This is something I've wanted to talk about for awhile and today's Jimquisition "A Difficult Discussion" was the impetus I needed to finally Swype down my thoughts.
This discussion isn't exclusively about Sekiro and difficulty modes however; you can insert any hot topic concerning the content of a game into this. Rather it's about the sanctibility of the "artist's vision" on part of gamers and how it inherently conflicts with how artists mentally and emotionally operate on large-scale collaborative efforts.
I learned years ago after breaking down in front of folks over a forgettable 2D design project that I thought was the shittiest thing ever that ideas are fleeting and production is a mystery no one wants to solve. Your audience cannot take into account the amount of effort your product necessitated because they weren't there for it, and frankly it doesn't matter during the present experience of your product. They just want the product. They are also not going to see every mistake you made because mistakes in art can only be gleaned by the context of the beginning intent and the end result, and only the artist understands both.
I imagine most artists who want to make a career of their talents and those lucky enough to do so come to these conclusions sooner or later, and when they do it's freeing. You are not a slave to the master of specificity and perfection anymore. Your goal is just to make something enjoyable. However you get there doesn't matter.
So nothing is sacred. Any idea or concept is only as good as it serves that goal. You seek out ways to separate the wheat from the chaff. You conduct research and ask questions from your colleagues. You interview people close to the subject. You steal other people's things. You trash other things. The world and the media before you becomes a cheat sheet. It's a subtractive process, and you keep yourself emotionally separate from the majority of individual hideas as a result.
That's how I got through making my animated short. It's how I got through collaborating on others' shorts. It's how I was able to let Weta Digital tell my tiny team what was and wasn't working on our creature design. I imagine for game design, specifically in an era where even the "final product" can still be subject to change and iteration through DLC, nerfs, buffs, events and whatever else, that designers must exercise a further distance from the so-called sacredness of their ideas just to function and love the process of their craft.
So imagine the cultural whiplash I experience everytime I read any gaming forum where people insist "ideas" are actually the most important thing worth upholding. That they are above criticism and demand from the audience. That the vision must be upheld and that any calls for change amount to censorship.
Gamers treat artists as this special class of folks that are under attack.
It's honestly creepy, and infantalizing to me. I'm an adult; I can handle the thought of someone telling me my work is problematic on some level. Because I want to know these things! I want to know the weak links and blind spots! How else can I get better?
Certainly not by living in a world where the audience insists that my fleeting ideas and processes are sacrosanct, or worse yet that if I did change anything on being convinced by the arguments of my audience it's because I was coerced or forced, as if I'm incapable of coming to decisions about the quality of my work, or that my self-description as an artist means I magically have all the answers.
I don't, and that's the beauty of working on large scale works-- learning from different people and coming together to work as a team, to see how an idea evolves over the weeks, months, and years as the cooks scramble around in the kitchen.
I imagine the reflexive argument coming up to refute my ideals is that artists are allowed to defend their work, thereby proving to some degree that the vision is indeed sacred. True, there is some degree of defensiveness or belief in any given idea, or a willingness to explore. That's fine. I've turned down criticism before after a conversation about it.
Where I draw the line however is the inability to even have that conversation, the inability for people to even say they disagree with my work in some manner. That's what I feel this worship of "vision" comes down to. It is a disruption of the contract between artist and audience that has happened since time immemorial.
Ultimately, the mere concept of an artist's vision that deserves infinite respect is fundamentally incompatible with how collaborative artwork is even made. This attitude to try and white-knight for game developers and other artists isn't respectful. It denies us our agency and the ability to grow as artists and people. You're not impressing me as an artist when you lay into audience members who demand different and better from their media. It's always disappointing and insulting.
Gamers, you don't need to be an intermediary or a speaker for our work. We can take care of ourselves. Instead, engage in the conversation on the merits of our work. Embrace the different lenses through which art can be interpreted. You just may learn something fascinating.
