They/he(Idk if it are multiple people, but the quality of content definitely hints at multiple people) would really deserve it much more than these "top ten poop jokes" youtubers. This channel is a hidden Gem and I hope it doesn't stay hidden
I agree with the last quote, even if we end up with little expectations for criticism. I love the hodgepodge of ideas of what criticism should be that seems to exist in the videogame world. In books or films, you get an often institutional and formulaic critique (when was the last time you read something weird in the nytimes book review? Or an article reviewing a blockbuster? We can often expect the lenses the critic will use). For games, on the other hand, I have like 8 different reviewers I like, all with wildly different techniques (this one only talks about the first 5 hours, that one likes local co-op and twee and a cute fun time, this one elegance and beauty in mechanic design, that one likes Mario and is easily impressed by cool moments). The medium of the internet has created star power and personal leeway for individual critics, giving us specific "characters" to follow rather than an institution with established norms. While that creates a lot of crap, I think it also gives us a good means of understanding the nebulous ill-defined mess that is the video game medium. Importantly, it also makes it impossible to create a rigid standard of interpretation for video games- some people reinvent the wheel every time they talk about a game.
A major issue with current game criticism stems from the pressing need to review games as close to their release as possible. There is room, and probably necessity in the industry for some amount of early reviewing for informing people of the general shape and features of newly released games, but the time pressure involved obliterates any real discussion of the experience of playing the game. Criticism has to be personal, because it is framed by our experiences and preferences in a way it is impossible to separate out. What I want to see more of is just people talking about what they have been playing and how it makes them feel. If a reviewer is playing the games they want to investigate and analyze and play, I trust much more that they have the kind of experience that is relevant to those games. If reviews are done on a less rushed schedule, we can look at the time frame of how well it engaged the player, as well as giving time to analyze one's own feelings and experience. It becomes easier and more valuable to find the players and critics that are playing the games relevant to you and your own experiences. So what do I actually want from game criticism? I guess more discussion and play from indie and older games. Take note everyone: I would listen to you talk about your experience playing your favorite game, whatever it is.
I think you make a real good point, and I think there's room for both kinds. I think it makes sense for there to be reviews of the game that happen right around release and focus mostly mostly on the toaster aspects, if just to make sure that people aren't buying something broken. People need time to play and reflect and refine their ideas about the work down into something coherent and meaningful. We get some folks (on youtube at least) that exemplify this. Noah Caldwell-Gervais and Errant Signal spring to mind. Channels like that are definitely few and far between, but I hope that changes as the medium, and the people enjoying it, mature.
Hello, I'm Brazilian, and I'm studying about criticism, and how to criticize a video game, your video is opening my horizons for criticism. I had no base until this video thanks
I really think you misunderstood Bogost. He wasn't talking about certain games being more ir less toaster-like. He was taking about our attitude towards them. ALL videogames ARE like toasters in that they first have to function properly as a piece of software. It is the shortcomings of criticism that fail to talk about these toasters beyond their function.
Good point, I actually deviated from Bogost without making it explicit. I thought the toaster imagery was very evocative when illustrating the problems about criticism, and hence why i used it , but yeah i could have articulated his position more clearly.
