5 ms·

There's an interest point: He dismissed Waco Resurrection, Braid and Flower as “pathetic,” and sternly predicted that “no video gamer now living will survive l

There's an interest point: He dismissed Waco Resurrection, Braid and Flower as “pathetic,” and sternly predicted that “no video gamer now living will survive long enough to experience the medium as an art form.” People still watch movies made over 40, 50, 60 years ago and still derive aesthetic appreciation from them for camera work, direction, acting, score, and don't just use the relative judgment of being "great for its day" (which isn't without merit) but as absolute recognition of artistic prowess. Will video games ever match movies' longevity, or will they be doomed to a more secular estimation, and eventually fade into obscurity?

M_Grey 10y ago
Most games definitely fade, and deservedly so. Others, from various incarnations of Mario, to various "Tycoon" games probably will stay around for at least as long as some classic movies. I would still happily play SMB on a NES right now... and I think a lot of people would. It's not just nostalgia, it's a good game, it looks good, it sounds good. I say this, and I'm not generally into retro for the sake of retro.
- lr4444lr 10y ago
  Right, and you played it in your formative years. I can watch a movie like "The Third Man" or "12 Angry Men" or "Scaramouche" in my adult years, made decades before I was born, even though I was reared on more flashy stuff, and find it as much as if not more satisfying than what I had encountered before. Could you get a 7 year old today who's had a couple of years of XBox 360 and Wii under his belt to enjoy SMB on the NES more than just to play it for 3 minutes to examine it as an artifact of another age? Even when he's older and can understand the evolution of video games?
  - hx87 10y ago
    Why not fire up an SNES emulator or DOSBox and find out?
    - M_Grey 10y ago
      Oh I have, I still enjoy it. I took about 15 minutes of getting used to, while thinking, "Oh man, it's just blobs on the screen!" and then I realized I couldn't put it down.
      - grasshopperpurp 10y ago
        I had a similar experience with Super Tecmo Bowl - after recently receiving it and an emulator as a gift. The nostalgia was strong, but, in terms of game play, it really is the sweet spot between something like NFL Blitz and Madden or 2K. And, it has QB Eagles.
        M_Grey 10y ago
        Yes, I would agree with that specific example too. I also got a chance to play an old NeoGeo cabinet with a game that was basically a jazzed up version of Pong... and it was still fun. Some gameplay just clicks at a deep level, and if the visuals and the sounds are there (i.e. not a distraction at the very least) I think it's possible. I also would point to something like Day of The Tentacle as a true and lasting masterpiece.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - mrob 10y ago
    I think that 7 year old would be bored by the films you listed too. They might prefer the works of Charlie Chaplin or Buster Keaton, which are appreciated by adults too. And I first played SMB as a child, so my claim that it's still great today could be tainted by nostalgia, but I first played Defender and Robotron as an adult, and those are every bit as fast paced and exciting as the best modern games.
    - lr4444lr 10y ago
      True, but what about the Wizard of Oz? Most kids will relate to and enjoy that, despite its age. There are just so many other aspects of movies. Maybe video games will hit that point, but right now, the impression I get is much like only the special effects element of movies - inevitably limited by our appreciation of the technology of the time behind them. Maybe games will eventually reach a point of broad cultural acceptance as complex art form that can produce timeless classics in the same way as film, but I'm not sure we're there yet. Will we ever be? Yet to be determined.
    - coldtea 10y ago
      >I think that 7 year old would be bored by the films you listed too. Yes, but then again we don't judge aesthetic merit but what 7 or 13 year olds find entertaining.
  - M_Grey 10y ago
