You should follow us on Twitter here
Join us - it's free
Sign up or Login



Articles: full stories summaries
a
a
?


 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Home #PC


Indie games don't have to act like indie games photo

I try and be an open minded person. I work hard at improving my world view, I attempt to put aside all prejudice, and I always aim to accept different points of view. However, I have learned that my opinion of myself is an illusion. I am not open minded. My world view is terrible, my prejudice defines me and alternative points of view disgust me. 

At least, that's how so-called "art games" make me feel. 

Perhaps I'm just too old fashioned, but after repeated attempts to "get" the vast majority of indie games out there, I find myself failing time and time again. That's not to say I think all indie games are terrible. Far from it, in fact. Some of my favorite games are independently made. However, my favorite indie games all succeed for one reason -- they don't go out their way to "act" indie. 

It's an amazing concept to grasp, but indie games don't have to act like indie games. It's true! Read on to learn the arcane secrets I have unearthed. 

This editorial was inspired by a game called The Path. If you've not heard of it, The Path was developed by Tale of Tales, a studio famous for making indie games that act like indie games. The Path is, itself, a classic case of this phenomenon. According to Tale of Tales, "The Path offers an atmospheric experience of exploration, discovery and introspection through a unique form of gameplay, designed to immerse you deeply in its dark themes."

The Path, however, is not an atmospheric experience of exploration, discovery and introspection. It is, in fact, something far more simple than that. It is bullshit. Pretentious, contradictory and unbearably dull, The Path is everything terrible about art games, and perfectly encapsulates the reason why most indie developers still live hand to mouth, working on their "art" in a basement somewhere in a bad part of town. 

It could have been brilliant, in actual fact, but it was so busy trying to be an art game that it forgot to be a fun game, or at least an interesting one. The game gives you control of a young girl and tells you to go to Grandmother's house. It also warns you to stick to the path. If you obey the game's rules, you will run slowly along a path for a few minutes before going to Grandmother's house. You'll then spend ages clicking your way through a glorified cinematic, only to be told that you have failed the game. 

Here is where The Path commits the first sin of indie gaming. It is pretentious. It gives you one rule to follow and then tells you that you have failed when you obey it, all the while going "Aaah, aaah, look how clever we've just been. We've just blown your mind, haven't we? Now go on the Internet and tell everyone how beautiful this fucking brilliant game is!" I'm sure there's a message in there about rebellion and choosing your own path, but I'm buggered if I know the exact meaning. This is because The Path commits a second sin. It is vague. 

This is another favorite of so-called art games. Pretending you have a deep meaning by telling the player absolutely nothing is not clever. I'm all for extrapolating one's own meaning from a game, but you need to provide me something to go on if you expect me to care. Games like The Path come across as clueless and out of their depth. They're a mess of vague images and incoherent babble and it only really means anything to the people who made it. The Path may well have a rich meaning and a righteous subtext, but it's buried under needlessly waffling poetry and overly obscure images. The end product is a game that comes across as smug more than anything else. Self-satisfied tripe. 

I don't mean to pick on The Path entirely. The Void is another prime example of a game that tries too hard to be ambiguous, and instead comes across as bleary drivel, cobbled together by people with no idea how to make good games. The Void was, in fact, the first game that made me ponder the question: Just because it's an indie game, does it really have to act like one? Would it really kill these people to throw in just a little direction? Just a little guidance? Just a little reassurance that we're not wasting our fucking time? 

Like The Path, The Void had promise. It had a beautifully bleak atmosphere, reminiscent of Demon's Souls. A feeling of death and dread more subtle than your usual retail game. But, like all indie games that try too hard, the brilliant atmosphere and premise was squandered on needlessly cloudy dialog and a complete lack of direction. It's clear that developers think they're being clever when they do this, that they're doing something different and forcing players to think. However, in order to think about something, one needs at least some shred of material for their brain to work with. It's like telling me to believe in God without providing me with some evidence. I refuse to make my brain run with nothing.

The irritating thing is that art games and indie games don't have to act like this, but there appears to be some sort of mentality that makes developers think that they do. You can have a game with rich subtext and interesting ideas without making your game boring, slow, vague, pretentious and so fucking stupid.