Well, I think that the criticism of an art, if it is to be brought closer to the academic discourse of objectivity and argumentative reasoning, undoubtedly needs academic literature to be able to be built on the basis of what other professionals in this field have said. formed, to some extent, systemically from the discipline. Although it can be said that video games are an art, rather than in an aesthetic, technical sense, appealing to the craftsman or demiurge who forges them, whether it be a designer or a programmer, the fact that there are aspects of the cultural group to which his creations arrive, which are the ones who give meaning and value to them. Following the classic tripartition of the dynamics of creativity of Mihaly C. (the individual, the field and the domain), one could assure that in the systemic block of society (field), it is from where criticism emanates as the action that we try to define. In order not to extend myself any further, I believe that, as Jacob Geller said in one of his videos on this subject, the value of video game criticism is in giving food to thought from the perspective of the experience that another lives, narrated in such a way that you make you think about the meaning of your own experience and thus revalue the time you spent with it (John Dewey also has an interesting text about "art and experience"). A good game criticism, be it beyond the pretense of making it objective or subjective, is one that makes you think and remember the value of the exchange (which would be to suppose the existence of an a priori economy) of you as an individual against the gross and full becoming of your existence. A good critic of videogames, of art, must then provide a discourse that gives value and meaning to the experience. And that can only be done, firstly, from the subjective sincerity of the being that lives it, and secondly, with the guidance and work of those who have already written, expressed and thought in some way, said experience and have left embodied in the annals of literature, as well as in videos, lectures, etc. etc. That is why I think that, in particular, you as youtuber, participate in a positive way in these speeches for the whole community. I think after so long that you must have started your channel, you have realized that people want to hear this kind of thing told in this way. Redefining the value of games in new ways, rather than seeing them as mere entertainment. You give a good example of how to mix a narrative with a certain philosophical rigor, let's say so for now to the theoretical field of game design, without touching the pedantry and obscurantism typical of the absurd pretense of some (many) others*; Problems like this only detract from criticism, making it banal, and on the other hand, the mere spectacle for the mere purpose of entertaining, makes it conformist without a challenge to thought, detracting from its value.** I wish more people realized it. *Although, that thing about the "toaster uncertainty principle", and the recursivity for naming things as "a phenomenological conondrum grounded of art"... oh man... that's ok... but you need to be more precise in those terminologies, to avoid that problem which i talked about in the last paragraph. The best critic of video games, by far, has always been Mathew Matosis. His works checks all boxes of what you said in your video as how videogame critic should be done. A bad example in this case , for being mere purpose of entertainment that is, would be the case of VideogameDunkey. ** You could also refer to the body of work of the ontolgy from G. Deleuze to formalize more your thoughts. It is useful to distinguish meaningful problems from those that are mere "false problems". Many of the thoughs frome the design perspective in the videogame theory are actually full of false problems when you realize it, and need more of the systemic thinking instead of recurring to the design multilateralism of valid and always good perspectives. The resources are in Spanish, by the way: ricardoetchegaray.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/el-pensamiento-de-deleuze-1-filosofia-y-ontologia-1.pdf www.redalyc.org/pdf/104/10418753003.pdf
This is a great write up Antonio, and I appreciate the kind words as well! On my use of expressions like toaster uncertainty principle and the like, I agree i should probably have more rigor if i'm defining things.....but these flourishes are done for humorous effect, or to get a strange concept in peoples minds. My essays are not published in academic circles so I can get away with this, but I take your point. Besides that though, I agree with most of what you talked about, and the formulation about good criticism living on in memory is an interesting one. I actually saw Jacob Gellers video recently, and its interesting how he comes at the same topic, criticism, from a much different perspective, but converging on the same point . I am a very analytical thinker, so emotions don't come naturally to me. I have to formalize, deconstruct and render explicit what others often just feel, which is why my points may come out as mechanical to some. But the Dewey comparison is great, as well the other aesthetic traditions that talk about experience, and transmission. In terms of great criticism, most great criticism I have read does not really exist on youtube or in the video space, it exists in journals, in books and in blogs, invisible to most of the public which makes it such a shame. There are exceptions, mathewmatosis is great and Noah gervais is fantastic as well, but in many ways, I feel the video essay format inhibits good writing more than it enables it. I use it because its an easy way to reach a lot of people, but I myself prefer writing. Regardless , this is an ongoing discussion and I will probably refine my thoughts on this going forward, but I appreciate the thoughtful engagement and additional sources. Thanks!
