art that is nothing but the point it's trying to make is garbage
This statement strikes me as almost entirely meaningless. What is "art that is just the point it's trying to make?" Being art sort of necessitates it layer the message in some way, right? Having a clear through-line isn't a problem; in many ways it can be a good thing.
This is me you're talking to. I do respect your opinions quite a bit but the criticism of this game seems to me to be mostly under vague umbrella of "it's pretentious!" which I don't like.
And I don't really see this towards any other medium. No one complains about Spring Breakers for pretending to be a vapid party movie but instead being a criticism of that kind of movie.
Yeah the difference is that there are no "vapid first person narration/exploration games".
The difference between this and something like Spec Ops The Line is that the latter has gameplay and is in an established genre. I think Spec Ops delivered its message incredibly hamfistedly but that's not the same complaint.
Being criticized is nothing I can't handle. It's good to take a bit of it. Which is why, from the standpoint of someone who only knows the plot, I don't really have a problem with Spec Ops: the Line (and I'm sure everyone thought of this when the topic came up).
Bioshock's biggest crime is not following through with its proverbial swing.
The Stanley Parable (Demo)'s biggest crime is that it's not criticizing you. It's criticizing the work of other game creators, and games in general, and you're just stuck with it for the long run. It's like listening to a relative complain about how your father mows the lawn. It's relevant to you, vaguely, but it doesn't really have much to do with you.
A modern day Clarence Darrow would be portrayed on Law and Order as a smug villain who is probably also a rapist.
What makes you say that, Odradek?
Lemme put it this way
If they made the court sections of Law and Order into a musical, the chorus for every song would just be BUT THEY HAD A CHOOOOOOOOIIIIIIIICCCCEEE
More explanation, please?
Some Darrow quotes
If I looked at jails and crimes and prisoners in the way the ordinary person does, I should not speak on this subject to you. The reason I talk to you on the question of crime, its cause and cure, is because I really do not in the least believe in crime. There is no such thing as a crime as the word is generally understood. I do not believe there is any sort of distinction between the real moral condition of the people in and out of jail. One is just as good as the other. The people here can no more help being here than the people outside can avoid being outside. I do not believe that people are in jail because they deserve to be. They are in jail simply because they cannot avoid it on account of circumstances which are entirely beyond their control and for which they are in no way responsible.
Why did they kill little Bobby Franks? Not for money, not for spite; not for hate. They killed him as they might kill a spider or a fly, for the experience. They killed him because they were made that way. Because somewhere in the infinite processes that go to the making up of the boy or the man something slipped, and those unfortunate lads sit here hated, despised, outcasts, with the community shouting for their blood.
I know, Your Honor, that every atom of life in all this universe is bound up together. I know that a pebble cannot be thrown into the ocean without disturbing every drop of water in the sea. I know that every life is inextricably mixed and woven with every other life. I know that every influence, conscious and unconscious, acts and reacts on every living organism, and that no one can fix the blame. I know that all life is a series of infinite chances, which sometimes result one way and sometimes another. I have not the infinite wisdom that can fathom it, neither has any other human brain. But I do know that if back of it is a power that made it, that power alone can tell, and if there is no power then it is an infinite chance which man cannot solve.
There is one way to cure all these offenses, and that is to give the people a chance to live. There is no other way, and there never was any other way since the world began, and the world is so blind and stupid that it will not see. If every man and woman and child in the world had a chance to make a decent, fair, honest living, there would be no jails, and no lawyers and no courts. There might be some persons here or there with some peculiar formation of their brain, like Rockefeller, who would do these things simply to be doing them; but they would be very, very few, and those should be sent to a hospital and treated, and not sent to jail, and they would entirely disappear in the second generation, or at least in the third generation.
Well, I think that Darrow is right that if we could make the world better; and to give every man and woman and child in the world to make a decent, fair, honest living and to live well, with comfort and love and rights, that there would be much less crime. And I agree that the mentally deranged should be sent to a hospital and treated, and not sent to jail.
But I don't agree with Darrow that you can't put blame on anyone. People need to be held accountable.
And for his time, I think there were a lot of people who were in jail because of circumstances beyond their control; like the poacher in the mountains of AFrica who has literally no other way to feed his children.
But, yeah, there will always be jerks, and I think we will always need at least a few jails for really evil people.
I don't agree with everything Darrow said, but he was an example of a man who lived philosophies others just preached about, and dedicated his life to working out the consequences of them.
