How Do Games Grow Up? 248
Gamasutra is running a piece by game designer Brice Morrison questioning the lack of games for grown-ups — or, more accurately, the lack of an intellectual progression in games like that which exists for books, movies, and other creative works.
"While my interests in other media grew substantially more adult — from Nickelodeon to CNN, from Dr. Seuss to George Orwell — games did not seem to have a more intelligent counterpart for me to move on to. As I entered college, I became less interested in mindless entertainment and more interested in encountering new ideas. I didn't want to kill time; I wanted to take advantage of it. I wanted to challenge myself with profound concepts, to learn of new paradigms, processes, and possibilities. ... So what exactly are the barriers of entry for great thinkers (or groups of thinkers) to leave their mark on games? What must happen for games — or interactive entertainment, if you will, to mature as a medium?"
My advice - don't look for satisfaction in games. (Score:3, Insightful)
I didn't want to kill time; I wanted to take advantage of it. I wanted to challenge myself with profound concepts, to learn of new paradigms, processes, and possibilities.
That's your problem right there. Games only kill time. The skills you acquire as you progress in a game, generally speaking, can only be used in progressing within the game's framework.
However, learning a slightly more challenging real-life task gives you more skills with long-term usefulness; My youngest daughter is learning piano, and we view each new challenging piece she has to learn as a 'boss level' - no matter how impossible it seems initially, we know from previous examples that eventually she'll conquer it and ultimately will be able to play it on demand without thinking.
So my advice is - don't look for more 'grown up' games - challenge yourself with something much more rewarding and useful in the long term.
Must be windy. (Score:1, Insightful)
How's life up in the intellectual ivory tower again? Must be windy looking down on us.
Anyway, games are - here it comes - ENTERTAINMENT. Hence they're supposed to help you relax, have fun and ,amazingly enough, enjoy them.
If I wanted to pursue more 'intellectual pursuits', I would socialize and discuss issues with other people rather than play games.
Grown up games (Score:5, Insightful)
- Programming
- 3D modelling
- Spreadsheets
- Online banking
- and so on...
He played Mario, doesn't that say it all? (Score:5, Insightful)
The claims that games don't provide a challenge, no depth. The game he uses as an example, and the only example? Mario.
This is like saying TV provides no depth, after you spend all time studying the shopping channel.
There are other games. Games that have tried to go beyond a simple platformer. Wether they succeed is up for question but when I see someone talk about the lack of depth of games and his example if a simple platform console game I get visions of a large lumbering stone creature that lives under bridges.
So his mother was never intrested in playing Mario. So what? My mother was never intrested in reading the adventures of "Spot" either.
Somebody give this guy a PC and some decent games. Hell, even consoles have the occasional title that pushes the envelope a bit (so, I am PC snob, sue me) but if he never played more the mario then the problem is not the game industry but his own lousy taste.
Complaing that Mario not anything more then a mindless (if fun) time waster is like saying Popcorn doesn't have enough nutritional benefits, however true it is, it is retarded observation. Mario and Popcorn are light fluf, devoid of meaning or value except. That is their goal.
But we get the post true intentions. Apparently the future of gaming is weight loss gaming. WHEE! Because a program that tracks your weight becomes a game just because it is on a console? If this is the example of growing up, of challenging your mind, taking you new places, then I take Mario any time (and I hate Mario since I suck at platforms ergo platforms are stupid).
Perhaps this developer needs to grow up and realize that not everything has to be liked by everyone. I had a grandfather who never ever had a telephone. Never needed it, never wanted it. Does that mean telephones are without value to those who use them? That the telephone companies needed to worry about this "lost" customer?
Re:My advice - don't look for satisfaction in game (Score:3, Insightful)
It really depends on the game. Action games do improve hand-eye coordination and reflexes. Strategy games improve planning and leadership abilities. RPGs are basically like long books and carry their own rewards in the form of their stories (unless you hate books also).
Playing piano is great and all for novelty, but it's not really a useful skill. It won't be needed often, if ever and it's not something that is noticeable unless you are one of the best. I don't mean to put down your daughter, but I doubt she will ever reach that "level".
Games and Hollywood Movies... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:My advice - don't look for satisfaction in game (Score:3, Insightful)
The Victorians mailed in a letter. They want their parlor room piano back.
If I understand you properly, you are saying that the skill of "Piano" carries more value long term than any particular game which now has a short lifespan.
Thing is, "Piano" playing itself is already starting to be passed by, except for the modern ofshoot of playing Keyboard in a small band. Then the grownup game is arguing with band members with "creative differences".
You do realize the other hobbies are the same? (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope you do realize that the same applies to most of the RL skills waved around as "yeah, but look what _my_ hobby teaches me" proof that someone's pet hobby is better than gaming.