@@thegameoveranalyser4835 You know, as one more random person, of so many there are in the comments and in life in general, who can offer you some of their time to consume and criticize about your content, I can share some more things based on what you just said/write, in attention to your answer. It seems to me that you are on the right track with these types of videos. I do not know why you do it, it may be a hobby that fortunately, with the quality that you show in each video, also provided you with the support of some patreons. Congratulations on that, my good man. Without a doubt, more critical quality content is needed on RUclips, even beyond the medium of video games. Things that really make people think critically and not only with contingent, reactionary situations*. With a little more work, this type of essay that you make could be published in an academic journal, believe me. However, I think that your work has as much value here on RUclips as what it could have in the academic meritocracy system. Both are two important parts of the transfer of "scientific" knowledge, and you do a very important part, the one which is the diffusion. No one else does the anlaysis of a bunch of videos and literature from this field the way you do, which is not to say less of the quality of your videos appealing to the lack of direct competition, but to the fact that it is really something Hard to do. Thought directly involves a creative act, following Deleuze, and what you do is very valuable to this entire community, among which there will surely be some developers looking for inspiration. The vocabulary you use is also to be admired, for a person not a native of the English language, but who has read a lot of crazy things about philosophy and management in English, you have a very good vocabulary, and I don't see any problem with you taking it out, afloat , or as you say "get a strange concept in peoples minds". That's what actually reading poetry does to your vocabulary, and seems you get a good grasp of the importance of American literature in general when relating structural concepts of its narrative to games. So man, get loose, but remember that some words, not by themselves, are sometimes seductive, so don't blindly follow the trap when building a concept towards a serious intention. The extreme of this is demagoguery, technocracy, and that doesn't help towards building a participatory communicative openness, political natalität (Habermas, Arendt). Not all publications, nor all videos of the GDC are truly useful to advance in the construction of a serious theory for game design. If anything, it is more about orienting the theory towards a perspective of dynamic systems design, like what you talked about in your video about the "emergence", that create virtuous cycles of interactivity between its elements for the future of the decisions of the players . The experience that the player obtains from this interaction is fundamental from the aesthetic point of view of all those involved in its design. Good books, good videos also of the GDC, there are above many that are of mere opinion, not even in salty art anymore, and I am glad that you have mentioned many of them **, but to concretely formalize a PHILOSOPHY of game design , It requires more than using a semiotic approach over the hermeneutic of the original works in a critical way. So don't worry, you have build a good path. Remember that only a good artist is one who always questions what he is doing, how to do it better, who is always looking for new challenges. So be it for your channel, and may it continue to find a much-needed audience for good game design theories review and analysis content in you. May you last as long as you have to last with good and health. Good luck.
@@thegameoveranalyser4835 * That is something that I have seen in all the media around the world: a penchant for the "cheap" show, an economy of "cheap" memes (maybe Jaques Ellul could have been right about his conception of the technique in this, You know, have you ever mentioned part of Baudillard's work, something has to do with it too ... well, I don't deviate from the topic). The RUclips platform, and in general all the content and communities created around video games, are really, in my opinion, an incredible evolution of the media without equal. You have also already talked about the limitations of the game medium in some video, but just to mention briefly, what other type of media content, technical or artistic artifact gives you the possibility of infinitely randomizing its contents and creating narratives by procedural generation? ? Perhaps this would be the closest to the way Leibniz conceived it with his concept of the Monads and the best of all possible worlds. In what other medium can the idea of an Italian plumber traveling at negative speeds through vertical, horizontal and diagonal parallel universes be conceived? And even how to describe the cultural richness of a phenomenon like it was the year before, of the different versions of the "Steam Hams" videos? What motivated you to create these media innovations? This is something that if you are interested, you can check the video of Ernesto Castro: ruclips.net/video/oxaa0pSJgvk/видео.html I regret that there is no version similar to any reference in English, but it is truly invaluable to study due to all the references that Ernesto gives, both from the game design and from the field of media theory. Really, when you have time make notes on this one, which is very good. ** Chris Crawford's, for example, is an excellent one that I wouldn't have found out about had it been through your channel. A book you mentioned too was VideoGame Lenses; very good book for every designer. I had read that before, when I was starting to make my design pdf library, lol.
1:09 well yes.. but Games..are expected to be ..."GAMES" thats not to say they dont have potential as a medium .. but the very essence of the market they are part of will hold back their potential as art.. which is why the most interesting artistic games outthere are in the indy market and not made by triple A studios. also this is an issue of art being a businesses.. its not unique to videogames.. it also happens to movies.. which is why they have become worst over the years and obsessed with formulas trying to makes them perfect products..
