/vr/ - Retro Games

Sever market oversaturation made everything go kaput

The market became too crowded; supply began to outweigh demand by a huge margin, a bunch of companies went under.

jews did it

>>598871
Games were so bad that people literally stopped caring, and 90% of developers went out of business.

As simple as that.

Some keep crying "new crash is at hand" simply becuase they dislike some shitty AAA titles, but the shittiness of Assassin's Creed is nothing compared to literal shovelware of 1982-83.

And it was Nintendo who saved the day. Again, literally.

>>598871
>Atari makes horrible games like ET
>other people make even worse games
>there's way too many shitty games
>in addition to way too much gaming hardware
>people get fed up and stop buying games
>the video game industry collapses like a burst balloon
>Shiggy rides in on a white horse with a NES and a SMB cartridge
>People are like Holy shit
>video games are back

The end.

High-profile games for major consoles were terrible
Lots of other console games were subpar
Consumer confidence was shaken
Console market crashed
Personal computer market was basically unaffected because it was still awesome

NOW WHY THIS SHIT HASN'T HAPPENED NOW BECAUSE PRETTY MUCH THE EXACT FUCKING THING IS HAPPENING IS BEYOND ME

>>598889
So Miyamoto did it?

It was also exacerbated by the computer price wars brought on by the Commodore 64 making computers much more affordable, and when you can have a machine that can play games and do useful things, parents gravitated towards computers for a while.

>>598891

Uh oh, here comes the mustard race.

there were, like, EIGHT viable home gaming units on the market, each one was getting the same wave of shitty games with little to no quality control

It wasn't limited to the game industry, the computer market (which has always been closely intertwined with video games) also took a major nosedive.

The proper term should the "The great North American video game and home computer collapse"

>>598871
Flooded market: low quality shovelware everywhere; overproduction of hardware and games; emphasis on technical wankery instead of playability (see: most console controllers pre-1983); limited mass appeal of the medium at the time, which was sorely overestimated by industry execs.

Once Nintendo came along and marketed an inexpensive, simple system with a straightforward controller and colorful, easy to play games, people got interested again.

>>598887
>but the shittiness of Assassin's Creed is nothing compared to literal shovelware of 1982-83
How about the shittiness of dozens of other modern games?

The 82-83 games are NOTHING compared to the embarrassing garbage that gets released on consoles these days.

>>598898
Are you possibly going to say with a straight face that Assassin's Creed is in the same category as ET and Warplock?

>>598898
The heavily-adverticed AAAs are fine. They're boring and unimpressive, but they aren't outright horrible, unlike the early 80s shovelware.

>>598891
>NOW WHY THIS SHIT HASN'T HAPPENED NOW BECAUSE PRETTY MUCH THE EXACT FUCKING THING IS HAPPENING IS BEYOND ME
Because modern AAA is quality product. The industry's not going under for the same reasons Hollywood is not going under: they do not aspire to be great, they just work really-really hard to be decent.

>>598902
>kid thinks that the C64 had bad games
Holy shitfuck.

>>598871
Americans stopped buying video games and consoles, the rest of the world didn't give a shit.

>>598901

>>598891

it's happening, but too slowly

>>598907
>Because modern AAA is quality product
Oh god, my sides.

Modern "AAA" games are laughably bad, specifically console games. They're created for dumb kids that care more about style and action movie sensibilities than good gameplay and quality controls.

>>598893
>It was also exacerbated by the computer price wars brought on by the Commodore 64 making computers much more affordable, and when you can have a machine that can play games and do useful things

Yes except that had the net effect of destroying the home computer market since Atari and TI couldn't possibly match Commodore's prices. European and Japanese manufacturers refused to even go near the US market thanks to that.

>>598909
Name, like, 3 exclusives that are truly great.

Not trying to prove anything, on the contrary, I'm going to downlaod and play them all immediately.

>>598913
I sure as fuck didn't like it. It would have been much better if they had just made it into a movie, which is pretty much what they seemed to want anyway.

>>598920
>it's happening, but too slowly
Yeah, and in reverse.

>>598925
Other factors too. Atari was fucked by the collapse of video game sales and TI insisted on keeping their hardware a closed design that limited people's ability to develop for it.

>>598917

Revolution was buggy and borderline unplayable in some parts

>>598909
Um...it did? Not all games mind you but you're acting like every game on the thing was a gem.

>>598897
>limited mass appeal

This is what y'all are forgetting. Like it or not, the better graphics and sound quality get, the more popular games become. Back then, both were so limited that only people who were able to look past those limitations from TV commercial or store-shelf distance would even consider picking a system up just for gaming.

Nowadays, arguments about *game* quality are irrelevant; as long as a game is fairly easy to play and looks pretty, it's likely to have mass appeal on a level that games like Q*Bert could only dream of.

And you know what? There's nothing wrong with that. We still have our backlogs and our collections. Can we get back to the early 1980s and forget about the state of modern gaming? It's the retro board, for god's sake.

>>598926
There were few exclusives given that they were all ported to/from the equally good Apple II* and Atari 800 anyway. They sure as fuck couldn't run on the crappy consoles.

Hey, look, another parallel!

>>598926
G-Great Gianna Sisters?

>>598921
>They're created for dumb kids that care more about style and action movie sensibilities
They are QUALITY products. They are exactly what the people youv'e described want. They are tightly focus-tested and work fine.

They are not very good games, but they are not shovelware, are tightly coded, and are fun to play if you don't know better.

Now then, a lot of high-profile stuff in the early 80s was outright unplayable by any standard.

>>598935
The computer market was oversaturated much like the console market. Too many competing platforms and a lot of people came to realize that computers really couldn't do all the amazing things they'd been promised.

>>598940
So, C64 didn't have a single worthwhile exclusive is what you're saying? O.K.

>>598951
>not good
>fun if you don't know better
You're not helping your case any.

Just because idiot kids like a game doesn't make it good.

>>598940
>They sure as fuck couldn't run on the crappy consoles

but then C64 can't run SMB3 and Castlevania 3 either, so...

>>598954
So, you can't fucking read? O.K.

>They're created for dumb kids that care more about style and action movie sensibilities

and they make a lot of money doing that.

>>598921
NO. they are competent, straight forward and very playable. They are not works of art by any means but they are quality.
Compared that to what was getting shat out back then prior to the crash which were cryptic, unplayable non-games

>>598932

Neither Sony, Nintendo or MS are doing too hot right now, more like lukewarm and loosing steam

It is like if some of you haven't actually played bad games. To think AAA games are bottom of the barrel terrible just shows you haven't played enough video games. I mean maybe they aren't great games, but they are far from terrible as well.

>>598965
I agree.

>>598957
They are quality products, unimaginative and soulless, but well-produced, tightly crafted and nicely marketed.

Go learn some video game history to see how that's different from '83.

>>598963
O.K.

>>598953
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGvHNNOLnCk

>>598962
Wow. Here's a hint, kid: THIS SHIT HAPPENED BEFORE THE GODDAMN NINTENDO WAS RELEASED.

Grow up and learn something about gaming history before spouting stupidity, okay?

>>598965
>works of art
Games aren't art, period, and that's some of the problem.

>cryptic, unplayable non-games
Just because you didn't have the manual when you loaded up a random game on the Stella emulator doesn't make it "cryptic" and "unplayable". Sure, they weren't all that great, and a few were pretty bad, but it's nowhere near the "let's put out a ton of pseudo-games inspired by Dragon's Lair over anything else that emphasizes gee-whiz effects and graphics and OMG STORY over real, quality gameplay beyond "do this to keep watching our shit story".

>>598965

sounds like you're describing casual facebook games

>>598913

I certainly hope not, the first AC is a masterpiece.

The others are overmarketed mass-appeal garbage that removed everything unique and interesting, but the first game is great.

>>598967
>Neither Sony, Nintendo or MS are doing too hot right now, more like lukewarm and loosing steam
That's because the current generation is over and the new one hasn't yet begun.

