This is so incredibly condescending I can't even process it.I don't think people are lying out of insecurity, I think that wanting to believe something is important because it has the affectation of importance is fascinating behavior.
And that's fair enough, I would just be wary of how liberally you use that line of thinking.
I get the idea of someone "wanting a thing to have significance" but I just don't think your average or mainstream consumer of media or games even thinks in those terms. I think it's a fruitless path to go down for your premise because you can't really intimate what's in people's souls as to whether how they are enjoying it is because of pressure or assumed significance.
Maybe I would take the angle of analyzing what aspects don't appeal to you more in depth and why they don't appeal to you and specifically how they contrast with the games that attempt similar things but aren't "soulless".
For instance Gears 5 and The Last of Us since you seem to have a pretty passionate opposite reaction to both games. Although personally I reject the premise that Gears is more effective in leveraging its gameplay to emphasize the impact of its story, but that's neither here nor there.
The validation aspect is a dead end especially when lobbed at the general public and not fellow critics and media and really just sounds like plain old gate keeping.
Most of these games don't seem prestige in the way a prestige film is. Most of them seem like safe, risk averse blockbusters.
And that's fair enough, I would just be wary of how liberally you use that line of thinking.
I get the idea of someone "wanting a thing to have significance" but I just don't think you average or mainstream consumer of media or games even thinks in those terms. I think it's a fruitless path to go down for your premise because you can't really intimate what's in people's souls as to whether how they are enjoying it is because of pressure or assumed significance.
Maybe I would take the angle of analyzing what aspects don't appeal to you more in depth and why they don't appeal to you and specifically how they contrast with the games that attempt similar things but aren't "soulless".
For instance Gears 5 and The Last of Us since you seem to have a pretty passionate opposite reaction to both games. Although personally I reject the premise that Gears is more effective in leveraging its gameplay to emphasize the impact of its story, but that's neither here nor there.
The validation aspect is a dead end especially when lobbed at the general public and not fellow critics and media and really just sounds like plain old gate keeping.
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 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.
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.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?
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 trying to prove why your opinions correct.
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.
Don't you think you're overreacting a little?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.
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 and experience and education you are more likely to grow jaded in that regard.
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.particularly in games wanting to be recognized as something more than just entertainment
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.
Yeah people who do this automatically invalidate their own opinion in my eyes.The notion of disliking and dismissing an entire category of any entertainment medium is ridiculous to me. Even in genres I generally dislike in games, film, books, etc., there are always a handful I do end up liking. The use of "Prestige Game" just makes the whole thing come off as "mainstream games...ew" snobbery, too.
That actually sounds like most of the entire indie industry when you realize expense has nothing to do with originality.I'd say that prestige games are expensive AAA-type games that imitate better art without really understanding or improving upon them in any way, often using fairly boilerplate mechanics to accomplish this.
Most of those MoMA games were primarily designed as entertainment. It's not like they are showing off Pathologic.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.
Well I think it just goes to show that the art world and the general public have very different ideals.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 .
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.Most of those MoMA games were primarily designed as entertainment. It's not like they are showing off Pathologic.
My buddy Cory and I embraced when we reached Gear's credits. Just like the jaw dropping conclusion of the final scene, this hug felt completely earned. The embrace of our hug was also surprisingly tight, unlike the gunplay mechanics in Uncharted 2.
Gears 5 rocked me to my core. I was pimp slapped by the quality, shellshocked by the audacity of a game daring to defiantly be a game-y game, and I was honored to be strong enough to withstand its relentless onslaught of good game design.
Cory continued to cry. He was utterly broken by the goodness and trueness of Gear's 5 campaign. He was hysterical. He left the room and ate a bunch of frozen pizzas, raw. He just refused to heat them in the oven. I was pissed.
-Anyway, Gears was a religious experience. Was akin to looking into God's eyes. His benevolent form looking back at yours, shaking his head in agreement as if to say "The Last of Us is just the Road. We have PS4s in Heaven. Played it and it was a 7 at best. One and done type game, wouldn't play it again tbh. Thinking bout selling my PS4, I'm overwhelmed by my Switch anyway..."
As for the 'appeal to authority,' it's more like, hey, I have people saying "this is very poorly written, you're shit, why isn't this like an article in esquire" and it's like, hey, I actually DO that. This is most emphatically NOT THAT. This is like telling a chef who gets home and makes a box of mac and cheese that all he cooks is garbage. Like, dude, I work in a 4-star michelin joint all day, no way am I gonna treat my personal space like that too. I want people to recognize the difference between formats and the intent behind the writing instead of making really shitty comparisons.