The more I watch your videos the more I love games. This is, by far, my favourite channel it opens my mind to a lot of things and possibilities. Thank you!
I'm sorry, that's a whole lot of writing for such few statements, maybe I should not write comments, when it's 1 am and I haven't slept the night before😅 Anyway, I totally agree and I really think, this channel should be spread under people like most parents, to help them better understand the importance videogames have to their children. I think most parents either play themselves or at least understand, that it's ok for their children to play games, but can't really see what is it, that's so fascinating about this medium so it would help them to connect more with their childrens hobby, by understanding the artform. What I want to say is, that I really think these Videos could even be helpful for non gamers to understand the fascination about this medium. They may be even more valuable for people who don't play but want to know why games are fascinating, than for people who played the game(for which they are still amazingly valuable) because people playing games understand at least unconsciously. This is not meant to say, that these Videos do not have values for gamers. In fact I think you are the best video game channel I know, and I know a whole lot of channels. Understanding and analysing Art is always important and not only elevates the fun, but also the impact games have to our life
I think video games should be judge both as art and product, it has many people coming together to create a merger between the two. You only praise on the basicals of art than you aren't judging the technical aspest of the game. The reverse is true. When you focus on just one of those elements you are devaluing the other. The merger of the two and how well one works with the other should be included in the critique. You can also have standards for both. Both art and products should have a purpose even if that purpose is more abstract in nature.
So, if you were the editor of a games magazine, what review methodology would you suggest adopting? (vs. if it's an independent blog maybe) Games magazines are expected to produce "MC" scores so, throw that out the window? Some kind of formalism is needed The way I see it, criticism of the game and especially "grading" a game and giving a note, works "technically" (toaster) up until you reach the 80-90 marks. At that point, it stops being relevant, because the difference you'll have at these levels aren't differences in "the toaster's quality", but basically, you'll be comparing a toastre....and a coffee machine. And there's no point doing that. The ultimate thing we should compare games to is "authenticity of feeling", or, how well the game fulfilled the core fantasy. Of course, technical success and flaws etc factors into that, but once you have a perfect execution, the only thing left is to compare and talk about these experiences, without really being able to say one is better than the other. For example Last of Us 1 and MGS2, probably impossible to say which one is better, both are works of Art. But I would argue, it is possible to compare Last of Us 2 to these two, because Last of Us 2 has flaws (design) that makes it get a lower "authenticity of feeling" score overall: it's a work of Art that has less impact on you because it talks less about things that are "real", the reality of how characters would behave in certain situations (even in fantasy or sci-fi worlds), and the reality of the lessons we can learn from these. This in turn is what breaks immersion.
Great video, and very interesting! I think I'm going to give this one a second watch. Do you have any favorite critics who you think are exploring these ideas and forms of game criticism? - Bryan
Thanks Bryan! I don't have any favorite critics per se, just pieces of criticism I think are great regardless of the author. Some that come to mind are actually buried in longer books. In Colin Milburne's book respawn, he does an ecological and systems critique of final fantasy 7 that functions as an analysis of the game as well as a distillation of his thesis in the book. Its great. Another is in the book ludopolitics, where the author does an analysis of bastion using Nietzsche's ideas, again to make his claim about games being about the aesthetics of control The best place for writing on games i've found though is in the well played journal, which is available for free online. It routinely has some of the best writing on games all compiled in one place.
"Does this mean FF XIII is a good or a bad toaster?" [on that field] A good toaster. It projects, it achieves. That's what a good toaster should be, good for it's own purpose. Not good for the user of the toaster, but competent in making the toasts it wants to make. It's all about the perspective of what is the toaster. Everything can be technical and deconstructed for its purposes.
@@sdrawkcab_emanresu Products -> please the consumer Art -> communicate, especially by challenging the consumer. Its worth as a commercial product will be different from its worth as an artwork. In my opinion, if someone can't finish something, it's on them. Art is not made to please. It's not Béla Tarr's fault if someone can't watch the 7 hours of 'Sátántangó'. And the quality of the artwork is not affected by that. Just because someone's will was not fulfilled, it doesn't mean the toaster is good or bad. I would say that that is only a problem when adopting a product consumer perspective. And while both artwork and product overlap nowadays, we should turn ourselves to the artistic side when talking about criticism, much like this video proposes.
