-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
“I don’t think I like Prestige Games”
- Thread starter Proven
- Start date
- Status
I did the Uncharted 2/3/TLOU thing earlier this year, actually. I archived most of the Uncharted 2 run but life issues prevented me from archiving 3 and TLOU. Did it live and on air. The first few episodes of the Uncharted 2 one are like "here are some good lessons we can learn here, this is really clever" and then it just kind of breaks down as the rest of the game breaks down.
I think the next article will be a lot more refined since I laid out a lot of groundwork in this one. Unfortunately I got a milestone I gotta go finish up, so I won't be able to get to it until later next week, I think.
This is like basic media studies stuff, though? Like this isn't even remotely controversial. Crafting a sense of importance is like... really basic level media shit?
I think most of them are trying to copy successful prestige tv, which makes them safe.
Days Gone is really interesting because it didn't have the money to BE a prestige TV show. It clearly wants to be The Walking Dead meets Sons of Anarchy. Like, if you told me that was the pitch, I'd believe you. And it actually does a lot of things that are very prestige game things, like the 3-tier skill system or the crafting system. But then it has these really intelligent design choices regarding things like hordes, the bike, the way the bike interacts with fast travel, using the loot system to push you into danger, and you end up with some of the smartest game design out this year. I love it.
I agree with most of the write up. Its part of the reason I love indie games so much over AAA games.
Big western games often feel like the maps are made, and then game designers come in to create a game around it. Like 'here's a sweet mall the 3d artist created. Let's put some gun fights in it and hopefully the enemy AI makes it interesting.'
The tacked on rpg elements are better this gen than they were in previous though. Capcom abused this system the most, and they're japanese.
Big western games often feel like the maps are made, and then game designers come in to create a game around it. Like 'here's a sweet mall the 3d artist created. Let's put some gun fights in it and hopefully the enemy AI makes it interesting.'
The tacked on rpg elements are better this gen than they were in previous though. Capcom abused this system the most, and they're japanese.
Yep.
I mean how many people buy UC4 or UC2 for eg thinking it make games art or some other thing .
When you can be sure they bought it cause they enjoy certain aspects of it .
The internet is a place where the minority can get very loud but what they saying sometimes don't really matter or what most people think.
So i take it you have the budget for DG ?
Totally agree with him on ND games, before I opened the article they were at the tip of my mind. When I played TLOU my eyes couldn't of rolled further back in my skull. I don't want to play narrative adventures that have you going from one barely disguised "looks like they read 'The Road'!" checkpoint to another because the 'auteurs' want to tell you a story. I want to play a game.
I totally understand if you like these games, but they're not for me.
I totally understand if you like these games, but they're not for me.
See, that's fine by me, but also exactly what this piece isn't saying.
You see, apparently we like them because they make us feel important. Also we're uneducated, and should play more games and stuff.
Eh, my favorite game of the last two years is an online game where you go from point A to point B with 3 other people, killing as many rat-men as you can and making sure you live to claim your reward at the end. I'm ok with being dumb :)
Right. The condescending part is you obviously have an incredibly high opinion of yourself and your own thoughts, while demonstrating a complete lack of empathy and respect for others, clearly illustrated, for example, by your incredibly out of touch thoughts on passion and expertise.
Media studies is about understanding the place and impact of media in our society. It's not about proving your opinions are superior to others.
Six people worked on the open world and they had to fly down to Santa Monica Studio for motion capture because Sony didn't give them enough money for their own. The subsequent success of Days Gone meant their budget for Days Gone 2 was gonna get a lot bigger.
I think you're starting with some preconceptions and trying to back them up, the content of what I said doesn't support your thesis.
That don't mean the budget was small.
Sony not wanting to build a whole new motion capture studio for them just show it could have been smaller than some of there other games.
Not having the biggest budget don't mean they did not have enough to do what you call a prestige TV show .
Don't you think you're overreacting a little?
I think for some people the safe and commercial approach of AAA game development is a turnoff, and I don't think it's unfair to say that with time or experience or education you are more likely to grow jaded in that regard.