So basically this happened:

>Commodore mugs Atari and TI by undercutting them
>People realize that it's more practical to keep recipes and do taxes on paper than with a computer
>Everyone who wanted a computer already had one, so they couldn't sell any more for a while
>meanwhile the business market is switching to IBM PCs en masse
>by 1986, cheap Taiwanese PC clones arrive and invade the home market

Result: PC clones and Apple are all that's left

>>598975
>learn some video game history
I don't have to, because unlike you underage idiots that got the dumbed down version and a bunch of lies, I WAS THERE.

>>598984
>Wow. Here's a hint, kid: THIS SHIT HAPPENED BEFORE THE GODDAMN NINTENDO WAS RELEASED.

I know about the damn Atari 800, you stupid underage /v/tard

>Grow up and learn something about gaming history before spouting stupidity, okay?

After you.

>>598984
>Games aren't art, period
What? That's very ignorant. And I'm not talking about indieshit. Games are art, like cinema, theatre, dance, musical performances et al. Gamedesign is a modern form of art fully capable of artistic expression.

>>598994
You can be there and still ahve no clue. Case in point: you, personally.

Also, I'm 27.

>>598993
The video game crash also adversely affected home computer sales because that had always been one of the main reason to buy the things and now suddenly games weren't cool.

>>598985
Kind of am. Add the casual "I just wanna play Peggle for an hour or two" mentality and add a forced cinematic vibe with more good-er graphics and BAM instant Cawwa Dooty.

>>599008
>Also, I'm 27

Getting close to wizard status, anon

>>599002
What the fuck does the Atari 800 have to do with anything?

We're talking about the generation of fucking consoles BEFORE THE NES. And you come along and start talking about Mario and Castlevania like an underage moron.

I don't have to grow up. I WAS THERE WHEN ALL THIS WAS GOING ON. Unlike you children.

>>599005
>ignorant
Is chess art? Backgammon? Monopoly? No?

Then games aren't either.

Sure, they may have artistic elements to PRESENT the game like the graphics and music, but they ARE NOT THE GAME THEMSELVES.

Here's a hint, little underage children: strip away all the modern graphics, sounds, music, story, and all that bullshit from your precious modern "games". Does your "game" still hold up? No? Then it's not a game.

>>598993
You're oversimplifying that quite a bit. There were a few computer systems other than IBM clones and Macs that were successful in the mid to late 80's, like the Amiga and Atari ST, and Japan had the MSX, PC98, and other computers before Windows 95/98 killed them off.

>>598984
>Games aren't art, period, and that's some of the problem.

I don't want to have this discussion, but you're horribly wrong.

>Visual Art
Yup, that's art.

>Narratives
Yup, that's art.

>Music
Yup, that's art.

>Put all of these things together and add interaction*
>Somehow not art

*Many other forms of art have pieces that involve interaction with the viewer, such as sculpture, video installations, and some times literature. Interaction does not invalidate art.

Also, from Merriam-Webster:

4. a : the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects

This doesn't mean every game needs to be a 2DEEP4U hipster masterpiece, but vidya is an art form.

>>599012
Lost my way to wizardry when I was 16.

>>599008
>no clue
How do I have no clue? Everything I've said is in line with WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED. Just because you read some goddamn biased/incorrect version of the past doesn't make it true.

>>599020
see >>599017

Games aren't art.

>>598984
>pseudo-games inspired by Dragon's Lair
Are you thinking that fad is still around??
Is your idea of "modern AAA" still a laser disc game?
Calm down and try to type out your thoughts more coherently.

>>598990
>That's because the current generation is over and the new one hasn't yet begun.

>What is the WiiU
>What is the 3DS
>What is the Vita

Games are not art. There children's toys

>>599017
>What the fuck does the Atari 800 have to do with anything?
We were discussing the pre-crash period
>Unlike you children
Ohhhhh dat projection

>>599019
>There were a few computer systems other than IBM clones and Macs that were successful in the mid to late 80's, like the Amiga and Atari ST
They were niche computers at least in North America
>and Japan had the MSX, PC98, and other computers before Windows 95/98 killed them off
We are talking strictly the US market here

>>599025
Yes. We were. Until YOU came along and started talking about MARIO 3 (post-crash) and CASTLEVANIA 3 (post-crash).

Are you this stupid?

>>599017
>Is chess art? Backgammon? Monopoly? No?

Yes, they are, you retard.

>>599026

>WAAAH! I'M GOING TO IGNORE ALL YOUR EVIDENCE AND JUST SHOUT MY OPINION BECAUSE I KNOW I'M WRONG

Fuck off

>>599017
>Is chess art? Backgammon? Monopoly? No?
Yes, how the fuck is it not? It's simplistic, folk in some cases, but it's still art.

Or are folk songs and dances not art anymore?

You're putting art on a pedestal. You seem to actually be confusing "art" and "masterpiece".

>>599032
Honestly I'm not sure what your original argument even was

>>599027
Every stupid modern story-heavy game I have played reminds me a LOT of Dragon's Lair. It shows you a story and then gives you "control" where basically you do some linear bullshit exactly right or die.

It may not be "press joystick left at this exact moment", but it's so fucking watered-down that it may as well be.

>>599039
I think his argument was that modern games are just as shitty as the crash-era games.

>>599017

Game design itself is art.

>>599032
>>599017
>>598984
This guy is so underage it's not even funny

>>599017
Any modern game stripped of it's story and graphics is STILL at least as playable as Missile Command so, yeah they still hold up as games. Not magical experiences but still games.

>>599026
>Games aren't art.

>Art
>4. a : the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects

>>599046
See >>598913

>>599043
He says he was playing games in the early 80s, though.

>>599052
And you believe him?

When someone resorts to all-caps and calling others "dumb kids", they ain't out of HS.

>>599034
>>599037
THEY
ARE
GAMES.

God, children. How are you this stupid?

>>599039
>get proven wrong
>goes off on a stupid tangent

>>599040
What evidence? You kids haven't show me a single shred of actual evidence. Meanwhile, here I am with the history of videogames under my belt having been there and playing them obsessively since the beginning and you tell me I'm wrong?

Yeah, fuck off.

compare the narrative in your typical JRPG and then read a real novel or play or something and then try to argue that games are art

>>599058
You obviously haven't been around a lot of old people, have you?

EVERY old person calls kids "dumb kids". Because they are.

>>599061
>THEY
>ARE
>GAMES.
>God, children. How are you this stupid?

How does this make them not art?

>>599061
>THEY
>ARE
>GAMES.
>
>God, children. How are you this stupid?
Yes, games - a form of art.

Playing games sin't art, like watching cinema or reading books isn't. Making games is - like writing a book or choreographing a ballet.

>>599064
>EVERY old person calls kids "dumb kids". Because they are

Like this yuckluck I'm arguing with is the epitome of maturity and non-childishness

>>599061
>What evidence? You kids haven't show me a single shred of actual evidence. Meanwhile, here I am with the history of videogames under my belt having been there and playing them obsessively since the beginning and you tell me I'm wrong?

Talking about games = art, don't give a fuck about your age related pissing contest.

>>599061
>What evidence? You kids haven't show me a single shred of actual evidence. Meanwhile, here I am with the history of videogames under my belt having been there and playing them obsessively since the beginning and you tell me I'm wrong?

You know and I know your first console was the PS2 your parents got you for Christmas in 2004 so who are you kidding, you /v/eenager fuck.

>>598898
6edgy9me

>>599061
>THEY
>ARE
>GAMES.
>God, children. How are you this stupid?

Yes, and the creation of them is art.

>>599063
Bad art =/= not art.

Even Drizzt do Urden and Witcher novels are art. Even the goddamn fucking Baldur's Gate II is art. Even Final Fantasy XIII.

Everyone is so angry in this thread. Just take a deep breath, and chill out.

This thread has shown me why modern gaming is such shit.

If gaming is in the hands of you moronic kids, then gaming is finished.

>>599067
>>599069
Go figure out what art is, kids.

The mechanics of a game is about as far from art as anything in the goddamn universe.

>>599070
A bunch of dumb kids arguing with someone trying to enlighten you fucking stupid kids about gaming with the goddamn truth is the epitome of childishness and stupidity.

Fuck this shit. Gaming is dead, and the only thing left is to play old games when shit actually made sense. I really hope one day you idiots realize that.

Shit like Mario 64 fucked you kids up something bad.

