Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 04:18:49 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Interesting Brooker article about intelligent games, vs dumb movies

Started by Neil, May 25, 2011, 11:59:29 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Neil

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/may/23/gaming-makes-hollywood-look-embarrassing

QuoteDo you remember the days when you used to be able to head out to the cinema safe in the knowledge that even if the film you wanted to see had sold out, there'd be something else worth watching? I'm talking about 10,000 years ago, obviously, because here's what's on at your local multiplex.

Screen one: a 3D CGI cartoon about a wisecracking badger with attitude you'd quite happily reverse a six-tonne tractor over. Screen two: a 3D superhero theme park ride that thinks it's King Lear. Screen three: a rom-com so formulaic you suspect it was created from a template on Moonpig.com. Screen four: The Very Hungry Caterpillar 3D. Screen five: all of the above, randomly intercut with one another because no one's paying attention anyway. Screen six: a lightshow for cattle. And so on.

About once a month there's a film actually worth bothering with: either something with a quirky sensibility and a modest budget, or the occasional decent blockbuster the studios have made by mistake. There seems to be something missing from cinema: big budget dramas with panache, aimed at an adult audience. Where are they? They migrated to television. And – don't snort with derision here – to video games.

Consider two of the biggest video games of 2011 thus far. The first is Portal 2, a darkly humorous science fiction . . . what? Story? Puzzle? Game? "Experience" seems like the best word to use, even though typing that makes me feel like shoving my fist in my mouth to punch my brain from an unexpected angle. The game mechanics of Portal 2 are almost impossible to describe without diagrams, but I'll try: you wander around a 3D environment trying to escape a series of rooms by firing magic holes on to the walls or floor; holes you can walk or fall through. So if I fire a hole on to the ceiling, and another on to the ground, I can jump through the ground and re-appear falling through the ceiling. This simple dynamic provides the basis for a series of fiendishly clever puzzles you find yourself working through – all of it tied into a humorous narrative that unfolds with more confidence, charm and sophistication than was strictly necessary. And before you whine about the solitary nature of games, it also includes a cooperative two-player mode in which you and a friend play through a parallel game together. The whole thing is stunningly clever and immensely enjoyable.

And then there's LA Noire, the James Ellroy-inspired crime drama, which has caused a stir, and rightly so, with its firm focus on narrative and staggering new facial animation technology. I'm a massive dweeb who keeps up with the latest gaming developments, and even I was astounded at what they've pulled off here. You're watching actors give genuine performances – within something that is still defiantly and unapologetically a video game. The lead character is played by Aaron Staton, AKA Ken Cosgrove from Mad Men – and is instantly recognisable, not just from his likeness, but also his facial mannerisms. Amusingly, plenty of his fellow Mad Men cast members also show up throughout the game (as well as faces familiar from shows such as Heroes and Fringe), reinforcing the overall feel of the game – which is like working your way through a hard-nosed HBO police procedural miniseries set in Los Angeles in the 1940s. If you've never played a game, or you think you hate them – but my description sounds vaguely appealing, give it a spin. Just watch someone else play it for a while if you like. I guarantee you'll be surprised.

And what really made me excited, thinking about both of these games, is that behind the state-of-the-art technology they both make use of (which has a level of sophistication that might come as a blinding shock to anyone who hasn't played a game since 1996), they're both old-fashioned video games at heart – not old-fashioned in the finger-twitching, reaction-testing Space Invaders sense, but something richer, something often overlooked by the population at large: old-fashioned video games that challenge the mind instead of the thumbs.

Portal 2 is essentially a demented series of puzzles – like being stuck inside a physics-based logic problem designed by the Python team; LA Noire is a trad adventure game. Adventure games used to be as close as gaming got to fiction. They started out as interactive text-based shaggy dog stories (a prime example being Douglas Adams's fantastic Hitchhiker's Guide Infocom adventure), transformed into point-and-click comedies (such as Monkey Island), and then largely went away for a while, as the gaming industry focused on gung-ho shooters aimed at teenage boys. The size, scope, and sheer self-assurance of LA Noire marks a major comeback for adventure games – for interactive fiction – and, potentially, a huge leap forward for wider acceptance of the medium as a whole.