Last edited:
Hm, I do think the author has some points, particularly in games wanting to be recognized as something more than just entertainment and how many games simply copy mechanics without actually caring if they will make the game better or not, but overall I believe he might go to far with the whole "you only think this game is good because you are ignorant of other media". I don't think I was tricked into liking some of this "prestige games", I simply did, and played them more than once.
Also, talking about Max Payne 3 and the influence of movies and not mentioning Elite Squad 1 and 2 is crazy!
Also, talking about Max Payne 3 and the influence of movies and not mentioning Elite Squad 1 and 2 is crazy!
I'm not crazy about tmese games either. (totally common and uncontroversial opinion, btw.) The main thrust of the article though, is that people who do like these games must be largely doing so out of insecure want for validation of the medium.
It's bizarre that "elevating the medium" usually translates to elevating production value with better acting and writing and visual presentation, which does nothing to "elevate" the medium beyond entertainment. The games that wind up in the MoMA couldn't be more different from the swathe of games being discussed here.
The whole caring about elevating the medium is done by such a small sub set of people .
Don't think most people care .
They just enjoy the games for what ever reason ., the "elevating the medium" will come with time .
Yeah people who do this automatically invalidate their own opinion in my eyes.
And the article is worthless on its own merits. Imagine calling popcorn blockbusters "prestige games." Prestige is exactly what I think when folks bring up Disney Infinity, Enter the Matrix, or the most dude bro series of all CoD. The most popular games coming from japan aren't soulless husks made only to make money? Has he not seen the mobile industry over there. Or heard of pokemon? Even the idea that western games alone are being designed to garner prestige, and thus more money, is ridiculous. Konami and Square has been doing that longer than most of the current western industry. Yu Suzuki and Kojima were at the forefront and are doing that as we speak.
That actually sounds like most of the entire indie industry when you realize expense has nothing to do with originality.
The writer has failed completely to justify their disdain for AAA outside of some arbitrary bias.
Most of those MoMA games were primarily designed as entertainment. It's not like they are showing off Pathologic.
Well I think it just goes to show that the art world and the general public have very different ideals.
Most of those are games that you could consider historically important to the medium, and games like Dwarf Fortress are certainly entertaining, just not created with any commercial intent whatsoever.
I'm not saying their selection is perfect, but I don't think you're going to see a lot of AAA games in that collection going forward.
Last edited:
Do you even realize how narcissistic you continue to sound? Honestly, if you spent less time telling us how important you are and more time getting your message across clearly, you might be able to start a conversation. Instead, 90% of this thread is about the tone of the blog rather than the content.
"Bioshock is stupid"
Yeah, sounds like snobbery.
I mean, it's not an intelligent ground-breaking story or writing. It's Ayn Rand in an alternate Steampunk-and-SF-influenced world.
And I don't think Bioshock says anything deep or profound about objectivism. They're good games, but, yeah, on some level they are kinda stupid.
Cool. You kids have fun thinking Bioshock isn't stupid. I'll go back to reading.
Edit:
Also, what does your comment even mean? Like, I called out a game for being stupid and basically lifting it's ideas from one of the worst (and yet most influential) pieces of 20th century literature without it actually saying anything about the underlying philosophy of said literature or its writer. If your response to that is "You're such a snob", then, I mean, okay, sure. I'll take that insult and laugh, because if you think what I wrote is snobbish, you shouldn't step anywhere near the NYT Book Review, The New Yorker, or in-depth art criticism.
I never said you were shit. I posted that Esquire article because it gets to the root of your criticism in a way that doesn't belittle the people who consume that media, which I would have liked to see in your writing about the subject. This is your Medium blog, it isn't your personal journal, so there is always a chance that people will read this. I am sorry some of us didn't find the writing and arguments to be up to snuff.
Why are you pointing out references to Ayn Rand? Everyone knows Rapture and Andrew Ryan is suppose to be objectivist.
