
The "videogames as art" movement is a funny thing. Artsy wooks like myself love to wax philosophic about the potential that games have in terms of narration or eliciting meaningful, emotional player responses. We laud innovative game designers for forcing us to make morally ambiguous choices about ourselves and the characters around us. Unfortunately for us in the post-post-pre-metamodern crowd, games as a medium fall short in one crucial, yet easily overlooked, way: They only go half of the distance.
What I mean to say is that while lots of the elements of the game are designed and featured in artistically and culturally relevant ways, a huge part of games is left out of the artistic amalgam: the controls. The controller is the fundamental aspect of videogames as a medium, yet developers and fans alike seem to totally overlook it. Unless the control schema is laughably bad or unnecessarily confusing, it gets nary a mention.
Even worse, the control scheme is almost exclusively relegated to a basic function and fails to convey any sense of artistry or contribute to an overarching metaphor. I'm not talking about good, responsive controls, or button mapping that is particularly intuitive; I mean a control scheme that, in and of itself, has something artistically important to say.
Intrigued? I hope so. Hit the jump to read how Fumito Ueda's Shadow of the Colossus achieves what so few other games have.

It's hard to appreciate just how creative the control scheme for Shadow of the Colossus is, particularly in the way it achieves an artistic goal, without comparing it to other games. To simplify, ponder this question: How does mapping "jump" to the X button contribute to the overarching themes of a game? Well, by and large, it doesn't, and that's fine. However, I want to argue that Wander and Agro's controls contribute in some important way to the artistry of Shadow of the Colossus.
Take the grabbing mechanic for example. In order for Wander to grab onto things -- ledges, walls, colossi -- the player must hold down the R1 button. The distinction is subtle: You don't just push R1, you have to hold it. The physical associations between holding onto a ledge and holding down the R1 button allow the player to always have a connection with Wander. Similarly, to attack a colossus, the player must press the O button once to raise his sword, and O again to strike. Again, the player is never separated from Wander and controls all his physical actions, that is to say there is never a rift between what's happening on-screen and what's happening in your hand.
Compare this to a game like, say, God of War -- you press X once, and you've killed 8 skeletons, deflowered a virgin, and ransacked a city -- and you realize what a feat this really is. The blurring of the line between Wander and the player becomes particularly important with respect to the Colossi. Unlike God of War, killing your enemies is far from automatic or easy -- it's a concerted effort and a pre-meditated choice.
This choice is inherent in the rest of the game as well. You have to find the Colossi, ride across an entire continent, and then figure out how to kill them. You have to want them to die. The game forces you to make decisions about whether or not to attack the Colossi, a choice you have to make over and over, at each step of the way. Even when you've climbed the colossus, found his weak spot, you have to choose again -- will you push O a second time and strike? Will you push O a last time and actually kill the Colossus?
These moments can be incredibly poignant, and I would go as far as to say that Shadow of the Colossus is the only game in which "no" is an acceptable answer to those types of questions -- all because of the way the controls are mapped.

When Shadow of the Colossus was released, some reviewers criticized it's controls for being unresponsive or clumsy, especially in regards to Agro. Treated like a traditional mount, Agro handles with all the grace and precision of a battery acid enema. Most mounts are relatively straightforward: you get in, get around, and get off. Furthermore, mounts are usually treated, thematically and mechanically, like extensions of the playable character -- it's really just a more efficient way to get from point A to point B.
Agro, on the other hand, has much subtler controls. Once you get him pointed in the right direction, just tap X a couple of times and let him do the rest. Agro makes turns, navigates obstacles, and generally keeps himself out of trouble, allowing Wander to enjoy the scenery and shoot arrows at birds, lizards, and the giant colossi that are trying to kill him. However, if you try to "steer" him , he just spazzes out.
Agro's AI and his ability to take care of himself become crucial later in the game, as some colossi are impossible to beat without his help. By giving Agro the AI and control scheme necessary for him to make decisions while Wander fights enemies, Shadow of the Colossus feels like a one-player co-op campaign. Wander fights the Colossus, and his distinct, separate, intelligent partner Agro helps him out.

