3 ms·
The notion that a work of art could be "incorrect" is absurd on its face. Just because a game (in this case) does not remain confined to accepted norms does not
by Fej 9y ago
The notion that a work of art could be "incorrect" is absurd on its face. Just because a game (in this case) does not remain confined to accepted norms does not make it "incorrect". The use of this word is pretentious as all hell, as if the author is the be-all-end-all of art criticism.
If one does not like a game, we have a word for that: "bad". There are plenty of bad games to analyze. Why the author picked Sonic the Hedgehog is beyond me.
As he said: it works. Therefore, to twist the word "incorrect" to its breaking point as he does is ridiculous.
- lucideer 9y agoThe fact that he put the 'incorrect' in quotes indicates that he likely agreed with you on the use of the word and the you probably missed the intent of his use of it. Unlike 'bad', a subjective word indicating opinion, 'incorrect' is objective: anything can be incorrect according to a certain set of parameters, and the author is selecting a particularly traditional set here from the book in order to frame the discussion. He's not implying that Sonic is bad. He calls it a masterpiece! It's quite likely he's also a Lorde fan.
- zemo 9y agothat's literally the point of the article.
- aidenn0 9y agoIn both the cases of the game and the song though, they aren't pure works of art, but also entertainment. With pop songs and games, there are formulae that, if you just follow them correctly, you are basically guaranteed to make something that is at least mediocre. Breaking the rules is more interesting, but also more risky. For every sonic and every Green Light, there are hundreds or thousands of crappy games and songs that thought the rules didn't apply to them. Analyzing successful "incorrect" games is interesting because it tries to pin-down the je ne sais quoi that gives them their appeal.