E.g., yes, your daughter's piano skills. (God knows how many kids have been tortured with _that_.) Unless her goal in life is an underpaid job in an orchestra that skill is useful for exactly one thing: more playing the piano. Usefulness for any other RL activity: zero.
And yes, you could say that she's going to be a great pianist and earn teh big bucks by being some concert's super-star. Guess what? His chances are about as good to make money as a gaming superstar. Or rather, your daughter's chances are just as bad. Not everyone gets to be Fatal1ty and not everyone gets to be a superstar musician. There are 1000 times more people wanting such a job, than people who actually get one.
But at any rate, the same chances apply to making living out of gaming. He can theoretically end up making a living out of being a top gamer, same as your daughter can theoretically end up a legendary pianist. Your daughter can end up a composer instead, and he can end up a game programmer with that experience. Your daughter can end up scraping by on a minimum wage playing in some orchestra or some unknown band in a bar, he can end up a minimum-wage game tester.
More likely, for most children who went through that, the only result is, ta-da, that they killed some time with it.
So remind me, exactly what do you base that snottiness on, when you look down upon his hobby? No, seriously.
But let's move on, let's see more poster children for "look at what a cool RL hobby I have" idiocies that get waved around all the time:
- mountaineering, camping, and other excuses to go out in the wild. Exactly what skills do people learn there, and when will they apply them IRL? Because it seems to me that the only times when you'll apply any of them, is... next time you go do that hobby. That's it. E.g., exactly when will you have to find north by the moss on the trees... in a city? If you want the actual useful version of that, get a GPS navigation system. No, let's make no bullshit pretenses, it's just a way to kill time.
- fishing. The chances you'll ever feed and clothe your family with a fishing pole, are practically nil. You'll never catch enough fish to sell them and, say, pay for your kid's clothes and education with it, because fish are freaking cheap. You'll never get a job to sit near a lake with a fishing pole, either. The way it's done nowadays is with big boats and nets, not with a fishing rod. And even, let's say, in a post-apocalyptic Fallout-type scenario, where are you going to fish? There just aren't enough rivers around to support even the most minimum population that way. Most have been depleted already, and you may notice that the fishing hobbyists go to some fish farm actually, where fish are artifficially fed and raised for that. So again, chance to ever get any other use out of that skill: zero. It's just a way to kill some time, and any skill you get there will only ever be used when you next go fishing.
- messing with one's car. I hate to break it to some people, but _very_ few even save any money there. Yes, everyone has some anecdote of that time they fixed the car themselves and saved a fortune. But almost everyone forgets those other times when they just made it worse and had to pay more to get it fixed, or the money spent on all those extra bits and pieces and tools that never actually got used enough to pay for themselves. And usually what they save is not worth the time spent there. There are people who practically live in the garage. Even if you saved $100 once (and you won't save more, unless you also smelt and forge your components too), if you spent 20 hours in
to paraphrase the author: (Score:5, Insightful)
You can have something which is completely utilitarian, which is not a game. These programs exist: Iraqi culture simulations, reflex training programs, etc.
You can also have something which has a sense of whimsy and fun. This is a game, and some of them have the potential to make you think or to awe you with their beauty.
I don't know what the author is bitching about. He wants games without the fun, it would seem; games which take themselves as seriously as he does. Those just aren't games.
He thinks games are a medium on the level of television. This is wrong. The computer is the medium. Games are merely a flavor of program, much as game-shows are flavor of television. Do you expect your game-shows to "progress intellectually" as you age?
Fucking games journalists. Enough pretentious, bullshit opinion pieces. Get back to your fucking jobs.
Re:breaking up the narritive (Score:2, Insightful)
In any game which is both attempting to tell a story and be an 'adult' (as in intellectual/emotional maturity, not 18+ content) game, the gameplay should be *part* of the narrative.
Games which have to put the narrative on pause are really just short stories laid on top of game mechanics that, as you say, would do just as well without.
Re:Online flash games (Score:3, Insightful)
Indeed [xkcd.com]...
Seriously speaking, though, the popularity of flash games has also much to do with the fact that they're right there, easy to access. You receive an e-mail from a friend with a link to a new one, click it and can immediately start playing.
The current video-games now have online content and easy network access, but you still have to change medias and spend time and money. That makes a lot of difference.
Re:Adult Games (Score:3, Insightful)
Games simply containing sex and violence doesn't really sound like what he's looking for. Instead, by the sounds of it, he's looking for depth and challenge. The top games in this field IMO are:
Interesting that they'll all PC games, but after browsing my console game collection I came up pretty close to blank. Mass Effect is great fun but isn't actually all that deep when you get down to it. The Fire Emblem series is mentally challenging but not as deeply as the broader strategy and tactics games available on PC. The various other genres that I may seem to be ignoring such as sport, fighting or racing aren't really designed to expand the mind like a good piece of literature can - which is no criticism of those genres, but merely pointing out that they exist for a different level of entertainment.
