Comments on: Snapping point

By: Wyatt

Wyatt — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 11:47:24 +0000

I just want to say that I’ve become something of an instant fan of your musings and we share a lot of similar theories; the things I’ve read today will be applied tomorrow, as you’ve managed to nicely give solidity to concepts I’ve been wrestling with the requirement I communicate to others this term. I look forward to more.

Cheers,
Wyatt

By: Christian

Christian — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 14:52:53 +0000

Hi. I just want to disclaim my way out of making a usual blog comment, I don’t want to enter into some kind of debate because I don’t think there is one. The last paragraph, beginning with ‘but goddamnit’ is absolutely inspirational and I think it should be shown and read and taught to anybody wanting to .. I was going to say enter the games industry.. but fuck the industry. It should be told and given to anybody wanting to enter games.

I don’t get the arguments in the comments here. (Aside from the assertion in one of them that dance is mostly about narrative is patently false.) Abstract art is hardly about emotions. It is often about a physiological response. The Seagrams Murals are a low-lit room with pounding, malevolent presences – this is not about narrative or interaction. Thats a false dichotomy – and sloppy thinking gets worse over time. Its about the very real, very physical act of looking itself. Turning from one panel to the next can often induce a sense of pure physical vertigo.

Just because things happen in a sequence doesn’t make them stories. There’s so much richness all around us, so much delight and play and madness, and when games look out that window to capture some of it, my God. But the timidity is getting to us.. fun is gaming’s birthright.. sometimes it feels like the hippie parents have brought up a chartered accountant.

By: Cunzy1 1

Cunzy1 1 — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:48:43 +0000

Jees don’t cry about it. Guffaw!

By: Enno

Enno — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:11:10 +0000

Passage made me cry.

By: Non-Linear Art « Pixel-love

Non-Linear Art « Pixel-love — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 12:41:37 +0000

[...] Robertson is on fire in this post. There are lots of stupid quibbles and assumptions in the games industry, things that function as [...]

By: Gregory Weir

Gregory Weir — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 23:14:59 +0000

Humans are story-making animals, and any work which has a sequence of events, including all games, will inevitably be understood in a narrative fashion. I agree that evoking sorrow is one of the more trivial and useless goals for games, but story will always be a powerful tool in gaming. It may not be a linear story, laid out ahead of time, but discarding narrative means discarding chronology, which requires discarding interactivity. Basically, I agree with what Dave said.

By: Scurra

Scurra — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 14:12:54 +0000

While I agree with your basic premise, I do think that the fundamental problem is that narrative art is simply easier to grok (and therefore to construct), because the supporting framework comes from a shared place.
Even when narrative art breaks the “rules”, it is the very existence of those rules, and that we know where they come from, that makes it work to begin with. (Which is why comics still belong in the narrative group, sorry )

Whereas istm that the emotional response produced by abstract art does not come from anything like the same place.

At present, therefore, games still have to be considered almost wholly a narrative form – the emotional response evoked by them comes from that world; although there are honourable exceptions to this (as there are in e.g. film or television), that doesn’t make them a non-narrative artform. Trying to force them to go to a place they don’t belong seems futile to me. Hmmm. I guess all I’m doing is arguing that the exceptions really do prove the rule!

But thank you for a thought-provoking piece. And do try and get to see the Rothko show – it’s not the best one he’s been given, but it’s pretty fine nevertheless.

By: Dave

Dave — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 04:34:13 +0000

Hi Margaret,

I agree, mostly. However not just comics, but theatre, opera, and much of dance are based in narrative form. One can also argue that much of painting, sculpture, music and poetry are beholden to narrative as well. Architecture…hmm, that gets complicated. But I get your point about not drawing exclusively from the disciplines of film, TV and literature for comparison. I think that, regardless of the truth of the statement that “the majority of art forms don’t rely on narrative for their emotional impact,” (which I would dispute, or perhaps qualify, and which more importantly I think is fundamentally irrelevant to your point) one must look at games in a new light, outside of the frameworks that came before, and not get obsessed with just one aspect.

I think that was the only weak spot in a post full of thoughtful, cogent points made coherently, and does not diminish your overall message. Thanks.

Best,
Dave

By: Infovore » links for December 18th

Infovore » links for December 18th — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 00:00:17 +0000

[...] Lookspring » Snapping point "Tears shouldn’t be our goal. Stories don’t need to be our tools. The majority of art forms don’t rely on narrative for their emotional impact. Stop and think about that for a second. The games industry tends to draw on such an amazingly limited roster of inspirations that it’s easy to forget it. But our obsession with linear, story-based – word-based, even – non-participatory art at the expense of all the other forms makes life so much harder for games, and it makes me crazy." (tags: games art narrative story emotion ) [...]

By: chewing pixels » Best Games Writing of 2008: Part 2

chewing pixels » Best Games Writing of 2008: Part 2 — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 16:16:08 +0000

[...] medium. While her own blog is rarely updated, it’s worth subscribing to for those time it is. Today’s update in particular is useful. And suddenly, with a single, trivial oversight, the New York Times [...]