>this thread
It's like I'm actually on /v/!

>>599085
But angry 4chan is best 4chan. You dumb piece of shit.

>>599061
The evidence is the games themselves.
You make a statement that the modern AAA games of today are just as bad as the worst Atari game from then.
That's absurd. /v/ and certainly /vr/ don't have much love for things like Gears of War, God of War, or hell, even Bioshock Infinite has gotten bad mouthed around /v/ BUT not one of them, as bile swollen as they are, would make that argument with a straight face.
AAA titles are often bland and shallow focusing on spectacle rather than gameplay but they are still competently made. If they were all Sonic '06 levels of broken, yet still massive money makers, I'd side with you. But they aren't and you are wrong.

>>599063

Art =/= quality.

>>599094
Bioshock had controls just as bad as E.T.

That is, so bad they basically made the game unplayable.

>>599086
>Fuck this shit. Gaming is dead, and the only thing left is to play old games when shit actually made sense
And you can go back to Youtube with the 13 yos who listen to Led Zeppelin and apologize for their generation ruining music or video games or whatever.

>Shit like Mario 64 fucked you kids up something bad

Nigger, please. I never touched a N64 because I wasn't molested as a child (70% of N64 kids were molested or turned out gay or both)

>>599103
>Game design
Which in modern days, is basically movie-making.

Stop confusing modern "games" with real ones.

>>599086
>Go figure out what art is, kids.
I am an art major. Game design definitely is a form art. And not just an ultra-modern underground form, but an internationally, academically recognized one.

DO NOT REPLY TO TROLLS
DO NOT REPLY TO TROLLS
DO NOT REPLY TO TROLLS
DO NOT REPLY TO TROLLS
DO NOT REPLY TO TROLLS

AM I FUCKING CLEAR

With that mess out of the way, let's get back on topic.

>>599104
I don't think there are trolls in this thread.

>>599098
Plenty of people find it very very playable. Did you loose your thumbs in the Gulf War or something?

>>599106
This makes me think you don't know how games are made...

>>599105
Fuck man, I was born in 89. I wasn't even around for the Atari days yet I apparently know a lot more about video game history than this clown who claims he's seen everything since like Pong.

>>599098
For some reason I think you are exaggerating everything.

>>599086
>The mechanics of a game is about as far from art as anything in the goddamn universe.
I don't see why. They have all the elements that other forms of art have.
Made by people, original to some degree and requiring a certain ammount of craftsmanship.

>>598892
Yes, he saved us all.

>>599106
>Which in modern days, is basically movie-making.
No. Cutscenes are directed by movie directors, gameplay is designed by game designers. These are seperate jobs, often done by different studios.

Yeah, it didn't take a genius to steal a crappy mechanic from GoW and shove it into an Indiana Jones ripoff, but it still takes a gamedesigner to produce a working game system, even if it's unoriginal, boring and droll in general.

I mean, it does take a lot of knowledge to properly copy a mehanic and make it work, make no mistake.

>>598940
>There were few exclusives given that they were all ported to/from the equally good Apple II* and Atari 800 anyway. They sure as fuck couldn't run on the crappy consoles

Apple II was pretty shit compared to the Atari 800. Bleeper sound and dem horrible 70s colors

>>599106
Actual game design (i.e. anything that's not a well funded AAA title) is basically just Spreadsheets: The Job. Seeing a stream of a game designer at work has done more to deter me from getting into game design than a hundred hours on /v/.

The game still has potential to be art, though.

>>599052
Why would somebody lie on the internet?

Anyway, I was around for the crash, and had the presence of mind to wonder why companies would make SO FUCKING MANY copies of mediocre trash, or put out seven new titles every month or two. That wasn't terribly common, but it was weird seeing pages upon pages of shovelware in the Hill's catalogs, most of which had no screenshots, hurr hurr. Colecovision, INTV, VCS, ten million other wannabe TV game systems and a shit-ton of handheld games trying to be Tomy.

I think a big chunk of the crash was because the games were many, and were NOT CHEAP. I remember Atari 2600 games being $40-$50 each, and this was before the NES. Maybe I was getting hosed, but keep in mind also that this was in early eighties money, when minimum wage was less than the price of what a gallon of milk is today. People would get burned on too many expensive turds, then would just say fuck it and dump the systems, maybe going the C64 route, or abandoning video games entirely. I dunno.

>>599112
No, it's just that modern kids ignore shit controls because OMG GRAPHICS STORY OMGWOWLOOKATTHISSHIT.

>>599117
You're honestly telling me that the terrible, imprecise controls of Bioshock are good?

>>599121
These days, mostly with storyboards and all the other trappings of movies instead of concentrating on gameplay.

>>599126
Wow, kid. OMG TEH GRAFX R HORRIBLE THAT MEANS GAME=BAD AMIRITE?

Grow up.

>>599132
And MUCH more time and effort is spent with the "directors" (that shouldn't be there!) than the gameplay which basically boils down to "does it kinda sorta work? Yes? SHIP THAT SHIT."

>>599139
>Anyway, I was around for the crash
I'm pretty sure you're the only person here who was actually around back then because I sure don't think this dude >>599146 was

>>599139
It only tok a few decent games to put things back on track, though.

I think that oversaturation wasn't an issue. Shitsaturation was. I mean, if the problem was too many games, Ninty wouldn't have been able to fix it with EVEN MORE GAMES.

>>599146
>And MUCH more time and effort is spent with the "directors" (that shouldn't be there!) than the gameplay which basically boils down to "does it kinda sorta work? Yes? SHIP THAT SHIT."
Actually, script in those games, as well as direction, are on the same level of "quality". They are badly designed, horribly written and poorly directed. Character design is often terrible, voice acting droll. It's all a part of the Hollywood package.

But it's always well targeted and well adverticed, and, although boring, it's not unplayable. And the simplicity is lost on children - kids can get very much impressed by Halo, GoW, Final Fantasy, Uncharted and other such games.

>>599139
They were expensive as fuck, and that was a big part of it. And there were tons of mediocre games and quite a few bad ones.

I'm just saying that this is EXACTLY the situation we have now. Sure, $50 then is a lot more now by comparison, but we're not exactly living in the BUY BUY BUY 80's anymore and our modern financial situation is pretty goddamn shit. And back then, you really had the "novelty" factor playing into game prices. Nowadays, the factor is a bunch of overpaid wannabe movie directors and a staff of 100+ making a goddamn videogame.

>>599146
>Wow, kid. OMG TEH GRAFX R HORRIBLE THAT MEANS GAME=BAD AMIRITE?

Really now, which Frogger looks better to you?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBW3zYTk-_c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBW3zYTk-_c

>>599154
First, there was a year or two breathing room before the Nintendo really took off.
Second Nintendo did a great job of limiting the amount of games cranked out. Developers were only allowed five a year and as shitty as it was for competitors, their anti-trust violations ensured that there were five other systems with the same exact games.

>>599146
>Grow up

Graduate HS first and get back to me, teenager

>>599165
Hurry up and link to another frogger video, you silly fuck up of a person.

>>599165
>looks better
Why does that matter?

Do they play the same or at least similar? That's all that matters.

>>599167
It's unplayable to me because I want a game that's more than fucking window dressing.

>>598921
>They're created for dumb kids that care more about style and action movie sensibilities than good gameplay and quality controls.

GREAT SCOTT!! You mean they give the consumer what they want?! Well I never!

Look, just because the small group of us here enjoy games that are retardedly hard to the point that you have to break them to compete with a cheating AI (postman race, dk64 jack in the box fight, psycho mantis etc) doesn't mean that's what the normal 12-18 year old wants. They are where the money is, do that's what devs are going to build for

>>599179
But graphics do matter. They are ultimately part of the appeal of a game. Why would you look at something that is inferior if you can choose a prettier version?

>>599179
>Do they play the same or at least similar? That's all that matters

Hey, in those days bringing the arcade experience home was a big deal and the more like the arcades the better

>>599173
>that there were *NOT* five other systems with the same exact games.

>>599179
>It's unplayable to me because I want a game that's more than fucking window dressing.
Same for me.