The Marriage is another one. At least the developer, Rod Humble, admits his game is pretentious. It's basically a game about squares and circles that float around and have thoroughly meaningless interactions. If you didn't know it was called The Marriage, it could be about anything. You'll only really get why you wasted your time with this unexplained, boring, soundless, horrible looking game if you read Humble's post-game fucking essay on the thing. 

And The Marriage's message? 

"The game is my expression of how a marriage feels," explains Humble. "The blue and pink squares represent the masculine and feminine of a marriage. They have differing rules which must be balanced to keep the marriage going."

Wow. A marriage is about different people working together to balance their needs. Yes, we needed a fucking game to tell us that, and in such a contrived, weird way. It was such a secret before, that I am fucking thrilled we finally had a game that cracked the secrets of marriage. Thank God for art games. They state the fucking obvious, but they do it in such a convoluted and ambiguous way that it almost looks like they're being deep and profound.  

I think my main problem, however, is how these particular indie games seem to want to sacrifice fun in the name of art. Why can a game not be both? Why do some developers get this idea in their head that games need to be vague, pretentious, slow and unhelpful in order to be interesting? Why couldn't the marriage have been more than just silent shapes that look like they were drawn in MS Paint? Why could it not have looked more interesting, had some sound, had at least a little more going for it? 

Why does The Void have to rob you of any sense of direction? Why can't its characters speak plainly? Why does it want to introduce new gameplay ideas without giving us some sort of tangible idea about how the new ideas work? Why does The Path force players to walk across barren, empty forests with points of interest flung miles apart? Why does the game make you pick up 144 flowers? Why does the game not tell you anything about its ideas, and why is the game wedged so firmly up its own arse?

There is no excuse for it. The factors that make these games dull, boring, frustrating or smarmy don't add to the introspection or artistic value of the game. They only serve to turn people off. I don't know how anybody could have the nerve to make a game like The Marriage or The Path, play it, and then think that they created a masterpiece. That is, unless they're falling into a sheep-like mentality that tells them this is what indie games should be. The irony here is that these developers want to force gamers to think for themselves, and yet they themselves are subscribing to a hive mind that makes them develop their pretentious indie games in the same way as other pretentious indie games. 

There are indie games out there that legitimately try and break boundaries, and do it in fun, interesting, or otherwise valuable ways. Tag is a fantastic example of an indie game that truly tries to drive the medium forward, but does so in an engaging and honest way. Braid was able to be pretentious and fuzzy with its "meaning," but still make a fun and engaging platformer with mechanics that were a joy to tinker with. It can totally be done! You don't have to hide your precious "meaning" under layers of bullshit, and just because you're an indie game, that doesn't mean you can't be fun, or engaging, or valuable to the majority of players. 

Of course, most of these indie games get away with their bullshit because there is always a subgroup of people too terrified of looking stupid to argue against "art." Your game can be a broken, waffling, irritating mess, but if you call it an artistic endeavor, there will be an army of pretentious Internet professors defending it and telling dissenters that they just don't understand

To indie developers, I would say this: By all means have your messages, meanings and subtexts. Games are just as valid a medium for introspection and exploration as any other. However, also be aware that if you create interactive entertainment, you are demanding extra attention and effort from your audience, and typically an audience needs to be rewarded, not punished, for the investment it's making in your game. 

What most of you are doing right now is easy. It's easy as fuck to make some vague shapes and rambling poetry dialog and claim that it has meaning. Actually try making an artistic, important, introspective game, but try making it fun at the same time. Try and do more with your message than throwing some obscure ideas together and telling us to figure it out. You're not being clever, you're not being deep, and you sure as fuck aren't being unique. You're being like all the other indie games that act like indie games. Have some balls, commit to your message, and give your audience something that is both deep and enjoyable. It can be done. It's just far easier to be like all the other "artistic" indie games out there. 

Well again, I say -- just because your game is indie, doesn't mean it has to act like it is.


Continue reading: More PC stories





237 comments | showing # 1 to 50
prev
next 50 comments

BalloonFighter's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:04
BalloonFighter
Just about to read but let me give you a preemptive bravo.It's the same reason some art turns people off. Stop being such weirdos.
Magnalon's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:04
Magnalon
Art is whatever you want it to be. When people loved telling stories around a campfire, that was art, and people were resistant to musical ensemble.