And now, people with his views are villains on a lame daytime TV show.
The style of Malignancy took a sharp turn somewhere after their demo compilation, most obviously starting with 'Cross Species Transmutation', where they moved from merely (very) technical, groovy brutal death metal into insanely technical, spazzy compositions that seemed based more on how many pinch harmonics you can fit into a riff rather than any real idea of songwriting. Now, I heard this phase of Malignancy long before I caught up with their earlier work, and I have to say that the material on 'Intrauterine Cannibalism', though vastly different, is just as good, if not better, than their latter-era. I'm a sucker for archaic ideas like 'coherent songwriting' and 'guitars that don't make me want to cry from frustration'.
And I don't really see this towards any other medium. No one complains about Spring Breakers for pretending to be a vapid party movie but instead being a criticism of that kind of movie.
Yeah the difference is that there are no "vapid first person narration/exploration games".
You're really not looking at this the right way.
Like, Spring Breakers isn't a parody of party movies, it's a criticism of the culture that would create them. That's not the argument I'm making for this game, though, I'm just talking about perspective.
False! Analogies may get you into colleges and congresses, but they will not get you into a woman's heart, a man's ego, or any assortment of tiny, tiny gloves.
Perhaps I said the wrong explanation. Again, I'll try again for your sake. Intent: While you bear the brunt of the criticism/punishment by having to put up with the narrator's oblivious snarkiness and gameplay intended to be unfair, the criticism does not directly concern your actions, or even the actions of videogame players as a whole. The snarkiness focuses on videogame design. Specifically, it's own. Now, mocking your own story within said story is nothing new. Lampshades and whatnot. But to make an entire demo consisting of little more than "Look at how frustrating this is! Aren't we terrible game developers?" with a wink and a nudge is infuriating.
So, replacement thesis statement: The Stanley Parable (Demo)'s biggest crime is that it doesn't take its criticism seriously.
I understand that people'll say stuff like that to cover up the fact that they're not good at conveying the point, but the attention it's gotten from people I respect indicates to me that it's not frustrating out of ineptitude.
While infuriation (is that even a word) is often a secondary effect, the main goal of any critique is to challenge the reader. Shake them up. Make them reconsider what they thought was solid ground beneath their reasoning.
And infuriation shouldn't be a long-term effect. The reader or player can be angry at first, yes. Anybody's angry when their worldview is being challenged. But the anger should be able to subside so the reader/player can accept the newfound knowledge. And I'm still pretty infuriated.
And while I'm ranting, let me say that Spec Ops and Bioshock, their criticism can be easily summed up. "It's bad to continually justify everything that you do" and "Most videogames are fundamentally deterministic to a fault". SP? Their snarkiness is all over the place. No real purpose, no real mission.
It just sounds to me like you're trying to justify your frustration. I find the idea of getting rid of the one thing so central to almost every story ever (catharsis) to be a very intriguing concept and given the response the game has generated in critical circles, one I don't doubt the game has pulled off well.
It just sounds to me like you're trying to justify your frustration. I find the idea of getting rid of the one thing so central to almost every story ever (catharsis) to be a very intriguing concept and given the response the game has generated in critical circles, one I don't doubt the game has pulled off well.
What are you talking about, man?
I didn't like the game and outlined why, I don't think it's the worst game evar (there are many better candidates) and am not honestly sure what you're trying to get at. I don't even remember how we got on this subject.
Comments
Meaning
Message
Medium
Content
Context
Form
And all of these are different things.
If they made the court sections of Law and Order into a musical, the chorus for every song would just be BUT THEY HAD A CHOOOOOOOOIIIIIIIICCCCEEE
The difference between this and something like Spec Ops The Line is that the latter has gameplay and is in an established genre. I think Spec Ops delivered its message incredibly hamfistedly but that's not the same complaint.
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
But I don't agree with Darrow that you can't put blame on anyone. People need to be held accountable.
And for his time, I think there were a lot of people who were in jail because of circumstances beyond their control; like the poacher in the mountains of AFrica who has literally no other way to feed his children.
But, yeah, there will always be jerks, and I think we will always need at least a few jails for really evil people.
And now, people with his views are villains on a lame daytime TV show.
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
also I don't understand why we're even having this conversation.
I didn't like the game and outlined why, I don't think it's the worst game evar (there are many better candidates) and am not honestly sure what you're trying to get at. I don't even remember how we got on this subject.
I'm going to bed.