Quantcast
Community Discussion: Blog by ruicraveirinha | On the Tyranny of FunDestructoid
LIGHTS:  ON | OFF
surf dtoid with arrow keys

HOT GAMES
REVIEWS VIDEOS COMMUNITY FORUM SHOP

pc PS4 PS3 NEXT XBOX XBOX 360 WII U 3DS PS vita ANDROID APPLE

REMOVE ALL ADS?
Guaranteed contest entry?
A new video show?
Something else?

Vote in our membership poll

About
Hi. I’m a critic of the worst kind (the ones who think highly of their opinions), so I apologize for sometimes seeming arrogant. Since criticism is a part of me, I love to be criticized; so you can have your revenge in the comments page. I myself, see criticism as the only way to improve oneself, so go ahead… just keep it civil.

I’m in love with videogames ever since they started to become a more “artistic” medium. I have little doubt that they are a new and exciting form of art, and will eventually replace cinema as the lead audiovisual medium for the masses. The videogame medium is still young and immature, but it is also bursting with creativity and new ideas, which makes it much more exciting than other mediums.

So, this is my game blog. Here, I will review games and write about games’ artistic trends, history and future. In my reviews, I will take a different approach than most media outlets and magazines. I will take a closer look into games’ art design, plot and narrative, level and gameplay design. The authors behind the games will also be a special point of interest. Graphics, length, and other aspects will be completely overlooked, since I find it ridiculous to evaluate art on a mere technical or value standpoint. Movies and records are never criticized for having small budgets, being too short or not being “fun” enough. They are evaluated for the quality of their workmanship, art, ideas and meanings. So should games.
Player Profile
Follow me:
ruicraveirinha's sites
Badges
Following (3)  

ruicraveirinha
12:26 PM on 07.21.2010



Videogame media’s sine qua non condition for a good videogame: being fun. If, and only if it is fun, can it be deemed a good buy, a prime piece of entertainment or what they would foolishly call a work of “art”. Sure, technologically adept graphic engines, seemingly complex AI routines, innovative gameplay design and, occasionally (rarely?), captivating narrative and unique aesthetics can seal the deal. But the first and foremost condition for any review to assess, is each videogame’s “fun factor”. All those other features are, at best, just rationalization fodder for reviewers to find in their hearts if the game is worthy of 8, 9 or 10, B+, A or A+, or the equivalent in whichever scale is chosen by that publication. Of course, this is not just a case of the media, it is also a case for consumers. They’re the ones who determine what media focuses on, and naturally, together, they determine what videogame production focuses on, which is, undeniably, “fun”. But what is fun? What is the meaning that hides beneath this seemingly harmless three letter word, and why do so many of us spend half their waking life looking for it, in film, music, TV and videogames?

Csikszentmihaliy is a psychologist who studied entertainment across different contexts; through his research, he designed a model which encompasses entertainment’s cognitive and emotional basis. He discovered what he called flow, “a state in which people are so involved in an activity that nothing else seems to matter; the experience itself is so enjoyable that people will do it even at great cost, for the sheer sake of doing it”. Sound familiar? In reality, flow is more or less what people understand to be “fun”: a pleasurable state of high arousal. But there is more to this “flow”. Besides a profound sense of enjoyment, whilst in flow, people enter a state of deep focus and concentration in their activity, they feel at one with their surroundings, losing any self-consciousness and awareness of the self, and even lose track of time.



Csikszentmihaliy also digresses on the conditions needed for activities to incite flow as a ratio between challenges and skills. According to his studies, for someone to feel flow, challenges’ difficulty has to adapt dynamically to the skills of the practitioner, always being great enough to warrant improvement, but without ever seeming too hard to achieve. When the complexity of a challenge far outweighs the skills of the practitioner, that person loses concentration, building up anxiety, and eventually leading into frustration when the challenge is left unconquered. Conversely, when the skills far outweigh the challenge, the result is boredom. The very definition of a game fits into this challenge/skill model – games are systems bound by rules, in which an artificial conflict is proposed to players, a challenge that requires effort (read skills) to be achieved, and which has different outcomes, some good (win), some bad (lose). As you can see, the game activity has challenges and skills built into its weaving structure which is why ludic videogames can so easily mimic the cognitive and emotional effect of flow (fun) in players.



