Yeah and the only cool band in the world is Muse and everything that went before is shit… oh no I haven’t actually checked any other bands out or even thought about the history of music…..

By Tom on 07.06.07 1:45 pm

I’m sorry, he’s lost me. Someone get him LARPing or something then get back to me.

By Pete C on 07.06.07 3:35 pm

It’s a toss up whether the actual post shows less knowledge about videogames or traditional games.

KG

By Kieron Gillen on 07.06.07 3:39 pm

I got four points into the list and then I realised I need more alcohol before I can tackle the rest of it.

By Sören Höglund on 07.06.07 4:19 pm

[…] �חרונים. כל כך במהירות, עד שכמעט פספסתי את הפוסט הזה של קיירון גילן, עיתונאי המשחקים החביב עלי (כ� […]

By העולם על פי אינטל » ארכיון הבלוג » מי אמר “משחקים”? on 07.06.07 5:09 pm

The premise of the post is interesting–in order to create successful video games you do have to exploit what makes them unique.

But there are so many false dichotomies you could choke a horse. It’s a dialectic of idiocy.

Well, to be fair, it’s a dialectic of video game illiteracy. But still.

By Ryan on 07.06.07 5:31 pm

That’s impressively deranged nonsense they’ve come up with.

By xagarath on 07.06.07 8:59 pm

Allright. Nice challenge.

1. “Computer games are more intimate than other games. Because you play them alone.” Not true if sex and sex-related forms of play are considered. Sex is a game you play with more than one person. And it is extremely intimate.

2. “Stories are more important than rules.” Not true because it only seems that way. The stories are a sort of mental lubricant to make it easier for the player to enjoy the rules (which might otherwise appear as pure sadism). But what the player is really enjoying, perhaps subconsciously, is functioning within the ruleset.

3. “Immersion: computer games allow you to step into their worlds.” Refuting this is related to the previous. It is only in your imagination that you are part of a virtual world. What you are really immersed in is the game system. And that is the same with all games, digital or otherwise. It’s a kind of mathematical, metaphysical pleasure that goes much deeper than the carnal pleasures that a simulation might bring.

4. “Computer games are not just for children. Traditional games generally are considered so.” This may have been true in the past, when people looked down on sports and gambling. Or perhaps some stuffy intellectuals still find it all “bread and games”. But for any modern person, playing games or looking at them is a fine adult form of entertainment.

5. “Computer games are considered art while other games are not.” Well, computer games are not really considered art, are they? Some people might wish for this, but we’re not quite on the same level as cinema and music, are we? And some games, while perhaps not art, are still considered highly respectable. Marcel DUchamp gave up on making art in favour of playing chess, remember?

6. “Players as authors: computer games are less predictable.” This is not unique to computer games. Children make up games and change the rules while they play. Even the rules of card and board games can be changed as long as all players agree on the new rules. And my son and daughter make their own Pokémon cards!

7. “Aesthetics are more important than systems.” This is also related to point 2. The beauty of computer games is only an expression of the beauty of their inner workings. The real beauty is inside. The perfectly balanced constructions of forces and counter-forces are just aching for beautifully rendered landscapes and characters. Traditional games might be aesthetically minimal but they too can be stunningly beautiful in a very sophisticated way.

8. “The social context of computer games is more persistent.” This is only true if you see traditional games in isolation, per session. But there are many championships, explicit or otherwise, that bind large or small groups together for long or short periods of time. A game of chess doesn’t stop at the checkmate. There is always a rematch. If not now, then later.

9. “You can’t lose a computer game. You can only win. Or stop playing.” I don’t consider this a very important distinction. In practice it’s the same. And in many games, sports in particular, giving up is equated with losing. It’s one of the game’s rules that you lose when you give up. That rule is implicit in computer games as well.

10. “Cheating is allowed in computer games while it breaks traditional ones.” Designers of neither like it when players cheat. Even if they give them socalled “cheat codes”, these don’t really allow the player to cheat, they simply change the parameters of the game’s rules. And when traditional games are played in the company of friends, cheating also often makes the game more fun for everyone involved.

That should do the trick.

By Michael Samyn on 07.06.07 9:22 pm

Ahh, I’ll throw in my initial reactions as a gamer of all sorts* (yes, very sad).

[quotes taken from Michael’s post above. I’m cheap like that]

[Also, note that there is one get out clause they can call for a lot of their arguments - that ‘real’ games don’t include modern (i.e. 20th C.+) board games. Just the older abstracts - card and strategy games.]