Doesn't change the fact that the target audience is fully content. Unlike in '83. Madden is just fine, Bioware rpgays are just fine, corridor fantasy is fine, morpergers is fine, show them online is better than ever.

>>598898
Well the big difference is whether or not the titles sell. The shovelware of the early 80s were so bad people weren't buying. Modern games—AAA titles included—sell still. That's why we're not going to have another gaming crash any time soon. I really do think the whole increase in gaming that came as a result of CoD4 and Halo 3 will die down eventually, but games are still going to sell millions of copies every year for years to come.

Ms Pac-Man

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-upWtww9b4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rqvle88pCGk

>>599183
I can't imagine anyone wanting a game that is essentially a movie.

Maybe that's my problem. I expect an actual game, without any of the fucking boring action movie trappings in most modern games.

How about what THIS consumer wants? Hmm? Oh wait, there are plenty of indie and other (mostly PC) games that cater to me and are wildly successful.

>>599190
This is a really sad, sad attitude to have.

>>599196
Of course. They didn't sell because people had the good sense to realize when a game was shit. These days... not so much.

>>599190
>But graphics do matter. They are ultimately part of the appeal of a game. Why would you look at something that is inferior if you can choose a prettier version?
This.

Graphics are not a decisive factor, but they are not unimportant. On the contrary, good graphics can very much enhance the experience. If the experience itself is lacking, too bad, but good gameplay with beautiful graphics is a true pleasure.

>>599197
Right, right.

>>599206
>This is a really sad, sad attitude to have.
How? It's only natural to want both quality mechanics and quality presentation.

>>599206

>This is a really sad, sad attitude to have.

No it isn't. You're just stupid and not looking at games as a whole. The whole GAEMPLAY ONLY MATTERS stuff is for plebs and shallow thinkers.

>>599208
No question there that the Atari 8-bit Frogger looked, sounded, and played better and smoother than the Apple. In fact that was probably the best home version at the time.

>>599206
>I can't imagine anyone wanting a game that is essentially a movie.
Actually, nobody wants that. But a great game is hard to make. Profit-oriented outlets would rather sell cutscenes, since customer is O.K. with that.

Every now and then there's a Demon's Souls that outperforms, like, 90% of the market on sheer gameplay alone and shows everyone how things can be in good hands.

>This is a really sad, sad attitude to have.
Graphics should not be the decisive factor, but they should not be disregarded either. Graphics always help gameplay.

> because people had the good sense
People in the 80s had good sense? PLEASE.

>>599167
>And the simplicity is lost on children - kids can get very much impressed by Halo, GoW, Final Fantasy, Uncharted and other such games.
You say that like that wasn't the case with kids growing up with retro games.

>>599230
>You say that like that wasn't the case with kids growing up with retro games

That is true, but even little kids knew that Atari 2600 Pac-Man was a joke

>>599217
The problem with that is you rarely get both, and modern games go for broke on the presentation because it's easier to accomplish these days.

Not saying good graphics is easy, far from it. It's just that it seems very effortless for people to be able to make these things and create a game around it vs. making an actual quality gameplay experience, which is much more difficult relatively because it's not just about aesthetics and being able to create good graphics -- it takes a lot of patience and skill and imagination to make a game PLAY well.

So they tend to lean more on the graphics to sell a game than gameplay, because, relatively speaking, it's easier.

A factor that doesn't get mentioned often is the popularity of home computers. Commodore sold the c64 in toy stores, ruthlessly underpriced it compared to every other computer and console and marketed it as a game console. It came out in '82 and was pretty much unaffected by the crash. Something similar happened in Europe with the ZX Spectrum.

It's probably not going to happen again, though. If there is another crash, iOS and Android will probably play the role of the C64, not PCs.

>>599230

This.

See: Vectorman.

>>599228
But why is the customer OK with that? Shouldn't we be demanding more out of games? Shouldn't we want more than simplistic gameplay over what's basically an action movie?

>>599061
>THEY
>ARE
>GAMES

if you cannot appreciate the beauty of the chess ruleset and the amazing high end piece and boardsets that are produced, I feel sorry for you.

>>599245
>It came out in '82 and was pretty much unaffected by the crash

In fact the C64 was one of the few survivors of the crash after having crushed all its home computer competition. Kept on going in North America until 1990 long after the Atari 800 and TI-99/4A were pushing up daisies.

>>599230
It was always the case and will always be. Kids are both inexperienced AND dumb. If someone wants to capitalize on that, ok. With Hollywood and AAA games, no harm done. They're not brainwashing kids. Entertainment is simplistic, but it's the right kind. You may cringe at the banality, but at least it's not a harmful banality.

And the clever kids outgrow Halo pretty fast, you know.

>>599249
>See: the majority of games released for retro platforms.
ftfy

>>599206
Look you're confusing "shit-as in I don't like it" to "shit-this thing is offensive on every level; practical, aesthetic, and ethical"
Modern games aren't broken. They're boring and hollow, but not unplayable.
You don't like cut scenes and somehow thing that basic FPS controls are bad. Ok. That doesn't mean the games are shit.
Do you know we're talking about "AAA" titles here?
Hell, even the WORST games of the past few years are bad because they are just bland, boring and repetitive, not because they were glitchy indecipherable messes.

>>599242
>The problem with that is you rarely get both, and modern games go for broke on the presentation because it's easier to accomplish these days.
Actually, they focus on presentation so much because executives are old people. They know something about cinema, but nothing about game design. Because of that, they end up promoting designers who believe that cinematic experience is what good games should be like.

Again, nobody's preventing people from making gameplay-centric games. Like the original DMC or Dark Souls.

>>599271
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc0XDOUFOPI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBcnl3h2alw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DTjLG3usQo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-yXeboXuVo

These are just some of the horrors unleashed on the Atari 2600

>>599206
>there are plenty of indie
Woah, keep in mind that most indie games are still garbage rehashes of games from the 16 bit era. They're just as bad for the industry as interactive movies.

I get the feeling that you're just trying really hard to be hip here and not thinking things through.

>>599274
>Actually, they focus on presentation so much because executives are old people. They know something about cinema, but nothing about game design

Aw come on, it's always been like that. Atari in its heyday was headed by some faggot named Ray Kassar who didn't know a single fuck about video games and had spent most of his career as an executive at Burlington, a company that makes fucking jackets.

>>599069
I'm so tired of people trying to "enstablish" games as an art.
I'm not even saying they aren't it's just that it's tiring to see how many arguments spark from someone claiming games are only entertainment and everybody else getting upset their precious hobby is being played down and go on rambling about some awkward definition of art.
It's like seeing children trying to prove to their parents what they do is important, speaks volumes about insecurities around the "gaming" world.
Can't you just enjoy a thing because you like it and not try to label yourself and what you do into some sort of acknowledged group? It's the exact same shit than calling yourself a gamer, just shut the fuck up and play your goddamn games already, you're not your hobby and being "proud" of playing games is kinda pathetic anyway.
Just quoted a random post about the argument though so it isn't directed straight at you.
BTW I like playing games A LOT and am here often so it's not like I'm some outsider from another board that came here to say games suck or aren't art, I'm just sick of this shitty, overmade topic that at the end of the day doesn't bring anything interesting if you've been on /v/ in the last five years (or any videogaming site for that matter).

>>599252
>But why is the customer OK with that? Shouldn't we be demanding more out of games?
We are not entitled to that. Major publishers funnel hundreds of millions. They are afraid that focusing on game-design would fail them. It's fine. They have ok directors and bad game designers. That doesn't prevent good game designers from showing everyone what's what.

Really, in the age of the Internet, AAA shit can not harm actual games in any way whatsoever. If anything, they bring the movie crowd into gaming with their miltimillion flashiness. Then you can make a truly good game and sell it to the audience EA and Ubisoft helped build. Win-win.

>>599061
Wow, even the janitor couldn't stand this idiot

>>599274

They focus on graphics because graphics matter. Not just to reviewers and executives, but most gamers. A fun game that looks like crap will be a "sleeper hit" at best, while a pretty game guarantees attention.

>>599302
If graphics didn't matter, we'd still be using CGA shit with four colors because "Oh no gameplay is all that matters. Why care if everything is in cyan, pink, and white?"