The implications of such freedom, and the dependence on Agro that the player develops, are far reaching and important. By creating several situations in which the player is dependent on Agro, Shadow of the Colossus forces you to develop emotional ties to him. This relationship (coerced or not) lends a particularly poignant pathos to the end of the game, both Agro's fall, and his triumphant return. This, in turn, ties into all sorts of overarching themes of the game: loneliness, isolation, and the nature of love and friendship. Granted, other elements in the game also contribute to these themes -- the fact that Agro is the only character with a name, the sprawling, sparse landscapes -- but Wander and Agro's relationship is, at its core, based on how Agro is controlled.
What's happened here is that a really well-done gameplay mechanic (fighting the colossi with Agro's help) has engendered and contributed to a very compelling artistic metaphor (friendship). What's even more impressive is that said mechanic, and therefore said metaphor, is dependent on Agro's control scheme. Just let that sink in for a second: the artistic merit of Shadow of the Colossus is inextricably linked to its control setup.
Given that most designers don't seem to give a second thought to the way game characters are controlled (or, in this case, not controlled), this feat is particularly impressive and goes a long way in showcasing the artistry of Shadow of the Colossus and the vision of Team Ico. Sacrificing intuitiveness or gameplay to make an artistic statement is obviously a risky move and a tough decision, but Fumito Ueda made his choice, for better or for worse. For Shadow of the Colossus, I am of the firm opinion that it was for better.
02/29/2008 19:28
02/29/2008 19:32
02/29/2008 19:33
02/29/2008 19:34
This being one of my all time favorite games, I'm interested to see what these developers have in store controls-wise for whatever titles they make this gen.
02/29/2008 19:35
02/29/2008 19:42
02/29/2008 19:42
02/29/2008 19:48
02/29/2008 19:53
02/29/2008 19:54
02/29/2008 19:56
02/29/2008 19:59
02/29/2008 20:10
02/29/2008 20:15
02/29/2008 20:15
02/29/2008 20:29
02/29/2008 20:32
@Dexter:
Wander/Wanda is the guy. The girl is named Mono.
When I get the time and patience to beat this thing again, I'll try going to the secret garden at the top of the shrine/castle.
02/29/2008 20:41
02/29/2008 20:41
02/29/2008 20:47
02/29/2008 20:51
02/29/2008 20:58
'Unless the control schema is laughably bad or unnecessarily confusing, it gets nary a mention.'
the goal of a controller and a control scheme is to connect the player in the game so well that the player never needs to remember that they are using an input device, it should feel like they're controlling the game with their mind, because if it does, it means that the player is able to execute in the game exactly the way they want to.
if you don't notice the controller, then the developers are doing their jobs. that's art :)
02/29/2008 21:02
I'm reminded of another PS2 game that I enjoyed alot that had quirky controls. R.A.D. (Robot Alchemic Drive<--silly US name)
Now, before you say anything, I personally loved the game AND it's silly control scheme. It seemed so cool to me. It was like I was really controlling a remote controlled robot (that happened to be 30 stories tall) with a hand held Radio Controller. Plus you had to constantly re-orient yourself so you could even see your mech.
Ah, memories... I miss my PS2...
02/29/2008 21:21
02/29/2008 21:22
Dude. YES! I love that damn game. It pulled off a similar idea of putting you in the game with the controls, though arguably not as well.
Orcist, excellent write up. I''m definitely on the same page with you, especially about the holding mechanic. That really pulled me into the gameplay.
02/29/2008 21:27
Personally I loved the controls on my first shot and have considered SOTC to have the greatest handling in any game I have ever played. It feels weighted, it's like you can actually feel the gravity in the world.
Agro is difficult to get used to, but when you manage to use his automated running and obstacle dodging, you can use it to great advantage.
02/29/2008 21:41
As you control Wander, based upon how he runs you can tell he is really just am amateur. He can trip over surfaces, and he seems to haphazardly carry the sword. The controls, being less fluid, really helped to emphasize that point.
In regard to Agro, when I was playing the game my friend remarked about how huge Agro is compared to the Wander. Once again less fluid controls help to create the sense that this boy is an amateur and doesn't have full mastery over Agro.
Plus, having to constantly wrestle with Agro to get him to go the the right place really made you concentrate, when you could otherwise lose focus in the large areas.
02/29/2008 21:49
02/29/2008 22:29
Great stuff Orcist, I'm ashamed to say I never played the game, but even without playing it I can see what you mean so props for that.