And both these games – both of these entirely different, utterly unique creations – are a huge commercial success. In cinematic terms, it's the equivalent of films of the intelligence and quality of 2001: A Space Odyssey and The Maltese Falcon not just being released to great fanfare in 2011, but actually going on to smash box office records. Somehow Portal 2 and LA Noire manage to be more cinematic than a great deal of contemporary cinema – while being something entirely different, something with the phrase "I LOVE VIDEO GAMES" embedded in their DNA like a cheerful slogan through a stick of rock. These are not replacements for films, but something thrillingly different. Gaming's ongoing push into the mainstream consciousness has entered a bold new phase – by appealing to the players' intelligence and imagination, it's starting to make Hollywood look embarrassing.

It's a false dichotomy though, isn't it?  Surely the majority of games are as dumb as any Hollywood film, with many of them still being centered around steroid-using space marines.  WITH ATTITUDE.  Games like L.A. Noire seem like the exception, and cost so much money to make, that they simply can't be much more than an exception.  I do agree with some of what he says, though, and find gaming to be a great experience, when it's so centered around a strong narrative. 

Another thing that concerns me relates to these immersive games, and also to the internet itself.  As game worlds get richer, it can become harder to go back to being a passive consumer of entertainment.  I find it difficult to sit down and watch a DVD, because, paradoxically, it takes more effort to do nothing, than it does for me to grab a controller, and get involved.  I detest this about myself, and rue what the internet has done to an already short attention span.

Funcrusher

Big budget films have become video games. That's the problem.

Subtle Mocking

Also, on Gameswipe, didn't Graham Linehan say that the problem with a lot of video games is that too many of them are based off films as opposed to books?

El Unicornio, mang

Quote from: Subtle Mocking on May 25, 2011, 12:19:26 PM
Also, on Gameswipe, didn't Graham Linehan say that the problem with a lot of video games is that too many of them are based off films as opposed to books?

I thought he was off the mark when he said that. It's not a problem that they're based on films, since the films they're based on (Godfather, Goodfellas, Scarface, Alien, Blade Runner, etc) are as good as any books, it's that they often only pick the most base, surface aspects ("SAY HELLO TO MY LEETAL FRENG!!!") rather than taking inspiration from the more subtle aspects of the storylines and characters.

Still Not George

Didn't we basically conclude that Linehan didn't have the faintest clue what the hell he was talking about?

Little Hoover

The problem with the IT Crowd is it takes it's inspiration from Seinfeld rather than books.

NoSleep

His figures don't add up. A decent film once a month is more than two games this year so far.

Still Not George

Quote from: NoSleep on May 25, 2011, 01:30:02 PM
His figures don't add up. A decent film once a month is more than two games this year so far.

Except he didn't actually equate them at all. He said there's a dearth of intelligent, clever, audience-respecting films at the box office. Which is true.

Famous Mortimer

Quote from: Still Not George on May 25, 2011, 01:34:41 PM
Except he didn't actually equate them at all. He said there's a dearth of intelligent, clever, audience-respecting films at the box office. Which is true.
What's also true is the similar dearth of intelligent, clever, audience-respecting games in the local shop. It's not like he's saying that this is a new development, either, the good games - brilliant and clever games have been around for decades - so although I appreciate his enthusiasm he's perhaps overselling the point.

Also, to mention the crap films in yer average multiplex, then with his next words to talk about Portal 2 and LA Noire might be seen as equating them to some people.

NoSleep

Quote from: Still Not George on May 25, 2011, 01:34:41 PM
Except he didn't actually equate them at all. He said there's a dearth of intelligent, clever, audience-respecting films at the box office. Which is true.

And then went on to describe a mere two new games at length (a list of others would have sufficed). As if this proved games were any less dumb than films, generally.

Funcrusher

Quote from: El Unicornio, mang on May 25, 2011, 01:13:16 PM
I thought he was off the mark when he said that. It's not a problem that they're based on films, since the films they're based on (Godfather, Goodfellas, Scarface, Alien, Blade Runner, etc) are as good as any books

Also, four out of those five were based on a book.

Still Not George

Quote from: NoSleep on May 25, 2011, 02:17:24 PM
And then went on to describe a mere two new games at length (a list of others would have sufficed). As if this proved games were any less dumb than films, generally.

