/lit/ - Literature

>>5977867
vice versa

yes, and film is inferior to video games

Mediocre, dime-a-dozen literary science fiction
>What is the nature of consciousness? Is there any difference between a "perfect" simulacrum and the real thing? What about a simulacrum that "thinks" it's conscious, itself? What would such a consciousness or pseudo-consciousness want? If we can predict it, is that still consciousness? What does this mean about OUR consciousnesses?

Highest expression of cinematic science fiction
>I dunno, adapt some Asimov short and chop off the ending or something, let's snort some more cocaine

>>5977874
Seriously, if video games stop being utter pleb lowest-common-denominator shit they could become a fucking amazing artform.

Imagine what a genius like Shakespeare could have done with interactivity. It would be absolutely sick.

Yes, no work of literature can compete with Bergman, Tarkovsky, Teshigahara, Ozu, Mizoguchi, or Bresson at their best.

>>5977885
Already exists just not known among plebs

>>5977927
wrong

>>5977927

Dark Souls?

Video games > Visual Novels > Film > Anime > Architecture > Manga > Literature > Music > Painting > Sculpting > TV > Theatre > Dance

>>5977867
there is no objective way to judge. I personally like literature more

>>5977885
it will just give it some time
vidya is a relatively new thing

>>5977944
Murder Dog IV.

>>5977874
> video games
what is wrong with games as a medium?

>>5977960
For me, it depends on what's been considered. If we're talking movie comedies vs comic literature, then lit is better. If we're talking most thriller novels vs their film adaptations, the films are usually better.

>>5977957

> Film > Anime

Lol I don't think so buddy. Anime, VN, and Amines are the holy trifecto

>>5977976
Is chess or solitaire art? No? Then video games can't be art. It's that simple.

>>5977885

> Imagine what a genius like Shakespeare could have done with interactivity

Probably jack-shit?

Shakespeare was an author. He excelled at that. But assuming he could do great things with videogames is like assuming Vincent Van Goph could have been an incredibly writer. Possible, but well outside their comfort zones.

Different art forms have different strengths. The strength of movies (or television) is being able to say a lot in a couple seconds, to show the viewer things and have them gain clues from subtler things in the environment, or shock them with images that would lose their vivid nature if presented in word form.

The great weakness of movies is of course their length, and the fact they can only show. They cant really tell.

A book can tell a better story than a movie can. Thats just hard simple fact. Most movies only have two hours or so. But making a movie is more than just the story, its an art form unique in itself.

Games are totally different from either. Many videogames fail outright when trying to tell a story because they fall into the trap of making it a movie broken up by bits you interact in, which is generally crap.

The strength of a videogame is all in the interaction of course, and keeping up that illusion is generally vital to the game.

Because you interact with it a videogame can do something neither a book nor a movie could ever hope to do.

A video game can betray you.

A video game character can trick you, gloat at you, mock you, hunt you. Your actions, whether they play into its plans or not, are what make that. More broadly, a videogame can punish you for doing something you werent meant to, or reward you for doing something you might not have thought you could.

In addition, a videogame can do something with its story that no other medium could ever attempt. It can just plain not tell you anything. I.e. The Dark Souls storytelling method.

Slow-examination of environments and plentiful exploration can mean you discover the story as you play, piecing it together bit by bit. Putting it together yourself makes it all the more satisfying.

All that adds up to an experience unique to video games. It reminds me very much of something i heard about the artist Michelangelo.

He was both a lauded painter and a great sculptor, but disliked the former and preferred the latter. He believed sculpting was an innately superior art form, because it allowed people to experience the art from all sides and draw their own conclusions.

A great example of this is Michelangelo's David. A statue best viewed from above, looking down at him. From that angle - and that angle alone - you can see his fearful expression as he fights goliath. It also explains his tiny dick, since shrinking of the genitals occurs when males are about to fight (as blood is drawn from nonessential organs to the important ones).

Shakespeare probably wouldnt have made a good videogame. Michelangel would have crafted some kickass environments.

Why do neckbears want their vidya games to be taken seriously? Is it for some kind of validation of the time they waste on them?

>>5977999
good post

>>5978007


Why do faggots like you want their fiction seriously? Is it for some kind of validation of the time they wasted reading them?

>>5977999
>>5978026
Yeah, thanks anon. Nice anecdote about David.

I never understood why video game designers insert cinematic cutscenes into their games. They are always tedious, without fail.