02/29/2008 22:36
02/29/2008 23:57
03/01/2008 00:10
03/01/2008 00:10
03/01/2008 01:10
03/01/2008 02:40
03/01/2008 04:14
03/01/2008 04:42
03/01/2008 04:51
03/01/2008 05:14
03/01/2008 06:07
Anyway I think games like Super Mario Bros are good enough examples of art - after all good game design is good art.
03/01/2008 06:08
I tip my trilby to you Joseph -Orcist- Leray. Very well done.
03/01/2008 06:09
03/01/2008 06:20
03/01/2008 07:19
It's sad that most people didn't get it, but in Lair you do not control the dragon directly with your controller. Your hand movements are the hand movements of the guy sitting on top of the dragon, trying to control his dragon. You are holding the reins.
If the dragon misinterprets your hand gesture, it is because you have been too imprecise to give him a clear command. Sadly, for some people, that translated into 'SIXXAS is sluggish and inaccurate'. For me, it made the experience more intense and exciting, as I tried to be as careful with my commands as possible.
03/01/2008 07:35
Some of the criticisms that have been leveled at the game remind me of this kid in my elementary school math class who said Star Wars (a New Hope here kids, not that modern stuff, yeah, 1977 was a long time ago) talked endlessly about how bad Star Wars was. Statements like that to a 12 year old were sacrilege. Turned out his parent's would not let him see it, leaving his criticisms unfounded.
03/01/2008 09:55
03/01/2008 11:39
Also, I think that his mild un-responsiveness only adds to the artistic feeling, he behaves like a real horse. If you've ever ridden on a horse, you will know that it's not like a car, the horse will respond however it wants, because it's a living, thinking animal, not a metal box with pedals.
03/01/2008 11:53
03/01/2008 19:59
I especially liked the fact that striking the colossi was not done with a single button command. Each plunge of the sword was more of a release than an all-out attack, which infused each blow with regret and doubt.
Also, clinging to that R1 button for dear life made the whole experience far more desperate. The interaction really makes you feel like you've been pushed to the edge.
03/01/2008 23:16
- Peace
03/02/2008 02:48
Anyway, great writeup and now I know more why I like this game so much.
03/02/2008 04:35
03/02/2008 12:04
03/02/2008 13:27
I'll probably have to go back to it, but I thought a good chunk of the controls were a low point in this game.
03/02/2008 19:47
I loved every moment of SotC
03/02/2008 20:31
03/02/2008 22:28
03/03/2008 00:14
03/03/2008 13:15
Yes, the controls were broken.
No, I wouldn't have it any other way. The sense of panic as you tried to take down a horde of zombies in close proximity was at least 50% due to the controls. To improve them would have been like giving you infinite ammo and a zombie-proof vest.
Also Super Mario 64, but that should go without saying.
03/03/2008 13:33
These moments can be incredibly poignant, and I would go as far as to say that Shadow of the Colossus is the only game in which "no" is an acceptable answer to those types of questions -- all because of the way the controls are mapped.[/i]
Did I miss something? Can you actually not kill the Colossi and have the story progress? Doesn't the game just kind of stop at that point?
As much as I hate to admit it, but I'm about 5 colossi in, and I have to convince myself to keep playing. I'm good for maybe 1 a week, if that.
03/03/2008 13:42
Comparatively, SotC was a gaming magnum opus. The way the controls drew the player into the role of the innocent, fragile hero...
Or the way the designers dared to give the player vast, empty spaces that took an age to traverse, but gave you a real sense of place...
Or the veiled morality of the game, where you were a stranger in a strange land, murdering beings that were part of the landscape, and often not even hostile to you.
100% Genius. I still go back to it, and wish there was an HD version available.
03/03/2008 16:17
03/03/2008 18:39
03/03/2008 21:25
I really like that you decided to approach Shadow of the Colossus with this analysis. It could have been done with many other more obvious games (the idea screams Wii so much that you almost have to analyze a non-Wii game to give the idea justification) but this was a great choice. Good work!
03/04/2008 03:41
03/04/2008 12:27
03/04/2008 12:57
This article reminds me of what we've heard about the dog in Fable 2. That you don't control it, but instead it reacts to you on its own.
03/05/2008 10:39
"You have to hold down R1 to hang on? That's stupid," I remember saying.
About a week after playing it, I started thinking more about it and realized how cool it was that you had to do that. And how the game is just a series of boss battles...really kick-ass boss battles.
So I borrowed it, and eventually bought it (which led me to a recent purchase of Ico).