When people accepted music, that was art, and people were resistant to scripted theater.

When people gathered in a theater to watch scripted plays, they called it art, then were resistant to film.

When people gathered in a movie theater to enjoy film, they were resistant to accept video games.

It's all arbitrary. But what isn't arbitrary is pretentious games begging to be called "art", just like you're saying above, Jim. It will just come naturally, devs: chill out!
CowMuffins's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:05
CowMuffins
So, I suppose you think Interstellar Marines is the way indie games should be?
jkh13's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:10
jkh13
I agree entirely with this article, there are loads of indie games that try too hard to be arty and meaningful whilst forgetting that games are an interactive medium and must be engaging the person playing at some level for him/her to continue playing. You can make a game as meaningful as you want but the person playing won't give a shit unless the game has some way of making the player want to play more of it.

Braid is a perfect example of when it works, the game can be considered meaningful and 'arty' (or just pretentious) but it is succesful at getting its message across because of its innovative and fun gameplay.
Hamza CTZ Aziz's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:10
Hamza CTZ Aziz
CowMuffins: Unrelated, but love your avatar. ACTION HANKKKKKK!
BileSoup's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:12
BileSoup
so, you could say these games succeed as art, but not as games?
Arclight's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:13
Arclight
:) I agree kind sir
ndschroede23's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:15
ndschroede23
I like the article, and it's my main problem with indie art games. I played Passage, and I really did not like it at all. I understand that there's meaning about going by yourself or with a spouse or something, and that playing it twice would help me get a better idea about this meaning, but after playing through it once I had absolutely no desire to go through and play it again to get this meaning.

Braid is probably my favorite indie game, but I disagree with you that the meaning was convoluted and pretentious. I thought it was presented in a great way, and was as clear as it could be without blatantly hitting you over the head with it.

I have to wonder, sometimes, if fun is a necessity for a game. I guess maybe we need to broaden our definition of fun. I mean, if every movie were to be "fun" in the conventional sense, we'd just have a bunch of uninventive and shallow action and romance movies, which I think would ultimately detract from the quality. I think when we're looking for "fun" and "entertainment" we shouldn't necessarily look for instant gratification.
Wack's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:17
Wack
@CowMuffins:

I'm pretty sure Interstellar Marines is the opposite end of the spectrum. Indie games that sacrifice all originality and artistic worth to be fun.
Arianol's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:18
Arianol
@Magnalon: I would argue that art is NOT just whatever you want it to be.

A piece of art is supposed to convey a message or feeling to the viewer. Creators of art put a message into their work intentionally, and they either fail or succeed at getting that message across to their audience.
If that message is "this game is a piece of shit", then your game, book, movie, song, etc isn't art. It is a piece of shit.
grafkhun's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:19
grafkhun
I was playing The Path the other day and after I knifed a mutant wolf in the wilderness I realized I clicked on STALKER instead of the The Path in my steam games list.
alexeternal's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:21
alexeternal
Burch will love this...
Solgrim's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:22
Solgrim
Maybe the label is the problem. Maybe they should instead call them "Interactive Art" pieces instead of "Games". I thought art "games" like Shadow of the Colossus and as you said, Braid, did wonderful jobs of creating fun challenging as hell games while at the same time having a straightforward message that wasn't too vague, while at the same time leaving more for the person who would want to dig deeper.

There is no real reason to be vague other than to be pretentious. If you want to be vague, it had better be in an amazingly visually striking way. Your right, squares and circles, and two line pixels are a waste of time.
Zaxxon's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:23
Zaxxon
It's like people forget that games are the one creative medium that skipped the "art" stage and started off at the "pop" stage.

I'm a film school dropout, and I dropped out because of the other people there, who thinks being pretentious and obtuse means their work is "deep" or "arty", and I see this mentality creeping into games more and more, so thank you for this article.

I'm thinking this is happening for two reasons, 1: gaming is very much mainstream, everybody is playing games now, so indie developers think of themselves as an alternative to what's popular, so they go and make "art", or more likely 2: because coming up with a fun idea for a game is a hell of a lot harder than making something like The Path.