I don't think he was particularly trying to make a general point other than "Games and TV are better than film these days." And he's right.

Quote from: Famous Mortimer on May 25, 2011, 01:53:56 PM
What's also true is the similar dearth of intelligent, clever, audience-respecting games in the local shop. It's not like he's saying that this is a new development, either, the good games - brilliant and clever games have been around for decades - so although I appreciate his enthusiasm he's perhaps overselling the point.
His point is that brilliant and clever games are becoming heavy mainstream right now (which they've generally not been for the last decade) and brilliant and clever film is currently MIA. He even states that halfway decent film is still around, which oddly isn't really the case for games, there's an incredible amount of "social" pap and some highlights.

Nibbsy

Quote from: Funcrusher on May 25, 2011, 03:39:29 PM
Also, four out of those five were based on a book.

Which book is that? It must cover a lot of themes.

Still Not George

Quote from: Nibbsy on May 25, 2011, 04:02:38 PM
Which book is that? It must cover a lot of themes.

Not really. Just the Mafia in a corporate future nightmare of violent androids.

Zetetic

Quote from: Funcrusher on May 25, 2011, 12:01:26 PM
Big budget films have become video games. That's the problem.
Weirdly enough, an entirely different problem is that plenty of big budget games have become terrible films.

Zetetic

Quote from: Still Not George on May 25, 2011, 04:00:42 PM
His point is that brilliant and clever games are becoming heavy mainstream right now (which they've generally not been for the last decade) and brilliant and clever film is currently MIA.
The second claim is trivially untrue, although the existence of brilliant and clever mainstream film might be more arguable.

The first claim. Hmm. Portal 2 and LA Noire, are certainly notable in their attempts to widen the appeal of games[nb]With twitch gaming being deliberately reduced in Portal 2, thankfully, to bring it closer to a puzzle game.[/nb], the former in particular. I can't think well enough at the moment, but there's point to be made comparing Portal 2's sales, and 'mainstream' presence, compared to CODBLOPS and its ilk.

eluc55

He's also not comparing like with like.

The games that are most popular are ones still fundamentally based around "action" premises... LA Noire and and Portal have been marketed as having shoot outs, chases and evil robots amongst the puzzle solving, not to mention they're developed by teams best known, and most acclaimed, for their more gun-heavy action games, Half Life and GTA.

So its only fair to compare them to action heavy films. The Dark Knight was enormously popular, and certainly as "intelligent" as any game mentioned. But more surprisingly, Nolan's more inaccessible, complicated film, Inception, was also incredibly popular with mainstream audiences. Regardless of whether we like those films or not, they're no less "intelligent" than the games mentioned, and similarly popular.     

Shoulders?-Stomach!

What seems to be missing is that games present a physical challenge. You can say that any number of first person shooters are dumb and have shit storylines but they exist to provide sparkly new arenas to shoot moving objects and think about strategy. And there's another thing- the stories are a bag of wank but many of these so called dumb games require puzzle solving and tactics as well as good reflexes. They certainly give a good reward for thinking about tackling the problem, rather than just shooting a load of bullets everywhere.

An interactive story can be reasonably rudimentary so long as the atmosphere is immersive enough, in my opinion.

I like seeing games take on new things, and one of the challenges is how to create a rich environment and strong story and still make something that's interactive and fun and gets the pulse racing.

In my opinion Shenmue and Shenmue II are still fine games because you routinely dice with death and it's usually something connected with the story, and usually something where you improve as a player afterwards. Similarly with The Nomad Soul. They're exciting and have adventures to follow that don't take you out of the gaming experience. Unfortunately because sales of those games weren't terrific, there hasn't been a similar development. The RPG side has improved, but the story is pretty much "Here's an open world, enjoy" with a little bit of story. But the adventure genre has stalled, and you'll find there are a hell of a lot of gamers out there that just press X to skip through all the dialogue, no matter what it says.

In the old days, PC gaming created an atmosphere of being locked into the task, thinking deeply and getting immersed. Sofa gaming just doesn't quite match up. You're further away from the screen and there are too many distractions. And what fills that void? Sports games, gun games, racing games and dancing games.