Fun can thus be understood as a concentrated state of mind in which self, time and space dilute themselves as we become short-circuited to a specific activity. In other words, fun or flow, is a hedonic, mindless past-time, one which we engage for its capacity to release pleasure hormones in our brain for long periods of time. Fun is the very definition of entertainment. Now we have to wonder if fun is really the defining quality which distinguishes good entertainment, good art and good videogames from the bad. If you believe that the best quality a videogame should possess is the ability to waste your time, with you mindlessly feeling pleasure as if hotwired to an endorphin disposal tube, then feel free to continue to uphold the logic of fun. Corporations will be pleased to know that there are more of you anxiously awaiting for your next pleasure fix, i.e. the next XX hours spent vacantly staring at a TV screen. Ever wonder why you compulsively buy games? It is because the “fun” high is, like most highs, shallow and short-lived, your body needs it constantly because it never feels totally satisfied. It’s the media equivalent of fast-food – it tastes sweet and salty in the first bite, but it never really feels satisfying enough, and once you finish eating, you’ll still get a spike of appetite and hunger. It’s not nutritional, but it’s addicting, because that is the only way you’ll keep coming back for more, time and time and time again.



Obviously, the true value of videogames, as in other media, has nothing to do with this “fun”. It’s neither the pleasure nor the challenge in themselves that make up good entertainment. It’s challenge’s semantic value, its meaning and its proposition of growth for each and any one of us. If a videogame only challenges you into mindlessly pressing buttons to kill monsters on screen, then it is worthless. This is a lesson which in older mediums is fully understood. In cinema, for instance, while some critics might praise the latest explosion fest blockbuster, they will consistently distinguish between popcorn “fun” entertainment, and proper films. Very rarely is something as discardable as a blockbuster elevated to film of the year. On the other hand, the same is practically a given every year in the videogame medium. The thing is that movie critics simply expect more out of film than just fun, they expect true drama and emotion – amusement, sadness, anger, joy, relief, fear -, they expect an artist’s views on life and socially relevant issues, they expect added cultural value, articulate narrative discourse and artistic expression. These are the challenges which we should be demanding for videogames. Whether or not they end up being “fun” is besides the point. Good media is additive, not reductive. It does not subtract time from your life, by having it pleasurably slip as sand through your fingers; it adds time to your life with new sensations, new emotions, new experiences, new memories and new ideas. It changes you, changes who you are, what you know and believe in. Fun is not part of this equation, nor ever was.



The problem is that society, because of economic interests, harasses you to continuously seek out pleasure, no matter how shallow and unfulfilling it may be. They afford you sensorial pornography – all pleasure, no emotion. And the deal seems sweet, since you get free pleasure with none of the added cost or effort. But true media bliss has a price: it is demanding, requires work, education and culture on part of its audience. This is the most powerful insight of flow theory: meaningful challenges require meaningful skills. You know that you cannot extract pleasure from great literary masterpieces without first achieving a certain level of maturity, learning how to properly read, decode metaphors, allegories, paradoxes, grasp the sociocultural contexts in which authors wrote, have some idea of genre tropes, formal and narrative structures, and you have read many many many other books before. Then why should videogames be different? Why should videogames be so deep and artistic if even kids can play them? Their semantics so powerful, that even teenagers can understand what they’re about? Why should videogames be so moving and thought-provoking, if all they require is for you to happily press a few buttons for you to feel “fun”? Why would the so-called “great masterpieces of the medium” require no cognitive and interpretative effort to play? The answer, no matter how infatuated we may be, is always the same: because videogames aren’t, for the most part, good media.

Videogames shouldn”t necessarily be fun. They can be fun. But their value lies in everything else besides that which you call fun, all of that which rewards you in deeper ways. You simply can’t be spoon fed “fun” as if a little child and expect to extract something relevant out from that experience. So forget fun. Forget formulas, genres, pre-conceptions, clichés, aesthetic trends, blockbusters and big company logos. Praise videogames that challenge you in meaningful ways. Praise authorship, innovation, personality, uniqueness, ambiguity, non-linearity, complexity, aesthetic view, virtuosity… praise that which challenges you! Praise artistic expression above all else, and if you do so, maybe one day videogames will be more than just lowbrow entertainment.



Is this blog awesome? Vote it up!




Those who have come:



Did you know? You can now get daily or weekly email notifications when humans reply to your comments.