The thing is, you can do arty things with narrative and imagery while still being a good game. Take Flower, for instance. It isn't apparent until the last level of the game, but there's a small yet beautiful story told throughout the game, and seeing it end the way it did, in the choice the sixth flower made, to save the city from itself instead of wanting to escape it, and in turn making the other flowers' dreams come true, made me tear up a bit. You can get emotional reactions out of people with games, you just have to do it right.
Matthew D Hems's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:23
Matthew D Hems
Your're so right Jim! I'll stick to the 60 dollar buckets of copycat games!
Telephis's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:25
Telephis
Good read. I remember being interested in how the path would turn out only to be disappointed. why call out for attention when you have nothing to say
Mr Ty's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:25
Mr Ty
Hmm, yeah and no.

I agree that some games are pretentious for the sake of it. Also agree with things being too open to interpretation. I'm cool with filling in the blanks Shadow of the Colossus style, but give us something to work with.

TBH though I think fun is a secondary factor with these types of games, it's all about the experience/atmosphere. Shadow of the Colossus is my single favourite game, not because it's the most fun (that honour goes to Rock Band/COD), but because the whole package is good.

Although I think this is where you draw the line between "games" and "interactive experiences"
BalloonFighter's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:27
BalloonFighter
Being and art student I see this shit all the time. This is why people think artist are weird people. It's like they think being vauge is artistic. I understand you can have hidden meanings and not be obvious with your message but more often than not like " The Marriage", the message is pretty stupid/pointless. In truth, I would expect this for awhile. There are alot of people learning to make games these days. Alot of weird people.
gatorsax2010's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:29
gatorsax2010
I agree. And it's the same for any art form or medium: there are always people that go out of their way to be "artsy" or "indie." Like the indie movie stereotype.

@ndschroede23
For me, at least (and from the sound of it, Jim), a game doesn't necessarily have to be fun, per se. As long as it's interesting, I'm happy. Don't be incredibly boring and tedious and then write a 4-page essay that boils down to "lulz that's the point." Get your point across in a way that I'd be interested in hearing/experiencing, otherwise I'm not going to want to listen to you.
Vigilante8's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:31
Vigilante8
Honestly? Where's Anthony Burch? I agree with Jim's point and now I'm totaly curious to know his opinion on the matter.

This pseudo cult intelectual treatment that some games ( and some pieces of other midia ) receives to be some kind of art or vanguard movement it's kind of lame.

Take a picture of a bird flying, make it black and white and put a subtitle saying: freedom. TA-DAM! art! ... to me it's just cliche and not even a good try to be or mean something else.
gatorsax2010's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:31
gatorsax2010
Forgot to mention, it's a shame that people are going to see who wrote this and completely write it off as trolling or "INDIE GAMES SUCK BUY HALO." Because it's actually an even-handed look at the subject.
flabzilla's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:32
flabzilla


Here is my new indi game, a variant on chess.
Pudge Controls the Weather's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:35
Pudge Controls the Weather


I've never done that before. Now I feel special. Like an Indie game.
D-503's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:37
D-503
Hm, I had the exact opposite problem with "The Path." They made too many concessions to make it MORE like a traditional game and suffered for it. Item collection and grading at the end of levels are just dandy when Sega annoys us with them, but if you want to be more "indie" (as you phrase it) than go full force.
There's nothing wrong with being different and creating something unconventional.

Really, we all have our opinions of what we want a game to provide us, and games like "The Marriage" give us a free alternative. It's all down to taste. Words like "pretentious" and "fucking stupid" tend to dilute any actual conversations we can have on them. But in the end what you enjoy and what I enjoy are completely different things, and we both get different things out of them.
-PL-'s Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:39
-PL-
All I can say is, fuck Passage.
munkee's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:40
munkee
http://www.kongregate.com/games/struma/gateway-ii
bustaballs's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:42
bustaballs
Hey Jim. Calm down. It's just a game.
Cataract's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:42
Cataract
You know, I actually feel the same way.

My god, I actually agree with Jim Sterling.

