76 Views | 13 Comments

Experience Points: Art Games Aren’t Superior

Experience Points: Art Games Aren’t Superior

It is 2013 and we’re into a new year of games with a great diversity of releases where it’s really difficult to pick a favourite. My biggest game this year will probably be Bioshock Infinite, which I hope washes away the distaste I had playing Diablo 3, and its abysmal ending. An ending which is far worse than Mass Effect 3′s mind you. In terms of what can be learnt from the past year of gaming is that 2012 has taught us is that games can solidly be both works of pure entertainment and pieces of art with the likes of The Walking Dead and Journey as marks of the ‘Games As Art’ movement. Other AAA titles have been the requisite populous form of entertainment as demarcated by a large proportion of critics. The argument I pose is that whether a game is purely entertainment, or an artistic expression, these factors are negligent to the quality of a game.

The problem is that people in the gaming industry can fit into two distinct camps, this of course is not a hard and fast rule. These two groups are gamers whom play games for their entertainment value, and those whom play games for their artistic value be it for the narrative, art style and game design of a game. Some people can fit into both camps, but for the sake of clarity I will go with both of these camps being probable potentials. Working in the gaming industry you come across these two separate viewpoints of games, and what factors make a game ‘good’ is dependent on which of these camps you view a game from.

What I would classify as purely entertainment driven games are for examples games like Call of Duty Black Ops 2 that don’t position themselves as actively being a work of artistic exploration and groundbreaking innovation. Such games have a formula they follow much like action blockbusters. At eGamer, we’ve spoken many times about the quality of a good game that can purely entertain you. Not every game has to be a work of art that moves you at the very soul. That is not to say that Call of Duty Black Ops 2 doesn’t have artistic features in its characters and narrative. But when comparing it to games like Journey which has a main core and focus which is to be an active work of art. The aims are totally different for both game with very different target markets. However, I think many people consider the artistic games to be in some ways superior to purely entertainment driven games. Because they feel that such games don’t have the same artistic depth as the self professed art game, and as a result entertainment driven games are in some way inferior. These different types of games serve different purposes, and have different markets. But undeniably so the entertainment driven games are highly popular when compared to the ‘art’ games.

Although an art game may have a uniqueness about it, this does not discredit that a game like Call of Duty Black Ops 2 can be equally just as as ‘good’, or equal to, the qualities of an art game. Being blinkered by preconceptions that art games are somehow the epitome of what a videogame can and will be is both limiting and a tireless venture that bears no fruit. Rather you’ll continually be disappointed and agitated by games which revel in their entertainment factor and won’t play those games because you feel them to be worthless and of no consideration. For the people who don’t care about such distinctions that means more games for us, and less for gamers who are too focussed on being a hipster in their gaming tastes.

Yes, some people may not enjoy Journey and think it to be self indulgent, that is their choice. Yes, they can play the game and by some magical occurrence their mind will be shifted into how awesome an art game is. But sometimes gamers prefer the simpler entertainment packages like Call of Duty or even Lolipop Chainsaw because they are fun games, and can rely on their entertainment factor as a selling point for gamers. This is all a matter of preference. Yet discrediting a gamer’s opinion because he or she believes a game like Call of Duty Blacks Ops 2 to be as good in their mind, or even better, than a game like Journey doesn’t mean they have bad taste, or don’t know what a ‘good’ game is. It’s just that they enjoy a good action film, and you prefer to go to the gallery so to speak. But then you get Bioshock which bridges the gap between the two so well. In other words, just play Bioshock and all other arguments are irrelevant.

If You Liked This, You Should Try These!

Name: Adam Meikle
Location: Durban
Position: Editor, Indie

  • Trebzz

    Can i take a little credit for inspiring this? :P

    • Adam Meikle

      Wrote this last night, so not really. But whatever Xbox 360 is still better than PS3. :P

    • Trebzz

      I don’t even have to see whose name wrote the article the minute i see this Half Life character i know its you :P Enjoy never ever seeing Half Life 3 in this lifetime XD

    • Adam Meikle

      It still doesn’t change the fact that the Xbox 360 is superior to the PS3 :P. Really Trebzz.

  • Gerald van Wyk

    Was a good piece , until I saw you think xbox is better than ps3 , then it just sucked :p

    • Adam Meikle

      All the PS3 has is a blu-ray player, the ability to play PS1 games and PSN Plus. All overrated. The Xbox 360 is awesome. So jelly :P.

    • Trebzz

      Oh please come Last of Us and Beyond Two Souls your mouth is just gonna be shut and we won’t hear from you for 2 weeks cause you will be enjoying the awesomeness of the PS3.

    • Adam Meikle

      PC will be better :P.

    • Trebzz

      PC on Last of Us seriously come on now o.O

    • http://twitter.com/MatuMikey Michael Matusowsky

      Yolo etc

  • Phil

    I don’t buy this argument at all. Its like comparing Transformers 2 to a David Lynch movie. The one has good action and is generally entertaining to watch, the other is thought provoking, cinematically beautiful and makes an impact on you as a person.

    Yeah some ‘blockbuster games’ have great gameplay, but all they are is fun. Theres no substance to them, they lack what is now an essential part of a game.

    That’s not to say that all blockbuster games are shit, they just aren’t on the same level as art games such as Bioshock or braid, which have both polished gameplay and substance.

    • Adam Meikle

      Games were always entertainment first, them becoming ‘art’ is just a natural extension of this. The irony is that so called games for entertainment may have a profound effect on a gamer, in the ways you mentioned. This is all subjective at the end of the day, much like the people who play games.

    • Phil

      Every other artistic medium was entertainment first and then became art. Look at films, theatre or fiction books. Even early medieval religious art was used as a form of entertainment – to captivate Church congregations, who often couldn’t understand Latin.

      Also yeah, there is a degree of subjectivity, but we need to have some form of criticism. The each person to his own argument doesn’t work either. Its like comparing Rihanna to Burial. The one’s commercial, it appeals to people, its fun and you can dance to it. The other touches you on an emotional level.

      I’d say the artistic element is an essential feature in the modern game. Even a game like Far Cry 3 got it right – which spectacular voice acting, excellent gameplay and an interesting lord of the flies with guns and psychedelics concept. While black ops 2, might be as or more entertaining for some, I don’t think you can regard it as an equal. Some people love Trechikoff’s work, but its just no good in comparison to say, WIlliam Kentridge.

      That said, this is a new artistic medium, which is very exciting and why I’ve drawn so many examples from other art forms. So perhaps I am a little biased in the hope of seeing more games that affect me on an emotional level being produced.