@Elektrospektrus While I mostly agree with you. Especially with the part, that we need to see videogames more as an artform as we do right now. But I think we have to ask ourselves, what is the purpose of art. I think the purpose is to reach the audience and to tell, what they want to tell or let the audience feel, what it wants them to feel. And if it does not reach the audience, it might have failed (just a little, we are talking about it rn, so it's not like no one knows it). The key is the audience. Someone who watches a 7 hour long film, knows, what they are getting into. People watching these films may be at least partly another audience, than people playing a game like final fantasy, with the intention of just having some no brainer fun. That's the people who are disappointed in this game and the message never reached them except they are watching this video. Unrelated we must accept, that art is not the most important, and not more important than time. And if a game wastes that much time in not good gameplay, I can understand the critic. However, I in my opinion it's a bad toaster, because in a toaster rating(funktionality), it doesn't really work
@@Gazinne I must add, that by audience I mean the head space the audience is in. I'm not implying, that people playing FF or something are less likely to watch these Films or play games like papers please or bioshock. I just mean, that the important part is the mindset we play in
Absolutely, without audience there would be no art. I agree that if the artwork doesn't reach the audience it failed a little bit, sure, but only if it did fail in its proposition, failed to follow its own intentions, not the audience's ones. Reaching the audience is not the purpose of art, but a required condition. That is the purpose of a product, that’s marketing. The purpose of art is, above all, expression. It’s communicating through beauty and technique, it's raising awareness to something or evolving how we look at things. To me, art and time don't mix when making a comparison about importance. I would rather say that art is a solution to time. What if the purpose of the game is to waste time? To make you, with that, understand time? A great game to show this is 'The Longing'. It's all about the purpose of the artwork and not the expectations of the audience. We must follow their flow to understand, not the opposite, otherwise, we'll be closing doors to creative freedom. If we set limits, like wasting time (which is quite a relative thing) being forbidden, we'll be holding back art. That's why what Marcel Duchamp did is so important. If some people are playing 'Final Fantasy' to get some no-brainer fun, that's on them. You can play every game with that intention (and since you mentioned 'BioShock', I can assure you most people have played it like that), you can even watch 'Sátántangó' just for no-brainer fun. But all artworks can be consumed without that end, that's why they are artworks and not toys. I don't see any reason to categorize FF and "these films" differently. On a personal level, you can do it, create a folder on your PC and put FF in the "Things For No-brainer Fun" and "those films" in the "Things Not For No-brainer Fun", but everyone will have it different. If you want to use a chair to hammer nails, you can, but when discussing its quality, in this case, on a functional level, do it in relation to its own purpose. And remember, perhaps that purpose is not sitting, you have to analyse the craft to understand what's the creators purpose. Why doesn't it work? If the game direction intended that and it was accomplished, it’s functional. If a game was a gun that was meant to shoot ice and it shoots ice, it's functional. But if it was meant to shoot ice but it shoots water, that's failing. They can never "fail" the audience's wishes, as every single person will have a different one.
We need all kinds of critics. The journalists, the philosophers, the artists and the dunkeys
I'm shocked by the quality of your content and the fact that you have so few subscribers ! I hope you get blessed by the algorithm.
They/he(Idk if it are multiple people, but the quality of content definitely hints at multiple people) would really deserve it much more than these "top ten poop jokes" youtubers. This channel is a hidden Gem and I hope it doesn't stay hidden
Amen to that
I appreciate the kind words baale, and for the continued support!
I agree with the last quote, even if we end up with little expectations for criticism. I love the hodgepodge of ideas of what criticism should be that seems to exist in the videogame world. In books or films, you get an often institutional and formulaic critique (when was the last time you read something weird in the nytimes book review? Or an article reviewing a blockbuster? We can often expect the lenses the critic will use). For games, on the other hand, I have like 8 different reviewers I like, all with wildly different techniques (this one only talks about the first 5 hours, that one likes local co-op and twee and a cute fun time, this one elegance and beauty in mechanic design, that one likes Mario and is easily impressed by cool moments). The medium of the internet has created star power and personal leeway for individual critics, giving us specific "characters" to follow rather than an institution with established norms. While that creates a lot of crap, I think it also gives us a good means of understanding the nebulous ill-defined mess that is the video game medium. Importantly, it also makes it impossible to create a rigid standard of interpretation for video games- some people reinvent the wheel every time they talk about a game.
