another exciting thread this time about "The Grammar of Fun"

okay i was wondering what ppl thought of this article? it's been interesting to see mags like the new yorker increasing their coverage of video games and the i think this is their third large article about video games this year.

actually starting this thread because of this quote: Anyone who plays modern games such as Gears does not so much learn the rules as develop a kind of intuition for how the game operates. Often, there is no single way to accomplish a given task; improvisation is rewarded. Older games, like Super Mario, punish improvisation: you live or die according to their algebra alone.

i think i disagree with this but i'm not sure how to formulate my thoughts yet. would be v. interested to know what others think

On first glance, I think Gears of War is a really bad choice of comparison. You can flank, but the game is still on rails for the most part.

Although I guess this article is actually ABOUT Gears of War, and more specifically about the culture at Epic.

i guess this is better than most 'high-culture-magazine-dips-its-toes-in-videogaming" type articles but it still suffers from a bunch of the same problems

the article isn't super interesting in and of itself but i thought it did tangentially bring up some important qns particuarly about "retro" games vs. new games. also i think a lot of the assumptions underlying the article things like "Fenix was something that few video-game characters had yet managed to be: disappointedly adult." might be worthwhile to examine.

Fenix didn't seem all that unusual to me... he is a warrior with a conscience. Isn't that s.o.p. for any in-game protagonist? You rarely come across a game wherein your character doesn't have the added benefit of righteousness.

nice:

Dear Matthew,

I don't usually respond in these situations, but what the hell. Funnily enough, I've been to your site before and always enjoyed and often admired your thoughts on games. Your long post on Mass Effect (a game I love), to name one in particular, was not only a thing of analytic beauty but also really illuminating. I even had the thought, while writing my piece, whether you might address the thing, be it for a huzzah or an ear twist. Too bad for me, it's an ear twist, but that's the way these things go.

However, I really very much take issue with your pretty blithe way of suggesting I would do the bidding of Microsoft or its PR arm. You know the game industry inside and out, obviously, but I'm not sure you know as much about the world of magazine journalism, because if you did you might realize to suggest such a thing is pretty much akin to spitting in a writer's face.

Your other criticisms are fair game, and, however wincingly, appreciated. I tried to write a piece that gamers wouldn't want to puke on. I know those pieces, and, yes, I've puked on them. I can say that I'm not a fanboy, though I love games, and I wasn't particularly dazzled by Cliff, though I did like him an awful lot. You read it, possibly a little willfully, as fawning, though that certainly wasn't my intention. We could probably argue about this, but that would be dumb, and beside the point. The bottom line: Thanks for the response, sorry it let you down, and I hope in the future our literary/gaming paths cross again, though more happily.

Take care,
Tom B1ss3ll

http://www.magicalwasteland.com/2008/10/in_any_guise_a_poor_ambassador.htm

^^^tht is a good thread btw, worth a read. tom b1ssell stops in to talk more about his article after ppl quiz him on it

by this pt, I'm just impressed by ppl discussing civilly on the internet really

thanks for the link. i still dont think i agree with where that dude is coming from w/r/t GoW i mean

"Well, think about it: Has there been a shooter since Gears was released that has not been, in some way, forced to address it? That's what I think great games do: They reconfigure the genre they're a part of."

i cant agree with either part of that. otoh i could care less about gears of war so maybe im not tuned to the aesthetic in the right way. i also really like that site its oddly comforting that so many ppl are still so unsure of how to conceive games criticism. also lol at his post banning "narrative" poor slocki

For real, czn, ESPECIALLY about video games!

I have ever played Gears of War, but the discussion's mechanics are interesting.

I thought this was interesting:

As for literary references, all I can say is that I'm a writer and reader before I'm a gamer. Literature is the prism through which I look at the world--particularly creative endeavors. No snobbiness intended, in other words. It's just the way my mind works.

Kind of gave me a new perspective on ref-drops. I can dig that they would seem a natural thing (like they are to me in everyday conversation, just bcz 'that's how my mind works,' making associations w/everything I've experienced in life, quite a bit of which is art/lit/science). And that they CAn definitely look snobby, but somehow I never considered that it might not be an affectation or a way to give video game writing (and video games' significance) a puffed-up facade.

It made me appreciate, too, that figuring out how to write about video games is really, really new. And that probably the hardest part is knowing what audience to write for, how to make it broad and interesting without alienating most people.

I write my blog knowing that my family reads it, which is why I keep it funny and friendly, hopefully, interesting for people who don't play, perhaps (so it will pass the all-important mom-test), and above all, PG-rated. Ha!

My mom still won't read it though. :(

the hardest part is knowing what audience to write for, how to make it broad and interesting without alienating most people

I occasionally write about games for general interest newspapers and struggle to remain inclusive and jargon-free. Regularly reading obsessive and enthusiast websites certainly doesn't help keep my junk straight-forward and non-gamer-friendly, unfortunately. I don't even want to imagine how high the bar must feel if you're writing for the New Yorker, or any publication that people actually give a damn about.

It is hard to do THAT without alienating gamers, though, as Bissell encountered (in a surprisingly gentlemanly fashion).

Not that they're core readers, but certainly the LOUDEST (see: when Ebert talked about video games).

It made me appreciate, too, that figuring out how to write about video games is really, really new.

it is!! thats what i liked about the site czn linked: its kind of what we talk when talk about games criticism. i like that he's trying to figure how to think about games what vocabulary to use and that hes aware of how much ppl reinvent something when they describe and how much i think that invention takes precedence over actually noticing things about games.

i think maybe thats why i never liked book/movie/sculpture comparisons in games crit/journalism the idea that instead of noticing or understanding how games work on us the author is just using some familiar and ill-fitting prism to describe them.