I think it's completely insulting that a game covering a recent event gets shunned into oblivion while bands write songs about the war in Iraq (most being against it, with no means of support) and it tops charts.
Film and television are just the same. But when a game comes along with the purpose of educating and honoring those that gave the sacrifice, it's beat down because one must play it?
Disgusting.
This is a note to self - watch the video when you get home from work.
I've seen Daniel Floyd's stuff before, and I've always really liked it. This particular video is really, really good.
I want to see Six Days in Falluja released so bad. They make an excellent point when they say that the battle is a very significant one in American history... and no one knows about it.
So many people talk about the potrayal of video games as art. When will we have our 'citizen kane'? The more I think about that question, the more I realize that we don't need a citizen kane. We already have it. As this video details, what we need are developers, publishers, and designers who are not afraid to talk about that which is taboo, and to never back down in the face of scrutiny. We have to show the world what we're capable of, and that we care about more that big boobs, guns, explosions, and toilet humor.
It'll happen eventually, but we have a lot of work to do before it ever happens.
Yeah, except let's be honest at the same time. Most "mature" games don't have an ounce of maturity at all, most in fact only have "big boobs, guns, explosions, and toilet humor" which tends to not help "our" case too much.
*Though, to be fair once again, most movies have a very small concept of what constitutes mature as well, hence throwing in sex (or whatever is considered edgy) and claiming that it makes mature art.
Does any video game need to aspire to be Citizen Kane in order to be considered art? Lets remove games from the emotional argument for a moment and examine literature and film. Lets take Peter Jackson's film interpretation of The Lord of the Rings. I read them in middle school, re read them in high school, then again as a young adult before those films were released. Upon seeing the films it was clear that Jackson took some liberty with certain events. One example is the dream sequence where Aragorn and Arwen share a kiss, it feels visually necessary as part of the film where on the page it was not. Did it mean that Jacson lacked respect for Tolkien's literary framework? I would argue no, he was working in a different medium that required a different approach to telling the story. The ultimate artistic conclusion is the same, but how you get there is different, and that is okay. Some will prefer the page, some will prefer the film, some will find each equally satisfying.
Games can be art, and they can be a high art form as we understand it to be, but we must accept the fact that the story telling medium is extremely different from literature and film and not everyone will embrace it. Some people don't read but enjoy film, some people read all the time but don't particularly enjoy film or stage, some mostly play games, some folks dabble in everything. Each medium has its nuances. Literature allows you to paint a broader range of imagery with you own mind, film takes you by the hand and guides you on the emotional journey, where games allow you to immerse yourself in the world and interact with it. They all tell stories and in rare cases, some take us on a deep emotional journey that is equivalent to a high art form. We have to accept that literary experts and film critics may never see the gaming medium the way we do because the medium is fundamentally different. We have nothing to prove to them. Games can be art, we know this, and we just have to accept that not everyone will see what we do and thats okay.
We have to accept that literary experts and film critics may never see the gaming medium the way we do because the medium is fundamentally different. We have nothing to prove to them. Games can be art, we know this, and we just have to accept that not everyone will see what we do and thats okay.
I can definitely agree with this. Otherwise, it soon becomes a fight over what is art and what is not which is just pretentious and silly. Everyone is always going to argue for the medium they like best because of their individual bias. People want to argue that their medium is a higher or equal form of art because we somehow perceive being able to claim as such gives it greater value. Maybe we should stop placing such important on "art" and just let it be, and I mean this to be applied to all mediums.
It seems to me that the continuing question of whether or not video games are art stems from a freedom of speech debate. It's widely accepted that "art" is protected under the 1st amendment yet, unfortunately many people are ok with censorship if it's not "art". That said, government censorship wasn't a threat in the case of Six Days in Fallujah and I'm not trying to get sidetracked with that debate.
While I fully understand a company pulling a product due to public outcry as purely a financial decision, I find it odd that a game publisher would be concerned with the outcry from non-gamers. I'm assuming the vast majority people we see protesting or appearing on Fox News to yell "think of the children" aren't purchasing many FPS's anyway. So why bow to the public pressure?
While I fully understand a company pulling a product due to public outcry as purely a financial decision, I find it odd that a game publisher would be concerned with the outcry from non-gamers. I'm assuming the vast majority people we see protesting or appearing on Fox News to yell "think of the children" aren't purchasing many FPS's anyway. So why bow to the public pressure?
That is precisely what bugs me about this situation. I guarantee you, publishers have swam through much more murky waters and come out of it fine. Why are they worried about only a little controversy? Do they not see the value in helping people understand the history of such a significant event? Are you worried the moms of our country won't go to walmart and buy M-rated Six Days for little 14 year old Johnny?
chrisWhite
Littleton, CO
Comments
Film and television are just the same. But when a game comes along with the purpose of educating and honoring those that gave the sacrifice, it's beat down because one must play it?
Disgusting.
This is a note to self - watch the video when you get home from work.
I've seen Daniel Floyd's stuff before, and I've always really liked it. This particular video is really, really good.
I want to see Six Days in Falluja released so bad. They make an excellent point when they say that the battle is a very significant one in American history... and no one knows about it.
So many people talk about the potrayal of video games as art. When will we have our 'citizen kane'? The more I think about that question, the more I realize that we don't need a citizen kane. We already have it. As this video details, what we need are developers, publishers, and designers who are not afraid to talk about that which is taboo, and to never back down in the face of scrutiny. We have to show the world what we're capable of, and that we care about more that big boobs, guns, explosions, and toilet humor.
It'll happen eventually, but we have a lot of work to do before it ever happens.
*Though, to be fair once again, most movies have a very small concept of what constitutes mature as well, hence throwing in sex (or whatever is considered edgy) and claiming that it makes mature art.
Games can be art, and they can be a high art form as we understand it to be, but we must accept the fact that the story telling medium is extremely different from literature and film and not everyone will embrace it. Some people don't read but enjoy film, some people read all the time but don't particularly enjoy film or stage, some mostly play games, some folks dabble in everything. Each medium has its nuances. Literature allows you to paint a broader range of imagery with you own mind, film takes you by the hand and guides you on the emotional journey, where games allow you to immerse yourself in the world and interact with it. They all tell stories and in rare cases, some take us on a deep emotional journey that is equivalent to a high art form. We have to accept that literary experts and film critics may never see the gaming medium the way we do because the medium is fundamentally different. We have nothing to prove to them. Games can be art, we know this, and we just have to accept that not everyone will see what we do and thats okay.
I can definitely agree with this. Otherwise, it soon becomes a fight over what is art and what is not which is just pretentious and silly. Everyone is always going to argue for the medium they like best because of their individual bias. People want to argue that their medium is a higher or equal form of art because we somehow perceive being able to claim as such gives it greater value. Maybe we should stop placing such important on "art" and just let it be, and I mean this to be applied to all mediums.
/end rant.
While I fully understand a company pulling a product due to public outcry as purely a financial decision, I find it odd that a game publisher would be concerned with the outcry from non-gamers. I'm assuming the vast majority people we see protesting or appearing on Fox News to yell "think of the children" aren't purchasing many FPS's anyway. So why bow to the public pressure?
That is precisely what bugs me about this situation. I guarantee you, publishers have swam through much more murky waters and come out of it fine. Why are they worried about only a little controversy? Do they not see the value in helping people understand the history of such a significant event? Are you worried the moms of our country won't go to walmart and buy M-rated Six Days for little 14 year old Johnny?
By the way, I love this discussion.