I haven't missed it, I just happen to think you're wrong. Crystal Dynamics' tomb raider games were the biggest uncharted-influenced games out there. Much more of last gen was influenced by Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare--it's the defining game of the generation, with the most obvious influence out there. Uncharted 2 was influenced by Call of Duty 4 (the guy who led Uncharted 4's gameplay design was actually a former Infinity Ward guy, haha)
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.Characters
Other
- Andrew Ryan's philosophy, his name, and some of his history were based on Ayn Rand.[1] His name is a partial anagram of hers. Both Andrew Ryan and Ayn Rand were originally from the Soviet Union, but moved to America to avoid the increasing tensions of Communism. Both created their own city to explore their ideas: Rand created Atlantis in Galt's Gulch in her novel Atlas Shrugged,[2] while Ryan created Rapture.
- In a radio message from Andrew Ryan in Arcadia, we learn that he set fire to his own land rather than let it fall into public hands. This seems to be a direct reference once again to Atlas Shrugged, in which the character Ellis Wyatt sets fire to his valuable oil fields for similar reasons.
- During Rapture Central Control, Andrew Ryan starts a self-destruct sequence for Rapture, because he does not want to see Atlas take control of his city. In The Fountainhead[3] Howard Roark dynamites the Cortlandt housing project when his designs had been altered.
- The name Atlas was inspired by the title of one of Ayn Rand's most famous books, Atlas Shrugged.
- A minor character in the game, Anya Andersdotter, shares the same characteristic Bob cut as Ayn Rand. Her name is also an anagram of the author's with letters added: AYN RAND converts to ANYa ANDeRsdotter.
- Ayn Rand's original last name was Rosenbaum, which is paralleled by the character Tenenbaum.
- The name Frank Fontaine was inspired by the title The Fountainhead.
- Posters can be found that say "Who is Atlas" are references to the regularly repeated expression "Who is John Galt" in Atlas Shrugged.
- Ayn Rand's philosophy, called Objectivism,[4] greatly influences the story of BioShock. Objectivism is the idea that one should follow their own self-interest and profit from their own abilities and ambitions while being virtually uninhibited by others. This is the idea on which Andrew Ryan's city is based.
- Each bottle of Arcadia Merlot is embossed with the name "Fountainhead Cabernet Sauvignon," which may be another direct reference to Rand's novel The Fountainhead.
- On Jack's fake passport, his last name is shown to be Wynand. In Ayn Rand's The Fountainhead, Gail Wynand is one of the main characters.
- Posters for the Pharaoh's Fortune Casino and Cinema Réal state that they are located in the Cameron Suites, a possible reference to architect Henry Cameron, a character in The Fountainhead.
- The name "H. Roark" appears on the advertisement for the Eve's Garden strip club and Roark Architect & Construction. Howard Roark was the main character in The Fountainhead.
- D. Francon Antiques is a reference to Dominique Francon, another character in The Fountainhead.
- A patient in one of the pictures scattered throughout the Medical Pavilion bears a striking resemblance to Ayn Rand.
- In Atlas Shrugged, during a party, the protagonist Dagny is told by a woman about the tale of John Galt. She says that while sailing in the sea during a storm, he saw the shining towers of Atlantis. This could be what inspired the idea of Rapture, an underwater utopia very much like Atlantis in many ways. Following this, there are many mentionings such as Poseidon Plaza or Neptune's Bounty, who both had influence on the city in myths.
- The "Welcome to Rapture" posters[specify poster] found throughout the city use a similar font, color scheme, and background to the cover art of the Penguin paperback edition of Atlas Shrugged.
Congrats man, you beat the article in 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.
Classy.Cool. You kids have fun thinking Bioshock isn't stupid. I'll go back to reading.
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.As for the 'appeal to authority,' it's more like, hey, I have people saying "this is very poorly written, you're shit, why isn't this like an article in esquire"
It's crazy that you'd have to explain this.Also, someone isn't being a "snob" just because they hold an opinion that you don't. You have to show your work a little more than that.
Why are you pointing out references to Ayn Rand? Everyone knows Rapture and Andrew Ryan is suppose to be objectivist.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.
Why are you pointing out references to Ayn Rand? Everyone knows Rapture and Andrew Ryan is suppose to be objectivist.
It is, in my opinion, a kind of cargo-cult storytelling, a means of placing the things that awe us in an order that those of us without media literacy will fail to recognize. Stuff that gets an emotional response not because it's earned but because it copied moments that were earned in the hopes it will do well.
So many of these games have stories that are clearly lifted from elsewhere, but lack the brilliant performances, character work, or drama that make these stories so compelling.
the guy who led Uncharted 4's gameplay design was actually a former Infinity Ward guy, haha)
I think the fact the Rapture ends up a dystopia hellscape under the sea is saying something about objectivism, regardless of how effective you think that critique is.
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.
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.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.
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.
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.
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.
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".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.
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?
Bioshock is a far more honest work than anything Ayn Rand ever shat out.
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.
Where is the name calling? I just asked if you were a libertarian and if you were offended.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.
Hallelujah Amen.