Legacy Comments (will be imported soon)


Videogames, for the most part, aren't good media yet. I tentatively agree with you, or at least I understand where you're coming from. Fun isn't enough, that's for sure. I definitely agree that it should be about so much more than mindless entertainment. So, great post. It's something to keep in mind.
Fun is a dreadful word, because it's so imprecise. Game designers really need to develop a better vocabulary for talking about these things.

My own guideline is that the games that I make have to be "compelling". That's a fancy way of saying that they can't be boring. Boring your audience is the one unpardonable sin that I can't let any creative type get away with.

And yes, I've seen Waiting For Godot and its ilk. If you want to talk about the unbearable tedium of existence, chat with your dog; don't write a play.
Do you think a big problem could be that we have all become Pavlov's dog in simply expecting "fun" to be the outcome of gaming? It's whole existance up to now has been dictated around fun so, from many devs standpoints, why fix a system if they don't see it as in need of repairs? Even in serious games there seems to be a "fun factor" involved. I totally would appreciate what you are proposing to be realized but I ponder the ability for these to be games then. If you make a game that is all about emotion, would replayability still exist? Does that even matter? Are we just programmed to expect a game to play over and over? I'm not saying it can't be done just that it would be really hard to be able to market these. Would we still call them video "games" and not video "experiences"?
"maybe one day videogames will be more than just lowbrow entertainment."

Really? Really! I mean I'm not denying that this is sadly the best blog that been written today but I don't think I can ever agree with someone that thinks like you do or at least expresses themselves like you. I agree with the sentiments that games have the potential to be so many different things and evoke so many different reactions but you act as if there is only one true way for games to progress and that completely nullifies those thoughts.

We shouldn't ignore games that don't attempt to not just be fun. Wesley linked to Anthony's Rev Rant and that is the sort of thing I could get behind. Not a complete segregation of the entire video game industry but the increased production of artistic expression in games. Why can we not value games for what they are instead of what they can be. Expect mainstream games to be mainstream with hints of "art" and art games to be artsy with hints of fun. Simples.
You claim that for video games, or anything else, to really be "worth" anything they need to "challenge" us in the sense that they encourage us to "expand" ourselves, to take in new ideas and views, to be aware of more afterwards than we were beforehand, to somehow be changed by them. You seem to apply this idea to more or less "universal" ingredients - "emotions", "experiences", "ideas".

My question is, can a game "expand" the player, not necessarily by taking on some sort of universal truth, but simply though the quality and creativity of its craftsmanship, the way it's put together to deliver what the creators intended, even if this is just "fun" in the sense you describe it? Do you need to know the symbolism behind Michelangelo's David to see it as an enduring masterpiece in its medium, or can it still be appreciated just for the sheer amount of skill and effort the artist put into it, and the way he was able to channel all of that into an exceedingly worthwhile result? Can video games similarly "expand" us by setting a higher standard for a cohesive, polished product, thus changing our perception of what a "fun" game should be?
Fun is like the carbonation in my Coca-Cola(TM). Without it, it just tastes terrible.

I need to be entertained. The only way video games, books or movies can get away without "fun" is if I'm either bettering myself (exer-gaming) or learning something. And even then I still need to be a bit entertained or else boredom sets in and I go do something else. Like coke. *snort*
@Wesley Susaya
Obviously, I am in total agreement with Burch's opinion.
@Wesley Susaya
Obviously, I am in total agreement with Burch's opinion.
Great blogpost. I'm not sure I would equate 'fun' with 'flow.' A flow state as I understand it would apply to something that requires intense concentration to trigger it - an example,using gaming, would be playing through an extremely difficult game like Mega Man where you get into the 'zone' and blaze through levels without dying or getting hit.

Anyone that has spent even a few minutes with a Mega Man game will know that to get to the point where you can achieve this type of 'flow' it requires setting aside 'fun,' dealing with frustration and focusing on skill. It takes a lot of patience, trial and error and frazzled nerves - that shit is not fun.

On the other hand games like Farmville which are indeed mindless and addicting require no 'flow' state at all. Many people consider them fun - yet they require little concentration and minimal engagement.

Seems to me that the concept of "Flow" is pretty distinct from what you are calling "fun."
Great blogpost. I'm not sure I would equate 'fun' with 'flow.' A flow state as I understand it would apply to something that requires intense concentration to trigger it - an example,using gaming, would be playing through an extremely difficult game like Mega Man where you get into the 'zone' and blaze through levels without dying or getting hit.