I'm scared.
Poe's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:44
Poe
@ flabzilla: Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep.

While I was playing Braid I took in all the bits of text that the game gave me but didn't really get anything out of it, but the game's puzzles were brilliant, and so after I finished it I was compelled to play it again. Lo and behold, after I finished it for the second time, something clicked in my brain and I managed to find some kind of meaning in the game.
That kind of thing happened because the gameplay was brilliant enough for me to come back to it. A lesson for indie developers.
Harvey Zygote's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:45
Harvey Zygote
@x1251
x1251's idiocy strikes again.

I don't think Jim goes "out of his element". It's his post, and he can make it however the fuck he wants, you overbearing ass.

"ass, fail, miserably"- sounds a lot like your opinion posts.

There are plenty, and even more authors who don't go for an honest approach. And you know this. So, the fuck is the point of this?

And who's to say he won't learn from his mistakes, and make an even better, functional post without being an overbearing ass?

Just STFU, x1251. How you get laid, is completely beyond me.
Stick to posting on indie forums, because you're somewhat decent at that.
When you go out of your element, and try writing these types of comments- you fail miserably.
Nephus0's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:45
Nephus0
Finally, someone points out the pretentiousness and leads us to a counter-counter-game_culture revolution! I vote more Shattered Horizon, Braid, Darwinia, Uplink, Eufloria, Obulis, Cogs and God knows what else takes gaming and tries something new. Vote no on "The Void," and other obscure 20 dollar rip-offs.

Just a note, I know Cogs and Obulis are just puzzle games, but they looked so damn pretty. Also, Lock's Quest needs a real ending.
Roager's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:47
Roager
While I do personally agree, consider the fact that artsy paintings don't have to be pretty.
Mulk Calathar's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:49
Mulk Calathar
I agree n' shit.
ohno's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:49
ohno
I hate sounding like a sheep, but I agree. Just like that.
Tremulant's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:54
Tremulant
I think Jims problem is with the abstract nature of these games, when classical art was subverted into ugly forms like in cubism and surrealism it raised the question as to whether paintings exist meerly to be aesthetically pleasing or enjoyed in other ways by changing the way we interpret them. I see these abstract games as a very similar thing exploring particular aspects of gaming and expanding on them sometimes it works for me but sometimes it doesn't but isn't that the beauty of it? Doesn't the fact that some styles of games rubs some of us up the wrong mean that video games are evolving and becoming even more diverse? I'm not sure a videogame has to be fun like a painting doesn't have to be pretty to look at.
Jim Sterling's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:55
Jim Sterling
"Your're so right Jim! I'll stick to the 60 dollar buckets of copycat games!"

Thanks for ignoring the entire basis of the article. I dedicate a whole paragraph to how games can be unique and still be fun. Now please do continue with your blatant, flagrant ignorance.
Klarden's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:56
Klarden
wow
Jim and stupid-- no. not stupid article
in fact i support the idea, that idie gamers don't have to be something "something" just to look indie: i'm tired of games which try to "show how hollow life is", which look 8-bit just for the sake of it and which try to evoke "youcannotbeatus nintendohard" masochistic nostalgie in people.
Problem is, you picked wrong fucking examples.
The Path is, and bere was a GAME as a GAME. An interactive experience, as all the other Tall of Tales "games" are. If you played it because you thought it to be something else, well, tough luck. Blame the PR
Th Void is, in fact, not an indie game. Ica Pick Lodge might not be the biggest dev's in russian community, but they are not "indie". They make art games. Unfortunately they always suck with making gameplay actually fully 100% enjoyable, but that'sa downside from the fact, that they do something DIFFERENT. and really interesting, actually. unfortunatelly the Void had to be stripped down heavily before the western release leaving it without the whole point of "life" in the void and talking to "sisters". But even before that Pathologic was a better game (as a game). But hell, you won;'t like Pathologic as well, most likely, because english version was translated badly and lost a lot of the beauty.
Oh and braid sucks. it's beautiful, with wonderful music, but as a game it's just plain annoying. but hell, you may like smb, while i definitely don't
Daxelman's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:57
Daxelman
I have to admit, Flower almost had me at tears, but later on, I never wanted to play it again.

