, 9:59am PDT 
I tried to watch that one time because Polonius was Bill Murray. BIG MISTAKE 8( by Jerry Whorebach 07/23/2007, 5:35pm PDT 
But not Broken Flowers. I actually really liked that one. NT by Jerry Whorebach 07/23/2007, 5:49pm PDT 
|
|