>>599302
It's not just that. People naturally prefer the prettier product. We've been making pretty things to look at for thousands of years.

>>599302
>They focus on graphics because graphics matter.
Case in point: God Hand. It's probably the best game I've played, and it is popular in the right circles, but it looked like shit and didn't sell even a hundred thousand. It should've looked better.

>>599301
Wow, I think deleting his posts was unfair. So what if he was angry? He was participating in a discussion. We wouldn't have been talking in-depth if everyone jsut agreed with everyone else.

MOD, QUIT HITLERIZING.

>>599318
Well he wasn't really backing up his arguments, or providing many arguments for that matter. His posts were mostly lashing out at people.

>>599318
>Wow, I think deleting his posts was unfair.
Hi, that guy. Please stop samefagging.

>>599306
Saving this, it's a beautiful response to "durr grafik dun mater".

>>599252
>But why is the customer OK with that? Shouldn't we be demanding more out of games? Shouldn't we want more than simplistic gameplay over what's basically an action movie?
As opposed to What?
"More out of gameplay" like WHAT!?
What deep experience are you expecting? Especially if you are trying to compare modern games to a 2600. What exactly aren't you getting that you think you are missing out on?

>>599309
>It's not just that. People naturally prefer the prettier product. We've been making pretty things to look at for thousands of years.
I call is the "toy aspect" of a game. Games shouldn't be toys, but containing toys is always a bonus. It's like a nice girl who is also pretty - how in the world of fuck is that inadvisable?

>>599318
>Wow, I think deleting his posts was unfair. So what if he was angry? He was participating in a discussion. We wouldn't have been talking in-depth if everyone jsut agreed with everyone else.

>MOD, QUIT HITLERIZING

I guess he got the guy for breaking Rules 3 and 6

>>599328
>Wow, I think deleting his posts was unfair.
>Hi, that guy. Please stop samefagging

I wrote >>599301, not >>599318. It's a coincidence that both posts began with "Wow,"

>>599271
>not because they were glitchy indecipherable messes.

Aliens Colonial Marines
SimCity5

>>599328
>Hi, that guy. Please stop samefagging.
Actually, I'm the psoter who first replied to his original post. I'm the one he lashed at first, the "I'm 27" guy. What sort of pussies is /vr made of that can't even take some badmouthing in the name of reaching the truth? FFS, as I said, I think it's thanks to that guy that this discussion is going so well.

Self-sage for off-topic.

>>599342
And as proof that we're not samefag

>>599357
I think he means that I (at >>599318 ) am the same guy as the one we've been arguing with.

>>599352
>What sort of pussies is /vr made of that can't even take some badmouthing in the name of reaching the truth?

That was going over the line and degenerating into Caps Lock screaming and ad-hominem attacks

>>599371
And being an underage idiot who projects yourself onto others

>>599294

Get off your high horse, fucker. Some of us just don't like inaccuracy. I hate random fuckers on 4chan trying to argue with Merriam-Webster.

>Expecting a nice informed thread on the crash
>Big sissy slapfight over games are art, AAA game bashing and buzzwords galore

/v/ please leave.

>>599371
>/v/ please leave.
Ok.

>>599371
Black Cocks is truly one of the worst games ever made

>>598921
Modern AAA games are actual quality. The games they were releasing back then were WarZ and Big Rigs bad.

>>599387
I'm not kidding. Many Atari 2600 games looked like they were slapped together in one all-nighter session by a drunk programmer.

>>599395
Yeah, pretty much. That's a bit of a trope of those years.

>>599294
That rant is stupid and ignorant.

Gamedesign is a form of art, period. So is music, graphic design, cinematography, choreography and writing that are normally utilized in a modern video game.

Video games are art, just like movies and operas.

As a person teaching the history of art, I can assure you that your same sentiment was applied to every single form of art known to man. Vocal and instrumental music was seperately bashed as "not music, not art". Theatre was occasionally considered not art. Performing arts were considered not art. Opera was considered certainly, definitely not art when it was new. Secular music was considered unartistic. Prose was occasionally considered not artistic enough. Cinema? Holy mother of god was it argued against.

And now video games. Or, rather, "and in the 90s, video games", because they've been long since accepted as a modern form of art, are studied professionally, taught professionally, etc..

>>599395
Now, that's not to say the NES necessarily had quality games because we all know about LJN and Pony Canyon, but Nintendo's object was mainly to prevent broken, unplayable games from being released or adult content/violence.

>>599395
>I'm not kidding. Many Atari 2600 games looked like they were slapped together in one all-nighter session by a drunk programmer.
Which was almost always the case, you know.

>>599407
Most third-party stuff was pretty bad but of course most devs only got their programming information from second-hand sources since Atari didn't exactly give that info away. So half of them didn't even have decent tech documents for the thing.

>>599395
That's actually mostly true. ET, for instance, was done in less than 6 weeks by a single man. He did a pretty good job considering what he had to work with and the time given.

I've read several instances where the games were literally made in a single night, usually that's when they have a team of programmers, usually 4-6 or so.

I don't care how much someone hates modern triple A titles. They might be bland, mediocre, and overdone, but they are playable, and maybe even fun at times (I enjoy Modern Warfare's challenges and zombies was always good. The standard multiplayer is trite garbage, for obvious reasons). But none of that compares to the utter dreck that these games were on those old systems. You got one screen, no powerups, two enemies, and lots of bugs. They were pure shit.

>>599379
yeah? and I hate mass-produced idiots that seem to come out straight from a factory talking about "accuracy", shut up you pedantic little bastard.
Let it go once in your shitty life.
You're not enlightening anyone fucking retard but better say it's art just in case some grown-up walks by, right?

>>599406
>or adult content
Custer's Revenge
>violence
Halloween

>>599417
Ray Kassar and the other suits in charge of Atari just viewed it as a huge moneymaking racket and didn't know anything about games. They pressured programmers to meet ridiculous deadlines and in the case of Pac-Man, wouldn't supply big enough cartridge ROMs for the game to be any good.

>>599417
>He did a pretty good job considering what he had to work with and the time given.
Ha ha, no.

>>599437
>top-right DVD
>¥2850 for a DVD
What is this? Cat porn? ohgod

>>599431
>Ray Kassar and the other suits in charge of Atari just viewed it as a huge moneymaking racket and didn't know anything about games
I understand that Kassar used company money to fund a private chauffer service for himself and have a 5-star chef come into the office and make him lunch every day.

After the crash, he was ejected from office and investigated by the SEC for embezzling money, but the charges were latter dropped.

>>599452
Yeah, kitty porn. It's all real, too.

>>599447
Nolan Bushnell has said multiple times that he regrets selling Atari to Warner, given what eventually came out of it.

>>599405
Have you read what I wrote or do they give those degrees to anyone who stops by?
I'M NOT SAYING IT'S NOT ART.
I'm saying it's sickening that people keep trying to reply evrytime someone says "games are just games guys" I mean what the fuck are you doing that for? Do you win a prize or something if you discuss the same thing for a thousand times? Sounds like you need some validation.
Obviously you'd like them to be on par with other forms of art so you put them under the same flag and hope the smell of shit doesn't wake anyone.
Guess what, IT DOESN'T FUCKING WORK.
You don't like games, you like the idea of your hobby being a status symbol for your little ego.
ART MEANS NOTHING, A CAN OF SHIT IS CONSIDERED ART.

>>599509
>ART MEANS NOTHING, A CAN OF SHIT IS CONSIDERED ART.
Why would you even pay attention to what a bunch of brainwashed retards consider art?
Why should anyone listen to you if you think it matters that someone thinks a can of shit is art?
Also heavy use of baseless assumptions in that post.

>>599537
because that's what you're fighting for idiot, a meaningless word.

>>599537
>>599550
BTW you don't decide what is art and what isn't you anted it now you get the whole package of nonsense.

>>598993
The North American computer market in the mid-80s

Sorry, but I have to ask:
Does anyone here actually like modern video games?

>>599598
Sure as long as they're not Black Cocks

>>599598
Hi.

I still think a lot of them aren't that great, but I don't see the point in bashing them as a whole.

>>599598
I like Dark Souls.

>>599593
"We knew it was coming down to us vs IBM and when you have nothing left to lose, you shoot for the moon."