Not because it was bad, but because I got a trophy for not playing the game for 15 minuets.

DON'T DO THAT.
chronomitch's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 16:59
chronomitch
I have to agree with Jim here. As much as I like the atmosphere of games like "The Path," many of these games just feel like they're missing something. Sometimes it's the game play. Other times it's a coherent message or story. At the end of the day, though, I just feel dissatisfied with these Indie games.
Magesx's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 17:00
Magesx
Jesus, I've been waiting for someone to finally tell off all this indie bullshit.
Magnalon's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 17:01
Magnalon
@Arianol
Who decides what is and isn't a "piece of shit?"

It's all opinion (arbitrary), and useless to argue about on the basis of what is and isn't "art". The entire subject is subjective. The problem is when you force feed people a definition, as a developer, and attempt to "legitimize" the medium, when it doesn't need to be.
HiddenAHB's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 17:06
HiddenAHB
Shhhhhh...
Don't tell anyone Jim, i HATED Passage.

Now go on and punch Burch in the face.
Dastardly007's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 17:07
Dastardly007
I have a much bigger problem with all the commercial rubbish released than a few pretentious indie games. At least with the majority of indie games you're not being charged for the pleasure of wading through content that you've seen a million times before. Yeah, a lot of them may be up their own arse, but at least they're trying something different than YET ANOTHER F**KING FPS.
Xzyliac's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 17:07
Xzyliac
So, I suppose you think Interstellar Marines is the way indie games should be?

Did you even try to get the point? Regardless of whether or not you agree with it.

I for one disagree because I feel like that's indie culture. It's how indie film is, indie music is, indie literature is, asking indie games to be any different is like asking Japanese games to be less Japanese.

Of course there can be indie games that are "less indie" but to say they shouldn't act as their culture is kind of ruins the point. Indie and independent are two different things. Independent are small in-house startups. That includes small bands, studios, etc. The term indie has become more the cultural byproduct of independent startups than simply referencing those startups.

I see your point Jim but, and at the expense of sounding pretentious, I think you're kind of missing the point. That's just indie culture. You don't have to like it just like I don't like most Japanese games. I don't think they should be more Western. It's just not my scene.
TheDirtyHobo's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 17:09
TheDirtyHobo
Wait, are you actually trying to say a game that's not distributed through a major publisher is allowed to be fun? What a ridiculous statement. Jim, you truly are a master troll. Everyone knows independent developers are more concerned with trying as many ways as they possibly can to create a vague message/purpose hidden behind the most obscure symbolism they can possibly conceive so that people like Anthony can say with complete fervor "This is what it means, and it is incredibly deep" to which the creator smiles and replies "Yes, I am so glad someone understood it" while secretly thinking "Oh, I didn't even think of that interpretation" and holy shit this is like the longest run-on sentence ever I should totally consider using a period at some point in time.

This is the exact reason I hate the majority of indie game/movie/music lovers, they're too concerned with making sure it's not on a major publisher/theater chain/label to be concerned if it's actually good, and too caught up in the notion that if it IS on something major, it's automatically shit. Indie gamers are less anal about this than film and music connoisseurs, but I still hate the mentality of it.
Kpax's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 17:10
Kpax
HEAR HEAR!
Xavier Hernandez's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 17:12
Xavier Hernandez
I could kiss you, Jim Sterling. Agree with every word.

Indie games seem to forget the whole "game" part of the equation.
SBC Slam's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 17:12
SBC Slam
There should be a clear distinction between Indie Games, and Indie Interactive Art.

Art communicates concepts, or trys to give you a different perspective on well know subject. The Marriage does this, ergo, it is art. They are using interactivity as a piece of their "sculpture (if you will)," but interactivity alone doesn't make this piece of electronic media a game.

The problem seems to arise when people begin to talk about games as art. Art is art, people. Art can be whatever you want it to be. Games, however, have a very rigid set of rules in order for them to be called such. Can art challenge the commonly accepted perspective on what we, as gamers, expect from a game? Yes, just as "Marriage" can challenge our perspective of what the common perception of that blessed sacrament is . . . "Marriage" isn't a real fucking marriage, though. It also isn't a real game. Is it art? Yessir, so long as its creator establishes his intentions as the creation of art. If I piss in a jar and submerge an NES copy of Tetris, then hand it to you and ask you to shake it around a bit, I haven't made a fucking game. Interactive? Yes. Artsy? I suppose. But it isn't a game.

