X

Sessler's Soapbox: Six Days In Fallujah and Fun Vs. Art

Posted: April 15, 2009
Sessler's Soapbox: Six Days In Fallujah and Fun Vs. Art
http://www.g4tv.com/videos/37744/sesslers-soapbox-six-days-in-fallujah-and-fun-vs-art/
http://images.g4tv.com/ImageDb3/144982_LGST/soapboxfallujah.jpg
Video_37744
Adam talks about 'Six Days in Fallujah' and how games don't have to be fun.

Comments are Closed

  • Halereborn

    Cont.

    Also, games spark philosophical questions, one found in Portal (but you have to think).
    SPOILER:

    For example, the Companion Cube is intriguing, as the cubic block embedded with a heart becomes your ally and friend as you venture along Aperture Science's laboratories. Then, when you have reached your peak relationship wiht the Cube, you are instructed to kill it. This poses the ethics of destroying an object one has become fond of, and the use of technology with intelligence, and if it can be achieved without ethical errors.

    Posted: September 28, 2009 8:57 PM
    Halereborn
  • Halereborn

    I do agree games are approaching the mainstream as an art form, a way of expressing ideas, and not pure entertainment purposes. Does games have to be fun? No, not really. A common misconception is that they all have to be fun. The purpose of games, is to present an image, whether it is a fun image, educational, or even controversial. One of our first art forms were paintings. There has been always a painting or drawing that has sparked outrage on the image it portrayed. The "next step" as you could call it, would be movies, which is basically a series of moving pictures creating a film. So why would the next expressive form be critique so harshly? One of the main things is choice, that you ddeide whether you do this or that, giving a more human characteristic to the art form. This makes people naturally feel uncomfortable. Who wouldn't, deciding whether to kill this person with an Ak-47 or an MP5? The main problem of the criticism is that they are going against the people expressing their views. As so well said by previous posters, the main objectives of some games are not to entertain but, to convict people and to get them to think.

    I personally believe COD4 was a prime example of the transition into a more serious, realistic way for games. The abilities you have are not infinite and grandiose, for example, you easily die with 1-3 shots, whereas in Halo, you may be stuck with a plasma grenade and recieving incoming fire from 3 Covenant troops, yet you come out unscathed. COD4 shows mortality of man, an experience I have never felt. Halo, TF2, Crackdown may all be fine and fun action games, but they are for entertainmnt purposes mainly, not a tool for thinking out your comfort zone.

    Posted: September 28, 2009 8:52 PM
    Halereborn
  • jrturner0112

    Aye.

    Posted: September 3, 2009 6:00 AM
    jrturner0112
AdChoices