Re:My advice - don't look for satisfaction in game (Score:3, Insightful)
I take it you've never spent time in a pub band, or even writing songs with your mates in a garage band. Being able to play a musical instrument is very rewarding even without 'being noticed'.
Probably not, this is news for nerds after all, not news for musicians ;D
Puzzle/Adventure (Score:3, Insightful)
Certain games in the Myst/Riven series, for example, have been challenging in an intellectually stimulating way, most notably Riven and Uru.
Many strategy games, particularly turn-based strategy games, also fit the bill.
I don't think games will ever become "educational" at the adult level, because in large part pedagogical concerns are part of the world of work for adults (stuff you have to learn for work, stuff you have to learn for this project or that one, etc.) and the point of gaming is to escape the world of work... unless we begin to transition to a society in which regular user interfaces for work-style tasks are constructed with game-like interfaces and metaphors, but I dont' see that happening.
The point for an "adult" game is to keep it from being utterly mindless and/or adolescent, to provide intellectual stimulation by requiring the juxtaposition and analytical processing of facts and information, even if these are fictional and appear in the context of a game.
To that end, my vote goes to the best of the puzzle/adventure games (the good ones with "puzzles" the scale of the entire game stretchign across contexts, not the shitty ones which have tended to be truly horrible an mind-numbing) and the turn-based strategy games.
By getting simpler. (Score:2, Insightful)
For these reasons I'd suggest as games mature they become less fantastical, and simpler in concept - or more or less the opposite of what you may imagine as a game maturing.
Re:My advice - don't look for satisfaction in game (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:My advice - don't look for satisfaction in game (Score:2, Insightful)
Two words: Interactive Fiction (Score:3, Insightful)
How come nobody has yet mentioned IF Archive? [ifarchive.org] The most innovative, thought provoking and literary games are not on your regular console.
Text adventures come in several flavours, many are typically puzzle-based, while others are just a sequential narrative. These have all the advantages of a novel in terms of profound concepts, possibilities and adult themes. But the active involvement that they require to keep the action going makes them a different experience compared to passive uncovering of the plot: they make you think about the storyline, step by step, and get involved in it in first person.
Also there are an annual competition that regularly provides new material, free to play. Some of these beasts provide the most original and interesting gameplays I've seen in a long while; see Galatea [wurb.com] as an example (you can play it online) [setonhill.edu].
Re:You do realize the other hobbies are the same? (Score:5, Insightful)
I play, and recently played at a close friends wedding. Not only did I get to give a unique, personal and priceless present whilst receive the adoration of hundreds of guests. I later carried an impromptu post-reception party with a smaller number of the guests at the hotel for several hours after the reception finished.
I didn't make any money, but I made a lot of people happy. If you think that's useless in real life then accountancy is the profession for you.
Re:Or, as Joshua put it... (Score:2, Insightful)
I'd let you watch, I would invite you, but the queens we use would not excite you......
Re:You do realize the other hobbies are the same? (Score:3, Insightful)
Your daughter can end up scraping by on a minimum wage playing in some orchestra or some unknown band in a bar, he can end up a minimum-wage game tester.
Apparently the fringe benefit of becoming a Minimum wage game tester is a free sex change. :]
(I joke.. I myself am a fairly horrible spelling/grammar person)
In general, I can agree with your abstract level of thought.. however I still disagree with the principles.
I think the problem may arise that, at least to me, a significant majority of the games out there teach no true auxiliary skills.
Yes; shooters/reaction games can in fact heighten your reaction time. Strategy games can improve critical thinking, etc..
But I'm not seeing what the auxiliary skills are for games like FO3 or GTA3+ (both games I love btw).. maybe reaction times; but it's not the defining aspect of those types of games.
Just it seems to me that most games being put out by the big houses are just more about entertainment and what's 'fun'. (I like fun.. I'm not bashing fun!).
Re:You do realize the other hobbies are the same? (Score:4, Insightful)
Unless her goal in life is an underpaid job in an orchestra that skill is useful for exactly one thing: more playing the piano. Usefulness for any other RL activity: zero.
You also learn music theory and music appreciation. Your world grows a little. Piano lessons as a kid might translate into guitar playing as a teen or becoming a professional musician. Honestly, I hate the attitude of "if it isnt making money then its stupid to do." Why go to college when you can just go to trade school? There's an argument that its worth educating people even if it doesnt translate into dollars.
I'm just saying that essentially games are the _same
Compared to learning a musical instrument or car repair? No way. Not even close.