-- Steve Jobs

>>599598
Sure, there's plenty of them to like.

People just latch on to specific games like Call of Duty and then somehow make a blanket statement that all modern games are shit. Sure, lots of triple A titles pushed by big name publisher are mediocre and done to hell, but that doesn't mean all modern stuff is bad.

>>599509
You're quick to assume randoms things, none of which are true or relevant.

Video games are a form of art. Whether I should or shouldn't talk or argue about it is none of your concern.

>>599593
Now you see how the computer market was nearly as oversaturated as the console one. For example, Radio Shack was selling at least four completely different and totally incompatible computer lines.

>>599598
Yeah, Dark Souls, Fallout New Vegas and Castlevania lords of shadow are what I enjoyed the most in the last years. I'll even add skyrim in there with all it's limitations It was good to pass some time.

>>599628
Well, competition is always great. The shitty ones that don't ahve anything to offer die out, the best ones survive. It only makes capable people try even harder, is all.

>The angry guy got banned, and now we have nothing to talk about.
I warned you, people.

>>599625
You're right, I just called you out on being an idiot.

>>599598
I think that games are one avergae better than they used to be, but 'masterpieces' are few and far between really.

>>599649
>I just called you out on being an idiot.
You're not very efficient at this "calling out" thing, are you.

>>599628
Apple had the Apple II, III, Lisa, and Mac all going at once and none of them were compatible or could run each other's software

>>599661
Are you serious?
God you're truly a disgrace to your fucking bloodline.

>>599598
I enjoy some of them, but there's not nearly as many great and memorable games as there were years ago. By years ago, I mean anything pre 2008.

>>599598
Of course. I'm sad we are forced to discuss old games out of context on /vr/ because /v/ cares more about the industry and whatever.

>>599694
>because /v/ cares more about the industry and whatever.
They discuss old games, too.

>>599598
No. The last game I played that I fully enjoyed front to back, all the way through was Bayonetta. That was three years ago. Demon's Souls and Dark Souls are alright, but they've got heaps and heaps of problems. Journey was inspired, but was more of an interactive storybook than a game.

Pretty much every other game I've played in the past three years has been a massive disappointment or casual shit to blast through with my buddy. Shockingly, Borderlands 2 was so bad that it even bored me while playing with my buddy.

>>599710
This is off-topic as all hell, but do people seriously not like Did You Know Gaming? I keep seeing sarcastic ones like that, but I always thought that it was a fairly interesting site.

>>599741
I don't know, I've only ever seen the fake ones.

>>599741

I like the site when it gets things right, but I'm not viewing knockoffs (at least like the one posted) as a serious knock against the site. Just a funny joke.

>>599761
I was sort of on the fence about whether or not they were serious knocks, since I really wasn't sure if there was something egregiously bad about the site that I'd just missed.

>>599020
games are art, but this is wrong.
putting a bunch of existing art forms together doesn't make a new form of art.
this is the reason that games = art fags will never win the argument; they're right for the wrong reasons.
film is an art because beyond combining literature, visual art, and music, there is an additional layer of complexity in conveying meaning that is exclusive to motion capture.
the way things are framed, lit, developed, paired with other images, placed in a scene, choreographed, etc. combine to produce a completely unique language, one which wouldn't make sense without our being conditioned to interpret it over time.

video games are art in the same way.
they are art because of the game's exclusive feature of interactivity.
because the player affects the events he or she experiences, there is a largely untapped potential for conveying meaning that has yet to be explored by other mediums.
the way the roguelike creates suspense by employing total ignorance of item uses as well as permadeath is a way of producing emotions that is unique to games.
the subtlety in good game design that provides the player with the means to discover and master controls organically and without a tutorial is artistic.
the emotional attachment to the player's top pokemon which rises from a constant dependency on, and development of, them.
the perspective created in the original gameplay of the katamari series, making the player somehow detached from the civilization he or she is rolling up, and providing varying experiences of the world through a vast range of sizes relationships.

i could go on and on.

>>599790
>putting a bunch of existing art forms together doesn't make a new form of art.
What about movies? I'm not even reading the rest.

>>599790
>film is an art because beyond combining literature, visual art, and music, there is an additional layer of complexity in conveying meaning that is exclusive to motion capture.
It's all film is. Still pictures, music, sounds, writing. There is no additional layer you can point out.

>>599801
He literally explains how that works one line down, you faggot.

>>599808
you've clearly never taken a film studies class.
even something as simple as putting two still images one after the other changes the meaning of both of those images in some way.

that is one aspect in which film is unique.

>>599790
>putting a bunch of existing art forms together doesn't make a new form of art.
Comics? Musicals? Opera?

>>599828
You can put two pictures together outside of film too.

>>599196
I imagine we're gonna have another crash for the same reasons, but that developers will understand and adjust quicker, because we aren't dealing with incompetent developers, we're dealing with controlling stockholders and corporate interests.

Once they see their paradigm start to fail (and it's already trending down), they'll adapt, or die.

Fortunately, there's enough talent out there now that I really don't think we'll have another gaming gap like we did mid-80's. A lot of people have invested thousands of hours into mastering the craft, and I assure you, developers didn't get into this business to make 17 call of duty clone sequels.

Innovation will come. It's just stifled by profiteering and marketing right now. Chillax.

>>598982
Good times, I used to love Ms back when I was a kid, I loved creative writer, and fine artist...now they make games about snoop dog, and let their creative directors start shit storms on twitter.

>>599837
those are all art in the same way film is.
there is something additional provided by a spectacle of passing events that isn't available in the several combined art forms you're referencing.

film still takes it a step further, though, because there's an extra layer in how the filmmaker chooses to utilize the camera (both the technical and aesthetic aspects of it), beyond the mere framing of events.

>>599840
my argument supposes a flip book to be film.
so take that for what it is.

>>599196

a lot of studios have gone bankrupt or got bought out lately

the big publishers aren't doing so hot either

>>599098
>Bioshock had controls just as bad as E.T.

>>599790
>putting a bunch of existing art forms together doesn't make a new form of art.
Game design is not new, but has had unique development with the advent of computing technology in the form of videog ame design.

>>599882
i know.
i'm including non-video games in my argument.
the key component is interactivity.

video games have just provided a much greater range of possibilities for the interactivity of game design.

>>599840

keywords are motion and montage

>>599598
I... I play a lot of them, and I keep desperately searching for good ones, Bayonetta was like, a light in the darkness.

I like the DMC series, besides 2 and the more recent casualized trash "DmC" reboot, I enjoyed Farcry 3 and am currently enjoying FC3 Blood Dragon (even though UPlay and Ubisoft can suck a BILLION DICKS), Dark Souls is great, Injustice and UMvC3 (even with all their salty ass hype bullshit characters and strategies) are fun, uhhhhhhhh... I can't think of many more I can say I genuinely "liked", I spend a lot of time playing Doom and related mods these days.

>>599879
Ooooo. That's a series I forgot about. I actually liked 1/Infinite a lot, although I didn't actually care for Infinite until I unlocked 1999 mode (because dying should have SOME fucking consequence. And it shouldn't be THAT easy to avoid, fuck).

2 was... Well it wasn't "bad", but it just seemed really boring to me. Maybe I was in a bad mood when I played it.

guilty pleasure alert: I also kinda enjoyed Battlefield 3...

>>599871
So then film isn't unique in that respect, like you mentioned, since this arranging of images is actually a part of any visual medium regardless how primitve it is.

>>599895
no.
my definition of film is just broader than yours is.
i consider the combining of multiple still images to create a meaning which isn't inherent in any of the individual images to be an early incarnation of film.

>>599915

Comic books are film?

>>599418

You're a moron.

Stay edgy.

>>599926
Games too, apparently. This tangent is getting silly though.

>>599790
Y'know if you ask me the whole problem with the debate is that you have the opinions of people who are very misinformed, and both take their opinions to extreme lengths, in fact the problem is just plain extremism with both parts.

AAA games are like Blockbuster movies, they are a triumph in technological innovation, but they won't change your life. It is like The Avengers movie, I doubt it might be considered art in a 100 years, but someone 200 years from now might consider art as it is part of our era, and culture.