Anyone that has spent even a few minutes with a Mega Man game will know that to get to the point where you can achieve this type of 'flow' it requires setting aside 'fun,' dealing with frustration and focusing on skill. It takes a lot of patience, trial and error and frazzled nerves - that shit is not fun.

On the other hand games like Farmville which are indeed mindless and addicting require no 'flow' state at all. Many people consider them fun - yet they require little concentration and minimal engagement.

Seems to me that the concept of "Flow" is pretty distinct from what you are calling "fun."
I disagree with this blog. A video game without "fun"... I think "flow" or at least "challenges and appropriate rewards" would be better since it would cover things like survival/horror games, war sims, brain teasers, farmville, etc... would be pointless. As bad as wine without alcohol, novels that don't tell stories, or Shakespeare without puns and dick jokes.

No media owes its existence to the investors, the analysts, the OCD fans, or the insufferable wankers in academia. Even the world's most refined art forms would have died in infancy if they did not begin with an appeal to the needs of the common man. To forget that is to become one of those rock bands that refuse to play the anthem that made them popular, may their concerts forever be empty.

Intellectuals will crash the party in their own good time, once there are enough regular people having fun that one can start feeling big about bullying regular people with rules about the right and wrong way to enjoy their gaming.
@ Lazaro Cruz
You're being too narrow in your interpretation of the concept of flow. I believe what you're mentioning is a very heightened sense of flow, one which we see high-end practitioners of sports and games employ to diminish response time of physical reflexes. But flow is a much more wide and prevalent state in our daily experiences. Csikszentmihaliy mentions flow in practically every human activity: reading books, watching films, walking, talking, working, etc. Flow basically means that you're completely and joyously immersed in a task, to the point you forget everything else; not necessarily that you that you're short-circuited to your arms and legs.

Csikszentmihaliy called his book "Flow, the Psychology of Entertainment", and isn't fun the very basis of entertainment? Isn't being immersed in a task, while taking pleasure from it, "fun"?

@PvPPY

I don't want to crash nobody's party. Like Burch, I know there will always be fun games, and fun films, and fun TV shows. That's the norm. But that's not art or cultural expression. Those are past-times people engage on to relax, enjoy and have a good time. That's fine, and it will never end. I too engage in fun activities. The error, is believing that "fun" is the alpha and omega. That it is beginning and end. And more so, that "fun" has anything to do with a media's cultural or artistic value. It doesn't, Mona Lisa isn't fun, and Beethoven's 9th isn't fun, and Citizen Kane isn't fun. And good videogames might be fun, but that will never be what distinguishes them from bad videogames.

Why can't we have different paradigms of what a videogame can be, instead of what it should be? Why can't videogames be beautiful? Mellow? Mesmerizing? Sad? Frustrating? Difficult to understand? Ambiguous? Why can't videogames not be fun?
@rui - Maybe what's turning me off is the notion that that all of these other things games "could be" is somehow exclusive to being "fun". You sometimes admit that the two could go hand-in-hand but mostly position them as opposing directions.

"not fun", making a moment in a game something a player can't enjoy, is the negative space of videogaming. It can be put to amazing artistic use (Suda51, Beat Takeshi, Kojima, and many others) but you can't make a game consist of it entirely. Nobody would play it. If the platforming and climbing in Shadow of the Colossus wasn't enjoyable in a simple and visceral way, maybe I wouldn't have wanted to keep playing when the tone of killing the mosters became sad rather than triumphant. The conclusion of Snake's fight against The Boss in MGS3 wouldn't have been so stunning without contrast to the game up to that point.

I'd suggest that Citizen Kane (with its innovative direction and camerawork) gave its audiences a dose of the same mind-blowing spectacle as Star Wars and Avatar did two and three generations later. It's hard for modern audiences to misinterpret why that movie is held in such high regard when virtually every film since has copied and expanded on the cinematic techniques Kane introduced.
Nice blog,

We all have different ideas of what fun is. I think you could have saved some time and left it at that. Your intentions are good and there is nothing wrong with seeking new experiences.

I'm not sure how explaining Flow helps your case, as it can co exit with both hot and cold media.

