And if you think you are like being a "real" gamer or a "hardcore" gamer or just not being pretentious by saying that games should only be fun...like because that's what they originally were and that's what they've always been...you don't love games. You might think you do because you think you're being pure to the original idea of what games are and therefore what they're supposed to be, but you actually hate them. You hate the potential of what they could be and all the potential expressive power that video games have inherently. You're scared of seeing something change from just fun and to fun in a whole web of other things that could completely change your understanding of what the world could be through interactivity. You're scared of that, and if you think that games should just be fun you are a coward.
-Anthony Burch
I play games to have fun. I don't think I could engage in an emotional roller-coaster of a game for hours at a time. There might even be some serious topics I'd absolutely refuse to engage in with an interactive medium. Who would seriously want to sit down and play the video game equivalent of Schindler's List? Representing either side? The movie was difficult, and all I had to do was sit and watch.
That's not to say these types of games shouldn't be made. For the brave gamers, the hardened masochists who want to sit down and bear an emotional beating for 8-20 hours, by all means. Enjoy.
For myself, maybe I am a coward. If I want to be moved to tears, emotionally man-handled or otherwise - I know plenty of other mediums where I can get my fix. When I sit down with a controller in hand, I'm just looking to have some fun. Anthony might think I'm a cowardly gamer who hates games because I only want to have fun, but as he's looking down his nose at me from the ivory tower that is Destructoid - I AM having fun, even if I don't realize I actually hate what I'm doing. Yet there's Anthony, frustrated because gaming hasn't delivered to him his Citizen Kane.
People will still make your dumbed-down shooters and needlessly urban driving games, even once the medium has passed you by. No need to panic. No need to get in the way, either.
I am scared of most buttholes... but they are quite necessary. This is like saying buttholes are only for taking dumps. Now to most of us, this is true... but to others... they are for more than that.
And yet again, the point of the good Reverend's eponymous rant is missed completely.
I can prove that The Rev was not calling YOU a coward. How?
You: "That's not to say these types of games shouldn't be made."
Anthony's point, stated clear as day in the rant, was that people who think games should ONLY be "fun" are denying the potential of the medium. Monsieur Burch was NOT saying that people who only want to play fun games are "cowards;" he was saying that people who believe games cannot and should not be more than simple "fun" are the biggest threat to the legitimacy of games as an artistic medium. Do you see the disconnect?
You: "That's not to say these types of games shouldn't be made."
Hypothetical "Hardcore Gamer" Who Despises The Idea Of Games Moving Beyond Simple Fun: "These types of games [artgames and the like] shouldn't be made. Not ever. They are not fun, and as such are sucky games."
There is a very crucial difference between these two philosophies. I hope you can spot it.
Definitely, I knew when I wrote this out that I didn't exactly fall into the category of gamer Anthony is describing. Not entirely at least.
His rant still comes out as sanctimonious, pretentious drivel. It doesn't sit well, a kid pretending to know better than everyone else. It's pretty bold to bluntly state that a certain group of gamers hate gaming and is incapable of recognizing it. Or that they are cowards for not wanting more from the industry.
He's chasing an ideal which I don't think is attainable in the gaming industry, or necessarily worth pursuing. He's also insulting those of us who are content with what we have.
I don't see anything wrong with the state of gaming as it stands, indie developers can make their pretentious titles and find an audience. Games with deep meaning do get made, and I think the success of those games is completely proportionate to the amount of gamers who are interested in behaving like douches.
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Destructoid is an independently-run publication forged by our love of video games and the gaming community's need of accountable enthusiast press living the dream since March 16, 2006
Grimspoon's blog
follow this blog
subscribe via RSS
send message
invite to meetup+play
People will still make your dumbed-down shooters and needlessly urban driving games, even once the medium has passed you by. No need to panic. No need to get in the way, either.
I wouldn't dream of it.
I am scared of most buttholes... but they are quite necessary. This is like saying buttholes are only for taking dumps. Now to most of us, this is true... but to others... they are for more than that.
No need to condone or condemn either stance.
And yet again, the point of the good Reverend's eponymous rant is missed completely.
I can prove that The Rev was not calling YOU a coward. How?
You: "That's not to say these types of games shouldn't be made."
Anthony's point, stated clear as day in the rant, was that people who think games should ONLY be "fun" are denying the potential of the medium. Monsieur Burch was NOT saying that people who only want to play fun games are "cowards;" he was saying that people who believe games cannot and should not be more than simple "fun" are the biggest threat to the legitimacy of games as an artistic medium. Do you see the disconnect?
You: "That's not to say these types of games shouldn't be made."
Hypothetical "Hardcore Gamer" Who Despises The Idea Of Games Moving Beyond Simple Fun: "These types of games [artgames and the like] shouldn't be made. Not ever. They are not fun, and as such are sucky games."
There is a very crucial difference between these two philosophies. I hope you can spot it.
Anthony was implying that games should be BOTH fun and meaningful, not that games should be thought provoking and not fun to play.
@FFORDESOON.
Definitely, I knew when I wrote this out that I didn't exactly fall into the category of gamer Anthony is describing. Not entirely at least.
His rant still comes out as sanctimonious, pretentious drivel. It doesn't sit well, a kid pretending to know better than everyone else. It's pretty bold to bluntly state that a certain group of gamers hate gaming and is incapable of recognizing it. Or that they are cowards for not wanting more from the industry.
He's chasing an ideal which I don't think is attainable in the gaming industry, or necessarily worth pursuing. He's also insulting those of us who are content with what we have.
I don't see anything wrong with the state of gaming as it stands, indie developers can make their pretentious titles and find an audience. Games with deep meaning do get made, and I think the success of those games is completely proportionate to the amount of gamers who are interested in behaving like douches.