Why gaming is still inferior to film (and books)

I saw a great documentary recently, "Visions of Light," http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visions_Of_Light

It discusses the transition from cinema to film, from black and white to colour, and from silent movie to audio/soundtracks.

Great documentary for anyone interested in the "games v film" debate.

One thing I found interesting was that a few of the directors interviewed maintain that Colour and Audio were detrimental to the art of film making. They maintained that the constraints of silent/black & white really pushed the art of cinematography.

The same argument could be made for 2D games to 3D games, etc.

-Brendan.

 

<pot kettle and all that, next thing Mathematix will be joining in>

 

It would help if the so called writer would refer to the medium as Games rather than "Gaming," since Gaming is, at best, the process of playing games.

You don't say Filming or Booking in reference to the media.

Gaming as an act of playing a game is not logically comparable to Film and Literature.


EDIT:

I suppose, if it hasn't been mentioned yet, the act of reading a book is in and of itself an experience that is unique to reading books. Not everyone reads books, even when some people should. Similarly, the act of viewing a film, sitting in the theater, or even sitting at home watching the television, is an entirely different and unique experience from interactive games.

 

A very limited view.
And one that is not bourne out by the realities of even today's video game offerings.
The thing about our medium is that it can be a lot more things than any other previous medium and we are only beginning to tap that potential. Yes, we can do chess, but we can also do Gone with the Wind.

It is amazing that people are not discussing suspending disbelief, emotional involvement, complex characters etc more in this thread. Because these are the routes we have to go down. Unless you think that Wii Fit is the perfect example of what we can achieve.

 

Pure unadulterated bollocks.

You can't curl up in bed with a good computer game.

You can't take your girlfriend to a computer game and snuggle up with her on the back row.

Books and movies can do those things. Computer games can't.

Why am I even feeding the troll? It's yet another self-advertisement. "You can use the above to give yourself a competitive edge", ie. "hire me!" Yeah, right.

 

I think this is once again not seeing the wood for the trees.

Perhaps more people curl up up in bed with a DS/PSP/iPhone these days than with a book.
As to the girlfriend/cinema analogy, we now have multiplayer games. Eventually they will be a lot more snuggle worthy than any film.

 

Now I'm gonna stick my neck out here, and say, admittedly without hard evidence to back this up... no they don't. Don't be stupid.

Um, no they won't. I want to be entertained by a good story while being entertained in an entirely different way snuggling up with my gf. I don't wanna have to break the flow by pressing A to continue every now and then. It completely misses the point.

Games are active entertainment. That's not superior to passive entertainment - just different.

 

Comparing books and films to games is like comparing music to comicbooks or cooking to martial arts.

Videogames aren't a storytelling device. Many games don't even have stories (Tetris, Mine Sweeper, Geometry Wars) and those who do have a story often use it as a feeble excuse to tie together the action.

The cut scenes in Dynasty Wars 6 are quite good, but the main reason I'm playing the game is to whack thousands of soldiers in an entirely unrealistic way. As storytelling device it's not going to top Romance of the Three Kingdom, but it's not meant to.

 

I agree that people can take a portable machine to bed, I have done many times in the past when I had a very good game. Also, you can play a videogame with a partner as a romantic quality time together.

But those are entirely different activities. By the same logic, you'd think that TV and cinema should've killed the Theatre by now. People who enjoy reading books and watching movies are not going to find that exact type of pleasure in videogames (and if they do, the videogame is DOING IT WRONG).

 

Even if they did, e-books are not video games. Although they are both software.

 

Sounds like something I'd love to achieve. What exactly is your problem with products like that?

People have been talking about the things you're talking about for decades, and still nobody wants the games that have them.

 

I actually like that gif. Cheers for that. I'll use it later.

 

You clearly have never walked into an out of the way building in wow and found two chars spooning on the bed....

 

No, I haven't, for which fact I am profoundly grateful.

 

Disagree. CA:FT has women in it.

 

Couple of more points, that may (or may not) be relevant.

Does anyone remember the early PC "games" which were really interactive videos? Can not think of too many titles which were great at all.

Next up, I suppose is that if games are not becoming like books (or want to, for that matter), are films and tv shows becoming more like games?

Lost, (and even Desperate Housewives) are really playing up the "non-linear narrative" (by way of flashbacks/flash-forwards) which is somewhat of a games crossover (in my opinion).

"Interactive" tv, e.g. where you, the viewer/consumer, can affect the outcome, by picking up your phone and voting for Player X. Again, this is pretty lame, in terms of implementation, but I suppose it is still a characteristic of video games, that TV producers are looking to employ to hold on to their audience.

Then I suppose there is the "choose-your-own-adventure" books, from the 1980's, where the story was "non-linear." Again, this was pretty rubbish (in my opinion).

Lastly, I suppose is the concept of "convergence" which is a broadly used term, but I suppose in terms of games and TV, it is like user-generated content, (scripts, poems, short-stories, concept sketches) created by fans to expand the universe (whether that is Buffy the TV show, or Samus from Metroid). Some early games from Origin Systems actually shipped with a comic book (can't remember the game - had a red Boba-Fett look a like on the box), which included cheat codes, and hints that the player could use in the game. This is apparently "amazing" in terms of today's media exec's mindset.

This discussion is usually founded and argued around "Passive" nature of traditional media (one-way), and "Active/Participatory" nature of games.

From my perspective, I see tv (and film to a lesser extent) adapting the successful elements of video games, and trying to shoe-horn them into their existing products, in an effort to capture Generation X, Y or whatever.

Why?

Because, apparently, the "new breed" don't want to watch TV, as it is "so last decade", when they can interact with YouTube, MySpace, Bebo, Twitter, and Facebook, all at the same time.

Does this signal the end of TV? I hope not, as shows like Heroes, Lost, and Battlestar are the only reason I own a TV, (outside of gaming).

-B.

 

It is a limited view, and I fully intended it to grate a little - as I'm sure your own headline that games are inferior was intended to rub people the wrong way to get a little attention.

fact is, I think your premise is invalid, and that in fact games are NOT inferior to movies and books. How can you even compare them directly? Are games inferior because they don't have a 1:1 mapping to a movie or a book? Are you then not judging games on an entirely false set of parameters?
- Imho movies and books are both about story-telling at heart, the majority of them anyway. Games are about playing, everything else is just tacked on. But yeah, sure, we could do Gone with the Wind. If Metal Gear Solid 4 had had decent writing and plot, it could've been a perfect poster child for that sort of thing I guess - and I do actually love to be seduced by virtual characters, to feel empathy and fear for their well-being (though admittedly that's only really happened with Yorda) ... I want more of that sort of thing, absolutely.

But to claim that it is THE path we have to go down? No, absolutely not. Our industry stands on its own two feet - let's just learn from, collaborate with, teach (remember LotR's Massive? what was that if not a concept garnered from games?), and move on ahead.