    I don't have the same affection for 99.999% of the games I played in my formative years, most of which I played much more than Mario (I wasn't allowed to have a NES cry). If nostalgia were driving me, I'd be into earlier games, or slightly later Genesis games (I made bad choices). I agree that most games of the past don't translate well, and there's a barrier to entry for any vintage... anything. Most people don't watch old B&W movies, most people don't wear or collect vintage clothing, etc. Edit: I've shown kids 'Babes in Toyland', and 'The Point', and 'Wizard of Oz'... they seem to enjoy those movies still.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - jawilson2 10y ago
    My oldest kids (5 and 7) happily go from playing Halo, NBA2k17, the new Zelda, and Madden to playing Mega Man 2, SMB, and the old Zelda. This is an N=2, but it does happen!
bbctol 10y ago
I think we really are at the beginning of video games as a medium, though I hope some of us will be alive long enough to see a real masterpiece. People watch movies made 60 years ago and appreciate them on their own merit; they rarely watch movies made 100 years ago, though, except to comment on their impact. The technology underlying games is still progressing rapidly, and hasn't hit the relative plateau that film did. A movie shot in 1975 may use different technology behind the lens, but its similar enough in form (colors, scenes cutting between each other, sound) that we can appreciate it even if we've grown up with the films of today, whereas when watching a jerky black-and-white silent film from 1923 we simply can't get into it. No matter how good Ocarina of Time is, anyone playing it today can feel the lack of depth and poor graphics putting up a wall between themselves and enjoyment. Most games are still improving on a couple of simple models, and the only games that people really seem to revisit are ones so simple they can't be improved on (Tetris is a perfect game, if not a particularly deep piece of art) or truly different in a way that hasn't been met since (people are still getting into Portal a decade later.) The design of most video games means that more depth, points of interest, and complexity make the game more fun, which means more processing power will always improve the game. If nothing else, this is because most video games are simulations of reality, and reality is always more complex than the computer. I fully enjoyed the most recent Hitman, but still ran up against points where the game logic interfered with my intuition about how the world works, and the next iteration with better tech will inevitably improve on it. Not until gaming hardware and basic principles of game design reach a slower level of development will we see an enduring masterpiece.
- MattRix 10y ago
  Braid is pretty timeless, and I think The Witness will be too. They are both examples of "sublime art". The goal of emulating reality perfectly is fine for some kinds of games, but hardly necessary to create an enduring work of art.
- specialist 10y ago
  "...they rarely watch movies made 100 years ago" Hmmm. It's about the experience. The medium is the message and all that. Art out of context barely makes sense. We rarely get to see those films as they were meant to be seen. Buster Keaton on the silver screen with a live organist is a completely different experience than watching it on your TV. It's the same, for me, with old video games. I recently got on a tactics kick, wanting to relive the glory days. Tried to play thru an emulator; hated it. Ended up buying an old GBA.
GavinMcG 10y ago
Heh. I bought an N64 a few years ago specifically to play Ocarina of Time. I think the depth and specificity of games can make it hard for them to have the universal appeal that we associate with great art. But there are plenty of games that were clearly taken seriously by their creators, at the very least, and which are thoughtful about exploring/developing some aspect of the human experience. For example: Bastion; Papers, Please; Cave Story; Never Alone; Amnesia; Gone Home; Year Walk. Are they "high art"? I suppose not. But do they have many of the same effects on their consumers? Absolutely.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

