Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Who What Now
Sep 10, 2006

by Azathoth

Nevvy Z posted:

Couldn't the same be said of literally every other entertainment medium we occasionally refer to as 'art?'

Yes, which is why "art" is a useless label and/or standard for determining something's worth.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Who What Now
Sep 10, 2006

by Azathoth

Guy DeBorgore posted:

The Bible, Finnegans Wake, the latest edition of Gray's Anatomy, and a generic swords-and-sorcery fantasy novel aimed at teenagers: would you really judge all four the same way? Video games at least share the common goal of being "fun to play" even if they appeal to drastically different senses of "fun," but it's not like they're trying to teach you anything new about human nature.

Why not? What is it that makes games completely incapable of teaching people something new about human?

Who What Now
Sep 10, 2006

by Azathoth

Guy DeBorgore posted:

"Completely incapable" is pretty strong, even a rock can teach you about the human condition if you're in a receptive mood. I dunno, there's probably something to be said about the nature of the medium and how it basically glorifies the self (so the player feels stronger or smarter or braver than they really are) rather than encouraging self-reflection. Some games (e.g. chess) don't glorify the player but they're also far removed from everyday human experience, and the black-and-white world of chess doesn't really lend itself to exploring any profound themes.

But do we actually need to get all philosophical about it, or is it enough just to point out that even very good video games are mostly just concerned with giving a superficially enjoyable experience to the player, rather than grappling with any kind of difficult or emotional subject matter?

Considering I don't accept that games cannot be primarily about grappling with a kind of difficult or emotional subject matter, or even that dealing with such subjects is even mutually exclusive with having an enjoyable experience then yes, we do need to philosophical about this. You're pointing out something that is wrong.

Who What Now fucked around with this message at 15:43 on May 17, 2016

Who What Now
Sep 10, 2006

by Azathoth

Hieronymous Alloy posted:

To be fair I have been getting very similar groans lately when I try to talk to my friends about Hamilton

Why does SA not have a musical theater subforum

Because the line has to be drawn somewhere?

Who What Now
Sep 10, 2006

by Azathoth

Volcott posted:

Re: ME3 -



(1 and 2 were legit.)

Nobody should be mad at ME3 any more, and especially not that mad. Jesus Christ.

  • Locked thread