Because 1) Ayn Rand wrote Atlas Shrugged, 2) Bioshock says nothing about the philosophy or the author, so consequently 3) it's perfect as an illustration of Doc's points that
And
and finally 4) my post acted as a response to someone who thinks calling Bioshock stupid is "snobbery". It is stupid, because of my point 2 above. It's a game that says nothing, and everyone knows it says nothing, yet some people pretend it says Deep Things. And I say all that, and can still acknowledge that I loved the game and have no desire to return to it ever again.
There's movies and books (and even comics) that take a formula or ideas, or specific piece of work and subvert the readers expectations, or examine contemporary life or politics through those works. But Bioshock is just "Here's some philosophy from this author in this SF setting". It makes a great visually striking game. But it says nothing.
Who was this again?
As far as I know, Anthony Newman, Kurt Margenau, and Ricky Cambier weren't former IW.
What I recall is the other way round, where Jacob Minkoff ( lead on TLOU ) went to IW as design director.
Prestige gaming as a concept here is weird because usually a prestige picture where this term, I'd guess, originated are gorgeously made and crafted money losers that are made for the art. They're intended to be the highest form of the art.
It's a bit weird to apply this concept to games clearly made to be highly marketable, successful and bombastic. Not sure what that says about the medium tbh...if it's good or bad that the most successful games are also considered the best that the medium has to offer.
It's a bit weird to apply this concept to games clearly made to be highly marketable, successful and bombastic. Not sure what that says about the medium tbh...if it's good or bad that the most successful games are also considered the best that the medium has to offer.
ehhhh... I don't think so personally. It's an environment that serves the gameplay, rather than a statement about objectivism. Like, it's the only way you could have the gameplay of Bioshock (splicers, Adam, hacking puzzles). But I can see your point, yeah.
Does not really say anything about games.
Just some people like put certain labels on thing they don't like and come up with what ever reason to act like it fact .
All culture is cultural critique (even if only in service of hegemony). Bioshock very explicitly so. That doesn't make it good or smart cultural critique, but it is absolutely a critique—of objectivism, of the social role of individual achievement, of encoding and realizing one's desires in the avenues that one's environment allows for. The fact that its setting enables its gameplay has absolutely nothing to do with whether it's cultural critique or not.
I mean, I disagree with your central argument. I don't believe "all culture is cultural critique", even allowing for the rider of "even if only in service of hegemony". I do think that specifically avoiding cultural critique (like, what was it... The Division 2? Or one of the Far Cry games?) with a statement saying "This is just meant to be entertainment" is cultural critique in service of hegemony. But I also do believe it is entirely possible to create culture or entertainment (though not Art) which isn't cultural critique. Sometimes a shooty-bangy game is just a shooty-bangy game, y'know? :p
Edit: And, to my eye, Bioshock doesn't really provide a critique there, good, bad, smart or stupid. It basically just exists, I feel.
But, yeah, you've given me something to ponder and turn over in my mind, there, and maybe reconsider my point of view on, so thank you. :)
Last edited:
This is correct after doing some checking unless they don't have the info they work with IW before.
Bioshock is a far more honest work than anything Ayn Rand ever shat out.
User Banned (1 Day): Antagonizing another member
lol what the fuck. That's literally THE WHOLE POINT of the story's themes! It's not just some tacked on shit. The game posits that if we lived in a society that was built on objectivist morality, that it would likely collapse because of the absolute selfishness built into its philosophy that would cause mass greed and corruption. Obviously it's hyperbolic for the sake of being a satirical horror game, but I wouldn't call it "stupid".
Are you some libertarian who is butthurt by people seeing Ayn Rands philosophy for the ugly dreck that it is?
Do we really need the name-calling. Bloody hell. :/
I don't regard that as a critique of the philosophy. I regard it as as plot device for the purposes of the game, but that plot device is not in and of itself a critique.
And I think with the insults, I'm out of this conversation, and ignoring you.
Link to a good paper analyzing BIoshock that also touches on Objectivism.
Critical analysis
Where is the name calling? I just asked if you were a libertarian and if you were offended.
- Status