M_Grey 10y ago

Most games definitely fade, and deservedly so. Others, from various incarnations of Mario, to various "Tycoon" games probably will stay around for at least as long as some classic movies. I would still happily play SMB on a NES right now... and I think a lot of people would. It's not just nostalgia, it's a good game, it looks good, it sounds good. I say this, and I'm not generally into retro for the sake of retro.

lr4444lr 10y ago
Right, and you played it in your formative years. I can watch a movie like "The Third Man" or "12 Angry Men" or "Scaramouche" in my adult years, made decades before I was born, even though I was reared on more flashy stuff, and find it as much as if not more satisfying than what I had encountered before. Could you get a 7 year old today who's had a couple of years of XBox 360 and Wii under his belt to enjoy SMB on the NES more than just to play it for 3 minutes to examine it as an artifact of another age? Even when he's older and can understand the evolution of video games?
- hx87 10y ago
  Why not fire up an SNES emulator or DOSBox and find out?
  - M_Grey 10y ago
    Oh I have, I still enjoy it. I took about 15 minutes of getting used to, while thinking, "Oh man, it's just blobs on the screen!" and then I realized I couldn't put it down.
    - grasshopperpurp 10y ago
      I had a similar experience with Super Tecmo Bowl - after recently receiving it and an emulator as a gift. The nostalgia was strong, but, in terms of game play, it really is the sweet spot between something like NFL Blitz and Madden or 2K. And, it has QB Eagles.
      - M_Grey 10y ago
        Yes, I would agree with that specific example too. I also got a chance to play an old NeoGeo cabinet with a game that was basically a jazzed up version of Pong... and it was still fun. Some gameplay just clicks at a deep level, and if the visuals and the sounds are there (i.e. not a distraction at the very least) I think it's possible. I also would point to something like Day of The Tentacle as a true and lasting masterpiece.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- mrob 10y ago
  I think that 7 year old would be bored by the films you listed too. They might prefer the works of Charlie Chaplin or Buster Keaton, which are appreciated by adults too. And I first played SMB as a child, so my claim that it's still great today could be tainted by nostalgia, but I first played Defender and Robotron as an adult, and those are every bit as fast paced and exciting as the best modern games.
  - lr4444lr 10y ago
    True, but what about the Wizard of Oz? Most kids will relate to and enjoy that, despite its age. There are just so many other aspects of movies. Maybe video games will hit that point, but right now, the impression I get is much like only the special effects element of movies - inevitably limited by our appreciation of the technology of the time behind them. Maybe games will eventually reach a point of broad cultural acceptance as complex art form that can produce timeless classics in the same way as film, but I'm not sure we're there yet. Will we ever be? Yet to be determined.
  - coldtea 10y ago
    >I think that 7 year old would be bored by the films you listed too. Yes, but then again we don't judge aesthetic merit but what 7 or 13 year olds find entertaining.
- M_Grey 10y ago
  I don't have the same affection for 99.999% of the games I played in my formative years, most of which I played much more than Mario (I wasn't allowed to have a NES cry). If nostalgia were driving me, I'd be into earlier games, or slightly later Genesis games (I made bad choices). I agree that most games of the past don't translate well, and there's a barrier to entry for any vintage... anything. Most people don't watch old B&W movies, most people don't wear or collect vintage clothing, etc. Edit: I've shown kids 'Babes in Toyland', and 'The Point', and 'Wizard of Oz'... they seem to enjoy those movies still.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- jawilson2 10y ago
  My oldest kids (5 and 7) happily go from playing Halo, NBA2k17, the new Zelda, and Madden to playing Mega Man 2, SMB, and the old Zelda. This is an N=2, but it does happen!

bbctol 10y ago

I think we really are at the beginning of video games as a medium, though I hope some of us will be alive long enough to see a real masterpiece. People watch movies made 60 years ago and appreciate them on their own merit; they rarely watch movies made 100 years ago, though, except to comment on their impact. The technology underlying games is still progressing rapidly, and hasn't hit the relative plateau that film did. A movie shot in 1975 may use different technology behind the lens, but its similar enough in form (colors, scenes cutting between each other, sound) that we can appreciate it even if we've grown up with the films of today, whereas when watching a jerky black-and-white silent film from 1923 we simply can't get into it. No matter how good Ocarina of Time is, anyone playing it today can feel the lack of depth and poor graphics putting up a wall between themselves and enjoyment. Most games are still improving on a couple of simple models, and the only games that people really seem to revisit are ones so simple they can't be improved on (Tetris is a perfect game, if not a particularly deep piece of art) or truly different in a way that hasn't been met since (people are still getting into Portal a decade later.) The design of most video games means that more depth, points of interest, and complexity make the game more fun, which means more processing power will always improve the game. If nothing else, this is because most video games are simulations of reality, and reality is always more complex than the computer. I fully enjoyed the most recent Hitman, but still ran up against points where the game logic interfered with my intuition about how the world works, and the next iteration with better tech will inevitably improve on it. Not until gaming hardware and basic principles of game design reach a slower level of development will we see an enduring masterpiece.

MattRix 10y ago
Braid is pretty timeless, and I think The Witness will be too. They are both examples of "sublime art". The goal of emulating reality perfectly is fine for some kinds of games, but hardly necessary to create an enduring work of art.
specialist 10y ago
"...they rarely watch movies made 100 years ago" Hmmm. It's about the experience. The medium is the message and all that. Art out of context barely makes sense. We rarely get to see those films as they were meant to be seen. Buster Keaton on the silver screen with a live organist is a completely different experience than watching it on your TV. It's the same, for me, with old video games. I recently got on a tactics kick, wanting to relive the glory days. Tried to play thru an emulator; hated it. Ended up buying an old GBA.

GavinMcG 10y ago

Heh. I bought an N64 a few years ago specifically to play Ocarina of Time. I think the depth and specificity of games can make it hard for them to have the universal appeal that we associate with great art. But there are plenty of games that were clearly taken seriously by their creators, at the very least, and which are thoughtful about exploring/developing some aspect of the human experience. For example: Bastion; Papers, Please; Cave Story; Never Alone; Amnesia; Gone Home; Year Walk. Are they "high art"? I suppose not. But do they have many of the same effects on their consumers? Absolutely.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]