Lastly, I do some car repair. Ive never "had to take it in because it was worse." Being educated about cars means lots of savings. A better maintained car is a longer running car. Inflated tires is better mpg. Being able to talk to a mechanic with knowledge on your side is power. Replacing worn parts beats paying for the tow and downtime. Heck, knowing whats wrong with a car means I can do the labor most of the time and I can shop around for the best price on parts, even if I cant install it.
Re:My advice - don't look for satisfaction in game (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Eye-hand coordination (Score:2, Insightful)
and most of the newer fighters coming along are video games in a sense anyway, because you no longer have direct control of the plane, and instead feed inputs to a computer which decides how best to interpret those inputs without letting the plane fall out of the sky.
Most of the time the value of the game is in the players' choice of games and purpose for playing them. Games are marketed primarily as entertainment, so most have an entertainment portion, but there are many games trying to teach people things, and many people repurpose games to learn from them (ie driving and flight simulators, the many games commissioned by the military for recruiting and training).
As many have already said, the question is not whether games can convey meaningful messages and expose people to new ideas, as they certainly can do so as much as any book, movie, or TV show. It's a question of what games you decide to play. Action games (whether FPS or otherwise) have started to bring in more story elements, but for the most part they still fall into the same realm as an action movie, and are mostly action-driven entertainment. An RPG, for the most part, is centered on story, it's simply a question of how far the developers were willing to go with a particular story.
Even a fairly light-hearted story like that in Disgaea (a console strategy-RPG) brings about some questions about good vs. evil, and how perspective can change what is good or evil (and for the most part, even though the game doesn't really take itself seriously, it's an idea to which a lot of people seem to need exposure). Even fairly open-ended RPGs like Fallout could have a lot to tell us, and more people are getting involved in writing for games every year that take their work more seriously than anyone involved in Super Mario Bros.
Actually... (Score:3, Insightful)
1. When I take my holy-spec raiding in WoW, I make 24 people very happy too. Used to be 39 >;)
2. Actually, the point was that we should stop measuring it all by utility, money, investment, etc. We do things because they're _fun_. And that goes for both my gaming and your playing an instrument.
You probably didn't put years into it, just so one day you can make those people happy at that wedding. You did it because you _liked_ doing it, right? The utility came incidentally, but what kept you doing it was that you _liked_ it. (If it was as a hobby, and not as a job, that is.) Let's not make further pretenses and accept it as just that.
3. What I'm trying to say is basically this: there was once a society and a culture, where once you've "grown up", you're supposed to no longer have any fun. You must think only of making/saving money for your family's survival, and spend every waking hour dedicating yourself to . Hence, that if you have any fun, and can't justify it as some kind of investment, you're irresponsible, immature, or a few other choice insults.
Some people IMHO seem still stuck in that mentality: that if they do anything, they must justify it as some kind of investment in the future. It must be "building character", or "learning RL skills" or whatever other excuse.
And I'd have nothing against it, if that was actually what they did. E.g., if they actually took a course or a certification or whatever actually qualifies as learning actual skills.
But most of the time it's flat out a lie. They just went and had fun, and any utility is at best incidental or non-existent. But they still have to pack it in that socially-acceptable lie. God forbid that they'd admit that they did something just because they liked doing it.
And I'm saying: let's stop that pretense already. We're already a few generations past the point where that bleak, no-fun-ever existence was necessary or even justified. We can afford to kill some time with the things we like. Be it a computer game, or playing an instrument, or tuning a car. Let's for once just admit, basically, "I did it because I liked it, and to kill some time."
Re:The idea is to move from 'play' to 'life' (Score:3, Insightful)
That rises the question of why you are participating in a discussion about video games. It also rises the question of "Why": What criterion would use of time need to satisfy in order to not be considered "waste" by you, and why ?
A bold claim. Can you back it with reasoning ?
Being entertained is a goal in itself, meaning that it satisfies a feedback loop in your brains, which is interpreted as a reward by them. Benefits towards meeting your other goals are a nice bonus, but not really necessary.
"Play" and "life" are not mutually exclusive, you know. And what, exactly speaking, makes being successful in life superior to being successful in a game ? Both bring you satisfaction, and both are ultimately fleeting moments.
"Meaningful" and "real" are useless in a discussion such as this, since what is meaningful to me isn't necessarily meaningful to you, or the other way around. And while "real" has an objective meaning, it seems that you meant it in some vague philosophical sense, rather than the objective one.
Perhaps you meant "useful" - the term "occupational game" hints that way - but that then rises the questions of: useful towards what end ? And why is that end more worthy of pursuing that the entertainment from playing games just for amusement ?
What purpose, exactly speaking, does this serve ? What is it that you want us to "Do", and why should we ?