Not all games are art, and not all interactive art pieces realized through an electronic medium are games.
Chainsawkitten's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 17:14
Chainsawkitten
I couldn't agree less.

We need more games like The Path and Passage. There are far too many games out there based on the premesis that games need to be fun. They don't, and they very seldomly are anyways.

All games, just like all movies, don't need to be straight-in-your-face with their meanings and goals. There's where the beauty of peronal experiences and interpretations come in.
genericuser's Avatar - Comment posted on 02/07/2010 17:16
genericuser
x1251 does have a point - "pretentious" games like The Path are like that because their developers wanted to create an experience; for most, it did a pretty OK job at that.

Basically, videogames don't always have to be fun. We don't complain that some movies aren't comedies or action movies; why should we then do it for games?
prev next 50 comments

Comment with Facebook





Click connect and comment instantly!

Comment with Dtoid





New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds

Comments policy

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!




Review Round-Up: The Games of August
Dead Rising 2: Case Zero
Valkyria Chronicles II
Ufouria: The Saga
Guilty Party
Metroid: Other M
G.G Series Ninja Karakuri Den
Ys Seven
Book review: The Art of Resident Evil 5
Shank
Book review: Udon's Art of Capcom 2
Shining Force (iPhone)
Book review: Street Fighter World Warrior Encyclopedia
Mafia II
Hydro Thunder Hurricane
more reviews


PAX 10: Comic Jumper Impressions
PAX 10: J of Kirby's Epic Yarn
PAX 10: Bit.Trip FATE reveal trailer, pics
I played Duke Nukem Forever today ... what the f*ck!?
Preview: Call of Duty: Black Ops multiplayer
Impressions: Shogun 2: Total War
John Daly ProStroke Golf
Spider-Man: Shattered Dimensions for the DS
Spider-Man: Shattered Dimensions
Drawn: Dark Flight
BioShock 2's Minerva's Den
GC 10: Inversion will flip your sh . . ooter
GC 10: Dragon Age II community follow-up
GC 10: Impressions of the prenup Knights Contract
GC 10: Blood Stone has a license to kill
more previews




Call for entries

New posts Expand all

New to the c-blogs? Read the survival guide
- The Dtoid Army is 74480 strong -




PAX 10: Day 2 wrap up with Sterling and Holmes
PAX 10: Outland is going to be a big deal
COD Points could stick around for future iterations
PAX 10: First look at Call Of Duty: Black Ops headset
Interview: Talking the rebirth of GoldenEye 007
Sundays with Sagat: Dead Rising and dead Birdie
Monthly Musing: More than just noise
The ten worst videogame haircuts EVER!
Dead Rising 2's Chuck Greene: Father of the Year
You keep using that word: "trial and error"



tips@destructoid.com
Nick Chester
Editor-in-Chief
Niero
Founder, El Jefe
Jim Sterling
Reviews Editor
Hamza Aziz
Community Manager
Dale North
News Editor
Jordan Devore
Tom Fronczak
Ben Perlee
Ashley Davis Tara Long
Conrad
Zimmerman
Chad Concelmo
Jonathan Holmes Jonathan Ross
Brad Rice Mikey Turvey
Joseph Leray Matthew Razak
Josh Tolentino
Samit Sarkar
Hollie Bennett Daniel Lingen
   









 
  get involved

register or login
post a blog
post a forum
enter a contest
contribute a news tip
suggest a feature
be a guest editor
support

new member's guide
login assistance
tech support
report abuse
email our editors
read our dev blog
nuclear crisis?
keep in touch

RSS feed
Twitter
Facebook
Myspace
Flickr
Game nights
Meetup+play online
seriously

about Destructoid
advertising
terms of use
privacy policy
jobs at MM
buy our crap
our network

Tomopop
Japanator




All editorial content, including blogs, comments, and forums written by our community, are licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution. 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".