As a side note my tutors would always kick my ass for starting a paragraph with 'obviously' because it comes of as insulting, obviously.
This started off as an interesting read. Flow is a fascinating theory, of which I am a huge fan. I spent quite a bit of time examining the concept of flow for my Master's thesis. While I think you are mistaken in the way you interchange flow and "fun", I was interested to see where you were going. Until.....

"In other words, fun or flow, is a hedonic, mindless past-time, one which we engage for its capacity to release pleasure hormones in our brain for long periods of time. Fun is the very definition of entertainment. Now we have to wonder if fun is really the defining quality which distinguishes good entertainment, good art and good videogames from the bad. If you believe that the best quality a videogame should possess is the ability to waste your time, with you mindlessly feeling pleasure as if hotwired to an endorphin disposal tube, then feel free to continue to uphold the logic of fun."

You completely misinterpreted some of the characteristics identified as part of flow. Losing self-consciousness and track of time does not equate a mindless waste of time. Self-consciousness refers to the resources (which exist in limited capacity) directed toward monitoring one's self-concept in order to create a balanced state. Self-consciousness and keeping track of time are themselves a waste of resources that prevent optimal performance on complex tasks. Flow, or the reduction of the burden imposed by resource wasting activities is an overwhelmingly productive and desirable state. Flow is focused, fun, rewarding, and highly-productive.

I think I may try to put together a full post on this topic. Just have to find the time.
"Beethoven's 9th isn't fun"

I'm sure there are plenty of people who think so. Have they a wrong understanding of the term "fun", is it that they use it flippantly that makes it an unjustified way of access to the piece? And what of metallers who like to listen to an interpretation of Bach? Have they no right to listen to it without the right sense of piousness?
And much of Bioshock's fun actually derives from its thematic complexity, its original atmosphere and its stylistic playfulness. These things can be fun. The gameplay didn't impress or interest many people.
Even if the majority agrees with the general concern, this is where I think many are divided almost by necessity.
@ctrain
"You completely misinterpreted some of the characteristics identified as part of flow. Losing self-consciousness and track of time does not equate a mindless waste of time. Self-consciousness refers to the resources (which exist in limited capacity) directed toward monitoring one's self-concept in order to create a balanced state. Self-consciousness and keeping track of time are themselves a waste of resources that prevent optimal performance on complex tasks. Flow, or the reduction of the burden imposed by resource wasting activities is an overwhelmingly productive and desirable state. Flow is focused, fun, rewarding, and highly-productive. "

They're productive solely towards the execution of the activity, but that doesn't guarantee (and here is where I disagree from Csikszentmihaliy) that it is a productive activity in terms of your self growth. People achieve "flow" by playing COD multiplayer, by reading pink novels, watching TV or simply walking; do these activities teach people meaningful skills? Do they wide their cultural, psychological and social horizons? No. Yet, they induce flow, and allo people to remain entertained.

Which is precisely my point: it isn't the fun that is important, it's what comes out of it, what extends beyond the boundaries of the activity into our lives that is of value, whether or not it induced "fun" or "flow". Our capability of pleasurably engaging in activities is not the key factor, but activities capacity to change us, to better us, to challenge us in meaningful ways that counts. That is good media.

@Ty

Again, it's not the fun that matters. People may find Bioshock entertaining or boring because of the shooting, as they may find it entertaining or boring because of its setting, narrative and sub-text. Now, which of the two is more important? Which challenges players to better understand cultural, sociological and political issues? Killing splicers with cool shotguns and lighting bolts, or learning about the consequences of objectivism and laissez faire capitalism?
The answer is obvious. One truly challenges players to think in new ways and to learn, the other is content with stimulating their more primal aggression instincts. It doesn't matter that shooting is actually more fun (to most) than the story. The setting and its narrative is what will allow Bioshock to be studied, as if a piece of literature, theater or film, for years to come. The "Doom" shooting will be forgotten as part of our current game design zeitgeist. Wanna bet?

Back to Top
DLC   |   BEST Games of 2012   |   Best PC Games   |   Best PS3 Games   |   Best Xbox 360 Games   |   Best Wii U Games   |   Best 3DS Games




All content is yours to recycle through our Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing requiring attribution. Our communities are obsessed with videoGames, movies, anime, and toys.

Living the dream since March 16, 2006

Advertising on destructoid is available: Please contact them to learn more