Indie games are like pretentious film festival movies, hardly art because the themes they cover are extremely selfish, and leave nothing of value. They try to focus on realism, or a relatively realistic vision of a crude world, that is so manipulative, it is somehow even more unrealistic than a super hero movie if you judge it by its context since the view was manipulated to fit the view of the director (I.E my opinion is better than yours sort of movies), but there are exceptions, there is your really good indie movie that pops every now and then, and with any hope a studio will rediscover it later, or it will be distributed nation or world wide.

The problem is that video games are indeed art, but people don't know the significance of art, not a single straight resume or guide to tell us exist to dismiss or accept it (last time I read it was accepted though). For example many people ignore that architecture is also part of art, art is everything that enrich human life, and culture, so something like video games that bring us enjoyment, and take such specialty to exist are most definitively part of human culture, and therefore art.

TL;DR It exists, it is part of our culture (not to be confused with us gamurs culture bullshit) it is art, cry some more.

>>599926
almost.
the only difference between them (besides the same difference which exists between games and video games) that i can figure is that film is intended to progress without the viewers participation.

a comic doesn't go anywhere if the viewer isn't reading, so the viewer can control the pace.

other than that, film just seems like an advanced form of comics to me, i guess.

>>599890
>the key component is interactivity.
Nope. Toys are also interactive, but they aren't games.

The key component is game design and there's no other term for that. It's a unique and meaningful form of artistic expression.

>>599930
all art forms are separated by pretty small differences.
they all revolve around producing meaning through the senses.
as such, most visual art, though experienced in a variety of ways, is tightly linked.

>>599959
Paintings are also interactive if you think about it. You can touch them and stuff.

>>599967
If you really think about it, humans are interactive, too, especially little children.

>>599959
But game design is just painting, composing and writing(code and story) rolled into one.

>>599974
>But game design is just painting, composing and writing(code and story) rolled into one.
Of course not.

Game design is game design. Just like cinematography is not writing or composition - it's cinematography and nothing else. The ones that you listed, although useful, are supplementary and not individually necessary.

>>599976
That's true. So interactivity isn't really a good basis for making a distinction. SInce everything is interactive.

>>599984
>are supplementary and not individually necessary.
How can you have a game without a code or rules? Or graphics to see?

>>599959
i agree with you in part.
but if you take away interactivity, game design isn't capable of producing meaning in any way that's different from film.

at the very least, it's a combination of 'game design' and interactivity, but game design is ultimately the same as designing a film without the aspect of interactivity.

it's becoming more of a stretch, the same way anything does when you're dissecting origins, but have you ever used a toy without creating some type of a game, no matter how simple?

even at the most basic level of deciding the boundaries for how a toy is intended to be used is an early aspect of 'game design', that being, you're taking a hand in crafting an interactive experience.

>>599996
>Or graphics to see?

>>600018
The text is graphics though.

>>599997
Right. Interactivity is part of gamedesign, like time is part of music (but is not necessarily music).

Also agreed: gamedesign is an abstract form storytelling, like music or dance is a form of storytelling. Gamedesign exists in linear time.

One might say that gamedesign is linear interactivity.

>>599986
>>599976
>>599967
no.
you CAN touch them, but the sensation of touching them was not likely included in the intended conveyed meaning.

and even if it was, your 'interaction' of touching the painting is not changing the painting in anyway.

and if you do change the painting, you're going against the message of the painting in the first place.

video games are intended to be changed through interactivity.

>This thread

>>600034
We're just kidding.

>>600035
It's been very entertaining
Until the bans started raining

>>600030
>a product of the graphic arts, as a drawing or print.

>>600034
>and even if it was, your 'interaction' of touching the painting is not changing the painting in anyway.
Sure it is. The way the light falls on it, it's relation to other paintings, which we talked about earlier.

>>600046
A letter is a drawing too.

>>600032
yes, i agree.
the only part we are differing on is i'm considering interactivity to be the absolute foundation for the artistic message of game design, as otherwise it would be the same as film and not an art form in and of itself.

also, game design isn't always linear.

>>600053
>a graphic representation by lines of an object or idea, as with a pencil; a delineation of form without reference to color.
>a sketch, plan, or design, especially one made with pen, pencil, or crayon.

>>600047
i can't tell if you're messing with me haha.
but just in case, the reason it's different is that the pairing of one painting with another to alter the meaning goes beyond the medium of still art. the art is in the pairing of the images more so than in the creation of the images themselves.

>>600059
>the only part we are differing on is i'm considering interactivity to be the absolute foundation
This type of thing is always disputable.

Again, in music, some say that intonation is the most important, some say the tonal langauge, some say it's rhythm (time) that makes music music first and foremost. No one is wrong. Focusing on different aspects of a composite form of art is normal.

Unlike preventing gamedesign altogether with cutscenes. HA HA

>>600073
Yes, a representation of a sound the mouth makes made with a pencil or ink. It has a form too. Fits the bill perfectly.

>>600074
That doesn't mean it's not interactive though. The two are not mutually exclusive.

>>598909

>>600081
i'm glad i'm agreeing with someone on this topic haha.
i've spent so long trying to argue this point in various threads.

>>600059
>also, game design isn't always linear.
Game design is never linear, but perception normally is. So-called "non-linear" games only acheive several games in one effect in most cases.

Occasionally, you can find experimental truly nonlinear game design - similar to nonlinear storytelling in literature where you can read any chapter in any order, or ever shuffle sentences. But that's hard to define and is perhaps superficial.

In the end, human perception of time is what limits the linearity/nonlinearity of temporal arts like the storytelling-based forms.

I want to 'play' some of these unplayable games.

What are some to check out, besides ET of course?

>>600096
Well, on /vr/, I don't think you'll meet many pro-cutscene people.

>>600107
>ET
>unplayable
I don't think most of /vr/ has actually played ET.

>>600091
what?
what about it is interactive?
you mean in the way you interpret the image?
i'm saying interactivity has to change things tangibly.
your interpretation changes your experience, but the aspect of changing the image itself isn't part of the intended message.

it's the difference between viewer and user.

Great /v/ thread, guys.

>>600130
Seriously. This should've been a great thread.

>>600112

Cutscenes came about in the /vr/ age, though.

>>600101
well-put. i have no argument against this.

>>600107
Best bet would be to emulate any random game you've never heard of. They fall into obscurity for a reason, you know.

Anyway, instead of that I'd recommend you the Intellivision Dracula. Now that's a genius game. You walk at night, knock on doors to make people come out, and bite them and random passers-by. You can turn into a bat to run away from policemen, and you can turn someone into a zombie that'll kill policemen and is controllable by the second player. In a way, it's the best game you'll ever play. It also one of the broken pieces of shit that killed the industry.

I can upload a game image if you can't find it.

>>600124
There are very few pictures that were made with the intention to not be moved.

>>600112

Yeah man I hate games like Snatcher and Time Gal, not /vr/ at all.

>>600130
at least people are listening to each other and having discussions.
that never happens on /v/ threads about art.

>>600136
everything on the topic of the crash was already posted.

>>600149
You can dispute the quality of it's mechanics, but Time Gal does not have a single cutscene, you know.

>>600145
that doesn't matter.
the moving of the painting wasn't part of the artist's message.
lighting shouldn't even be a part of it, though it's the best argument, because the correct lighting of the image was included in the painting itself.
the exclusive message of the painting should be best viewed in direct light.

I don't get this "interactivity" line of reasoning. There *is* interactive art, there always has been. Art isn't just paintings and sculptures.

>>599661
late and not /vr/ but holy shit is that Ubuntu? Kill yourself!

>>600162
It's Kubuntu 13.04.
And you thought you were already mad, huh?

>>600158
Time Gal was a fucking terrible game, though, just like all of those FMV QTE games, including Dragon's Lair.

>>600160
what other art forms are interactive in their consumption? i already made a post about the interactivity of interpretation being independent from the interactivity of games, see if you agree with that.
i would count choose-your-own-adventure novels as having gameplay, by the way.

>>600174
>Dragon's Lair.

Say that shit again. Say it again, nigga. On everything, I swear I'll beat your punk-ass..