1. “Computer games are more intimate than other games. Because you play them alone.”
a - Computer games, say hello to single-player RPG’s and Choose Your Own Adventure games
b - Computer games, say hello to Wargames and Grand Strategy games, or any other longform board game

2. “Stories are more important than rules.”

a - i. Stories, meet Tetris. And most puzzle, fighting or computer wargames. And a variety of other titles which don’t take them seriously (did you play Serious Sam for the story?)
a - ii. ‘but fighting games often have background plots! And puzzle games! And wargames are set in wars!’. True. So do most board games.
a - iii. ‘ah, but you MAKE stories as you play the games - battle stories etc.’. Yep. Board Games also. See how easy this is?

b - i. even if every game was Deus Ex, consider that there are many story-led board games, such as RPG’s. Which brings me to the next issue:
b - ii. games like Deus Ex. Where do they get their story-based structure from? RPG’s. Adventure games? RPG’s. Computer RPG’s? Um, the clue’s in the title here. The story-led computer game first came about from mimicking RPG’s.

c - if it was really the case, why would we define game genres by their mechanics, not the literary sphere they most resemble?

3. “Immersion: computer games allow you to step into their worlds.”

Really? Gosh. Pretty much the same response as 1 here - RPG’s, book-games, again. And on the other hand, a lot of computer games don’t pride themselves on this aspect.

4. “Computer games are not just for children. Traditional games generally are considered so.”

a - Uh-huh. Going back to very traditional games - Chess. Go. Abstract strategy games in general. Poker. Gambling-based card-games in general.

b - and the modern aspect - wargames. Eurogames. Hell, a huge proportion of games in general aren’t family games.

and c - the irony that, in fact, computer games are seen from the outside in the exact same way as this chappy sees board games - as being for children. We know that they aren’t all directed that way /because we’re on the inside/.

5. “Computer games are considered art while other games are not.”

Eh? See above, pretty much. Games like Go, Sudoku are praised for their artistry by the outside as much, if not more than, computer games like Ico. Internally, both forms have their games praised for artistry, but neither form regularly receives such attention from the outside.

6. “Players as authors: computer games are less predictable.”

a - Most board games actively promote alternative, player-created variants - this was particulary true in the 60’s-80’s when game magazines regularly printed such rulesets.

b - what Michael said. Also, RPG’s. Again.

c - again, so many computer games offer little-to-no real freedom. Fighting games. Puzzle games. Most FPS’s. Strategy games. None of them offer more than the average board game in terms of freedom and ‘creatorship’.

7. “Aesthetics are more important than systems.”

a - Depends on the computer game. So many ugly strategy/wargames, and cookie-cutter graphics in titles of all genres. Yes, this usually counts against them, but /the exact same thing is true of board games/…

b - …and so many board games sell on their aesthetic. Go and Chess are clear ones, but games like Carcassonne have become famous for their elegant little figures, known affectionately as ‘meeples’.

8. “The social context of computer games is more persistent.”

a - RPG’s. Again. Crikey.

b - game series - Magic: The Gathering, Blue Moon Chronicles, the many Carcassonnes and Settlers games…

c - what Michael said.

9. “You can’t lose a computer game. You can only win. Or stop playing.”

That’s such a flawed statement I can’t even be bothered to argue it.

10. “Cheating is allowed in computer games while it breaks traditional ones.”

Ah, the most interesting issue, one I’ve seen brought up before in a different context. Short response - the cheating he talks of is not really cheating, just unlocking secrets. However, I’ll deal with the two issues seperately:

a - ‘real’ cheating is generally extant with computer games through hacking - from savegame editing to full-on game altering hacks in online games. The equivalent in other games comes from non-game-sponsored bluffing, hidden pieces/cards etc., moving the opponents’ pieces/your own out of turn, loaded dice, letting yourself ‘undo’/reroll in solitary games etc. There is no real difference between these two forms.

b - this is a bit difference. Some board games share the ‘allowed’ cheating to a degree, condoning bluffing, for example. However, they do tend to lack the ’secret’ cheats and easter-eggs of computer games (though the latter can exist in RPG’s/more storyled games). This is a notable difference. Similarly, another notable difference comes in the way that board games tend /not/ to be played on a screen, or keyboard.

Er, that’s it. I’m probably missing many other arguments, and possibly being unfair on them in some cases. Ah well. Either way, I’m not exactly convinced by their arguments.

*except CCG’s and MMOG’s, for the same reason - too time-consuming and expensive.

By wiper on 07.06.07 11:19 pm

Sudoku Puzzles Online…

I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but it sounds interesting…

By Sudoku Puzzles Online on 10.15.07 7:00 am