LogFAQs > #59403

LurkerFAQs ( 06.29.2011-09.11.2012 ), Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear
Topic List
Page List: 1
TopicAoD 973: Opinions can be wrong.
Mr Lasastryke
07/06/11 9:04:00 AM
#105:


http://www.ludix.com/moriarty/apology.html

I finally finished reading this article. Interesting. I obviously disagree with Brian Moriarty (as I said, I'd rather throw the distinction between art [kitsch] and Art out of the window, while Moriarty embraces it), but it offers insight on why Ebert thinks the way he thinks in the first place.

Aside from a few less important points (his explanation of intersubjectivity, presenting Pauline Kael as the movie "expert" while she was just an expert at best - Andrew Sarris, whom Kael vehemently disagreed with, was another), my biggest disappointment of the article was the conclusion:

An hour or two or spent playing Defense Grid or Plants vs Zombies isn't a waste of time. There's nothing wrong with recreation. We need it. I need it. It's good for me!

But when I feel the need for reflection, for insight, wisdom or consolation, I turn my computers off.


In spite of Moriarty's knowledge and the good arguments he presents, the article still concludes with the hopelessly outdated notion that video games are nothing more than "recreation," and that for reflection, insight, wisdom or consolation, we should turn elsewhere. An actual gamer could provide a better argument against this statement than me, but with story-based games like Kana: Little Sister (which I've played) and possibly Planescape: Torment (which I haven't played) existing, I don't think the statement holds much water.

Also, I didn't understand the following segment:

But is this enough? Does an artistic presentation make a game art?

Of course it doesn't. None of you would presume to call that game "art" unless you had a chance to play it first, or at least watch somebody else playing it.

The identity of a game emerges from its mechanics and affordances, not the presentation that exposes them.


Why doesn't the presentation of a game make it art? It seems like he wants to make a clear distinction between "mechanics" and "presentation" - he's arguing that the mechanics of a game are unable to make a game art, and that the presentation doesn't "count" because that's not an actual part of the game itself...? I don't get it.

--
Full rap metal jacket ~ Method Man
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1