This discussion isn't exclusively about Sekiro and difficulty modes however; you can insert any hot topic concerning the content of a game into this. Rather it's about the sanctibility of the "artist's vision" on part of gamers and how it inherently conflicts with how artists mentally and emotionally operate on large-scale collaborative efforts.
I learned years ago after breaking down in front of folks over a forgettable 2D design project that I thought was the shittiest thing ever that ideas are fleeting and production is a mystery no one wants to solve. Your audience cannot take into account the amount of effort your product necessitated because they weren't there for it, and frankly it doesn't matter during the present experience of your product. They just want the product. They are also not going to see every mistake you made because mistakes in art can only be gleaned by the context of the beginning intent and the end result, and only the artist understands both.
I imagine most artists who want to make a career of their talents and those lucky enough to do so come to these conclusions sooner or later, and when they do it's freeing. You are not a slave to the master of specificity and perfection anymore. Your goal is just to make something enjoyable. However you get there doesn't matter.
So nothing is sacred. Any idea or concept is only as good as it serves that goal. You seek out ways to separate the wheat from the chaff. You conduct research and ask questions from your colleagues. You interview people close to the subject. You steal other people's things. You trash other things. The world and the media before you becomes a cheat sheet. It's a subtractive process, and you keep yourself emotionally separate from the majority of individual hideas as a result.
That's how I got through making my animated short. It's how I got through collaborating on others' shorts. It's how I was able to let Weta Digital tell my tiny team what was and wasn't working on our creature design. I imagine for game design, specifically in an era where even the "final product" can still be subject to change and iteration through DLC, nerfs, buffs, events and whatever else, that designers must exercise a further distance from the so-called sacredness of their ideas just to function and love the process of their craft.
So imagine the cultural whiplash I experience everytime I read any gaming forum where people insist "ideas" are actually the most important thing worth upholding. That they are above criticism and demand from the audience. That the vision must be upheld and that any calls for change amount to censorship.
Gamers treat artists as this special class of folks that are under attack.
It's honestly creepy, and infantalizing to me. I'm an adult; I can handle the thought of someone telling me my work is problematic on some level. Because I want to know these things! I want to know the weak links and blind spots! How else can I get better?
Certainly not by living in a world where the audience insists that my fleeting ideas and processes are sacrosanct, or worse yet that if I did change anything on being convinced by the arguments of my audience it's because I was coerced or forced, as if I'm incapable of coming to decisions about the quality of my work, or that my self-description as an artist means I magically have all the answers.
I don't, and that's the beauty of working on large scale works-- learning from different people and coming together to work as a team, to see how an idea evolves over the weeks, months, and years as the cooks scramble around in the kitchen.
I imagine the reflexive argument coming up to refute my ideals is that artists are allowed to defend their work, thereby proving to some degree that the vision is indeed sacred. True, there is some degree of defensiveness or belief in any given idea, or a willingness to explore. That's fine. I've turned down criticism before after a conversation about it.
Where I draw the line however is the inability to even have that conversation, the inability for people to even say they disagree with my work in some manner. That's what I feel this worship of "vision" comes down to. It is a disruption of the contract between artist and audience that has happened since time immemorial.
Ultimately, the mere concept of an artist's vision that deserves infinite respect is fundamentally incompatible with how collaborative artwork is even made. This attitude to try and white-knight for game developers and other artists isn't respectful. It denies us our agency and the ability to grow as artists and people. You're not impressing me as an artist when you lay into audience members who demand different and better from their media. It's always disappointing and insulting.
Gamers, you don't need to be an intermediary or a speaker for our work. We can take care of ourselves. Instead, engage in the conversation on the merits of our work. Embrace the different lenses through which art can be interpreted. You just may learn something fascinating.
I'm also not unaware that this concept is not always utilized in good faith. I'm speaking to the people out there who do this under a genuine belief in free expression and how the conversation looks from an artist's point of view. If you're only ever concerned about the artist's vision when it comes to misogyny, racism, and anti-LGBT sentiments in video games you can go piss up a rope. I have no other words for you.