>>600174
It is, technically, a full QTE game. But it does _not_ have cutscenes at all. I.e., Yoshi's Island has more cutscenes than it. Time Gal's 100% gameplay, hilariously enough.

>>600184
This.

We can take turns pummeling him. Don't talk shit about Dragon's Lair.

>>600183
Interactive ad-lib theatre is, obviously, interactive. It's when the audience participates.

>>600179
Yeah, I didn't mean to imply that it was terrible because it was heavy on cutscenes. I just think its type of gameplay is the worst shit to ever become a trend.

>>600183
>i would count choose-your-own-adventure novels as having gameplay, by the way.
Some do have actual gameplay, so of course those ones are games.

Some just allow you to pick what happens next, which isn't gameplay, it's just, dunno, real-time focus testing.

>>600184
>>600194
Sorry, the gameplay is and always has been terrible. QTE design is a fucking disease.

>>600202
That trend died out really quickly, though. Hilarious how there was a resurgence of that in the form of QTEs, but back in the 80s that shit got very stale very quickly and fell out of favour in the span of 2-3 years.

>>600201
see:
>>600032
>>600059
>>600081

we've already established that the artistic form of game design INCLUDES interactivity, but is not made up of just one component.

i still argue that interactivity is the primary attribute, though.

the difference between game design and interactive ad-lib theatre is the design aspect.

if it wasn't ad-lib, and was still interactive, i would say it's a type of game in the same way that a choose-your-own-adventure novel is.

>>600183
>what other art forms are interactive in their consumption?
More than I could list. Every static form of art has an interactive equivalent, and there are countless kinds of performance art that depend on interaction with an audience. Just read this for a brief overview:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interactive_art

>>600210
i guess we just disagree on that aspect, which is understandable.

i consider the choosing of what happens next to be an extremely simple form of gameplay.

>>598871
Essentially, there was no real form of quality control, not to mention that there were hundreds of other consoles on the market like the Fairchild Channel F

Atari was guilty of it as well, especially after all of their employees got fed up of inadequate pay and no recognition. Pac-Man and E.T. for the 2600 are usually seen as the poster children of the Crash

Also, here's a rather informative video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvHcYe2sQ-I

>>600228
granted i've only skimmed it so far, but what i'm gathering is that these forms of interactive art are things that i would consider a form of 'game' that is experienced by the 'audience'.

i had faith in /vr/ to be different than /v/, but not anymore

>>600227
>the difference between game design and interactive ad-lib theatre is the design aspect.
Personally, I value the gambling aspect of the game. I.e., the ambiguity of whether or not the goal is going to be reached.

I think it's the main difference between games and literature.

This can not exist without interactivity, but I do not focus on interactivity as such because, again, it can be an element of many other things and focusing on it could in some cases make the game a toy.

>>600123

I'm sure that's true. It's the same thing with the CDi Zelda games. I tried getting them to work but it was too much of a pain. But yeah I should start with one of the "greats" ET

>>600137
That sounds like the greatest game ever. I've been putting off going old-old school but now is as good a time as any.

>>600286
The emulator I've been using is Bliss. (For Windows, but I was using it under Wine, so if you're on Linux, the recommendation still stands.)

>>600248
That's alright. I don't see it your way, but I won't argue about it either, since I doubt we could ever reach common ground on this. My take on "art" is similar to my take on "fun" or "beauty". It's such an amorphous term that depends so heavily on subjective value judgments that it's practically pointless to use it as a definitional category.

>>600308
glad we've reached a mutual understanding, even if we didn't end up agreeing.

>>600269
details of the gambling aspect are part of the design.
it's not the same as ad-lib.
interactivity = toy in the same way that hammer = toy.

>>600326
Interactivity =/= toy.
But interactivity is probably THE defining aspect of a toy. That's what I mean. Focusing on interactivity brings the game closer to being a toy due to that.

>>599020
remember, kiddies:
videoGAMES
GAMES = ENTERTAINMENT
ENTERTAINMENT =/= ART
a videogame is good when it's "fun" to play, right?
Well, a good concert, or a good painting, or a good movie are NOT fun.

>>598917

This. The AAA aren't deserving of the AAA title but they are certainly not on the same level as the horseshit that was coming out in the early 80's.

>>600403
ART = ENTERTAINMENT, period.

All art from Hollywood cinema to Bach's cantatas exists to entertain human beings.

>>600416
>The AAA aren't deserving of the AAA title
That only ever refers to development costs, actually. Ads make it look like it has something to do with actual quality of gameplay, but it's not. A title is an AAA title despite everything whatsoever if it cost 50 million to develop. Suited businessmen and businesswomen at a meeting will refer to that as a "flagman AAA title" ro some shit like that.

>>600417
> Bach's cantatas exists to entertain human beings.

could you possibly be wronger
maybe in the ears of dumb noblemen of the time, even Bach's music was considered just entertaining. Ok. But it became Art when people started studying it, analyzing it and replaying for centuries and centuries.
I think that maybe, in a not-so-distant future, some games will start being considered art. But most of them for now are just meant to entertain kiddies.

>>600469
Being lowbrow does not prevent something from being art.

Bach's music exists to entertain, was written to entertain, and was used as entertainment by him, his friends at Telemann's and his pupils. The only other, secondary use it ever had was to educate his sons in composition, polyphony and harmony.

>>600213
nononononononononono.

No.

QTEs are a cancer NOW. 20 fucking years ago with "graphics" (really, prerendered, or pre-drawn) WAY ahead of the curve, and unprecendented design, it was *awesome*.

QTE-based gameplay *can* be decent, not great, in recent memory, but, for example, I liked a lot of Shenmue.

>>600530
>QTE-based gameplay *can* be decent, not great, in recent memory, but, for example, I liked a lot of Shenmue.
Or RE4. The, what, two times it actually happens in the cutscenes, it's AMAZING. every single goddamn time.

>>600545
I'll grant that. Although they way way way overdid it in 5 and 6.

>>600490
but now it is still studied and played. I personally think that art implies:
a)the accomplishment of a certain aesthetic
b)an elaborate mental process that brought to its creation (and therefore, trying to be "ahead of its time", trying to innovate and change previous rules and forms)
c)longevity. I think that what distinguishes "art" from "beautiful crafts" is that art somehow manages to live through centuries. It takes a very long time for an aesthetic craft to be considered art.

Therefore,
I think that the only videogames that will be considered art are those that, 60-70 years from now, will still be replayed and talked about.
It's just my perspective about art in general. Don't take it too seriously.

>>600564
Well, Shinji Mikami left. They had to do something, since they couldn't have good gameplay anymore and all that.

>>600559
No, they are art from the moment they're made. By definition, theyr'e works of art.

Don't put art on a pedestal and don't confuse "art" with "timeless masterpiece". "Art" is not necessarily part of the canon, it doesn't have to be highbrow or good. What you mean to say is high art" - yeah, most games aren't that. Most musical pieces, including academic music, and most books, including academic literature, aren't either. Very few things are; but there's no need to consider all art either high art or not art at all.

>>600614
ok, I accept your point of view. From now on, I'll be more careful about the use of "Art" and "masterpiece" (English is not my first language).

>>600628
In any case, "high art" is what you likely meant in your previous posts.

>>600559
>but now it is still studied and played. I personally think that art implies:
>text

Well dude, you're wrong, That's not the definition of the word art.

You're using the word "art" to refer to "high art" or things with "artistic value."

Extreme shovelware like E.T. being released, that costed 10 million to make. I dont mean like EA/Ubisoft on GBA shovelware, I mean games that actually were so bad they werent playtested

>>599252
Not really?

why does it have to be art at all?

Games are crafted and a good show of craftsmanship

Craftsmanship can be art as well

To put it in one word

Oversaturation

>>600417
>Hollywood cinema
>art

haaw waah

It's ironic that the R.O.B from Nintendo that everyone always makes fun of and in itself was complete shit was what literally saved the gaming industry. That robot allowed them to market it as something else other than a gaming console and it got people interested again, forcing them to realize gaming was fun. They ditched R.O.B as they had drawn people back. Gamers today should worship R.O.B

>>600801
Of both computers and consoles (consoles weren't the only thing affected)

Bye guys!