Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Breakdown: The Videogame Medium

I'm going to try to consolidate some of my ideas on the whole videogames-as-art idea.  I realize a lot of my earlier posts have some contradictions, and I'd like to solidify all of the things I've been talking about, (previously: Videogames Vs High Art, The Videogame Industry, The Videogame Auteur, Diversity of Videogames as an Art Form, Gameplay)  

I'll try to break it down as succinctly as possible.  

If you happened to actually read the earlier posts you'll notice a lot of overlap.  My suggestion is to start here first.  Ideally, it will be a lot more straightforward.

So.  

First off, 

Videogames as Art

Videogames are not considered Art.  They are considered entertainment.  Film began in much the same way, but eventually proved itself as a medium capable of great artistry.  

What differentiates cinema from interactive media?

I believe the most potent issue, is that Videogames lack significant auteurship.

Every other medium is propelled by the presence of visionary artists who create personal and unique work, (not to mention tasteful, relevant, and intellectual).

I can count the number of true videogame auteurs on one hand.

UPDATE: I insinuated one very important ingredient, but failed to mention it explicitly.  The significant presence of true and recognizable Auteurship will garner the attention of true and recognizable critique (as opposed to review).

Which brings me to my next idea...

Videogames that Model Other Art Forms:

With auteurship as a standard, or at least an expectation of the medium, we have to decide how videogames are critiqued.

Many games will (and do) resemble other forms of art.  Therefore, the criteria for analysis will be similar to that of the medium they aspire to.  (There simply aren't any videogame writers who compare to Melville, or videogame directors who compare to Kubrick.  In addition gameplay rarely serves the narrative, and instead dilutes it). 

While videogames do model other forms of art, they are unique, and as such their differences must be taken into account. Interactive Media's most notable and defining singularity is the players ability to manipulate the medium.

Which leads to...

Player Input

Gameplay is the area where videogames need to grow most.  The secondary elements of the medium will always draw upon other forms of art, and as such, these elements are not really limited by the nature of videogames.  They are limited by the ineptitude of the industry's writers, directors, voice actors and other artists.
 
Player input in and of itself has kept interactive media from being 'High Art'.

Ebert's condemnation of player control represents only the most notable of countless similar criticisms: 

"Video games by their nature require player choices, which is the opposite of the strategy of serious film and literature, which requires authorial control"

On the one hand it is my belief that an artist can have authorial control in a videogame. 

We can see the clear signs of authorial control in works like Oddworld: Abes Exodus, Stranger's Wrath, Shadow of the Colossus, Heart of Darkness, etc.  These 'authors' simply don't compare to the auteurs of other art forms, (however much we might like their stories).

On the other hand, I believe that player input will one day rival authorial control.  Games like Echochrome and Braid show the artistic and intellectual value of gameplay, while something like flOw attests to the plasticity of 'gameplay'.  Little Big Planet capitalizes on classic gameplay conventions while perfecting a kind of virtual Lego Land.  Jason Rohrer (previously), on the other hand, uses mechanics to evoke ideas and emotions as powerful as those of any film.

Not one of these examples compares to the level of auteurship present in other mediums, but each and every one attests to the potential videogames have to both model and rival today's definition of 'High Art'. 

The Final Word:

So what does it all mean?  How does it come together?  What's keeping videogames down?  

I'll try to sum things up for you as best I can:
  1. The auteur needs to comandeer the videogame medium.  That's the first step.  This will lead to a shift in audience.  The current generation of hard core gamers, nerds, geeks, what have you, will be either left behind, or converted.  The shift will also attract real critics.
  2. Where videogames model other art, they need to model it successfully.  I believe this requires the cohesion of narrative and gameplay.  In the case of visual art and other non-linear mediums, the guidelines are more plastic.  (This step is entirely dependent on the first step).
  3. Where videogames differ from other art, they need to differ with comparable auteurship.  In order for videogames to transcend their name, they must move beyond their twitchy, trigger happy roots.  Gameplay must evolve.  People like Will Wright (Spore), Jason Rohrer (Passage), Jenova Chen (flOw), and Lorne Lanning (Oddworld) have helped to broaden our ideas of what a 'mechanic' can be, but we still have a long way to go.

No comments:

Post a Comment