I really wish there were more channels like yours, which treated the artform, as it deserves it. As Art
Jesus Christ this was such a great video but nobody has seen it
A major issue with current game criticism stems from the pressing need to review games as close to their release as possible. There is room, and probably necessity in the industry for some amount of early reviewing for informing people of the general shape and features of newly released games, but the time pressure involved obliterates any real discussion of the experience of playing the game.
Criticism has to be personal, because it is framed by our experiences and preferences in a way it is impossible to separate out. What I want to see more of is just people talking about what they have been playing and how it makes them feel. If a reviewer is playing the games they want to investigate and analyze and play, I trust much more that they have the kind of experience that is relevant to those games. If reviews are done on a less rushed schedule, we can look at the time frame of how well it engaged the player, as well as giving time to analyze one's own feelings and experience. It becomes easier and more valuable to find the players and critics that are playing the games relevant to you and your own experiences.
So what do I actually want from game criticism? I guess more discussion and play from indie and older games. Take note everyone: I would listen to you talk about your experience playing your favorite game, whatever it is.
I think you make a real good point, and I think there's room for both kinds. I think it makes sense for there to be reviews of the game that happen right around release and focus mostly mostly on the toaster aspects, if just to make sure that people aren't buying something broken.
People need time to play and reflect and refine their ideas about the work down into something coherent and meaningful. We get some folks (on youtube at least) that exemplify this. Noah Caldwell-Gervais and Errant Signal spring to mind. Channels like that are definitely few and far between, but I hope that changes as the medium, and the people enjoying it, mature.
Hello, I'm Brazilian, and I'm studying about criticism, and how to criticize a video game, your video is opening my horizons for criticism. I had no base until this video
thanks
I really think you misunderstood Bogost. He wasn't talking about certain games being more ir less toaster-like. He was taking about our attitude towards them. ALL videogames ARE like toasters in that they first have to function properly as a piece of software. It is the shortcomings of criticism that fail to talk about these toasters beyond their function.
Good point, I actually deviated from Bogost without making it explicit. I thought the toaster imagery was very evocative when illustrating the problems about criticism, and hence why i used it , but yeah i could have articulated his position more clearly.
Well, I think that the criticism of an art, if it is to be brought closer to the academic discourse of objectivity and argumentative reasoning, undoubtedly needs academic literature to be able to be built on the basis of what other professionals in this field have said. formed, to some extent, systemically from the discipline. Although it can be said that video games are an art, rather than in an aesthetic, technical sense, appealing to the craftsman or demiurge who forges them, whether it be a designer or a programmer, the fact that there are aspects of the cultural group to which his creations arrive, which are the ones who give meaning and value to them. Following the classic tripartition of the dynamics of creativity of Mihaly C. (the individual, the field and the domain), one could assure that in the systemic block of society (field), it is from where criticism emanates as the action that we try to define.
In order not to extend myself any further, I believe that, as Jacob Geller said in one of his videos on this subject, the value of video game criticism is in giving food to thought from the perspective of the experience that another lives, narrated in such a way that you make you think about the meaning of your own experience and thus revalue the time you spent with it (John Dewey also has an interesting text about "art and experience").
A good game criticism, be it beyond the pretense of making it objective or subjective, is one that makes you think and remember the value of the exchange (which would be to suppose the existence of an a priori economy) of you as an individual against the gross and full becoming of your existence. A good critic of videogames, of art, must then provide a discourse that gives value and meaning to the experience. And that can only be done, firstly, from the subjective sincerity of the being that lives it, and secondly, with the guidance and work of those who have already written, expressed and thought in some way, said experience and have left embodied in the annals of literature, as well as in videos, lectures, etc. etc.
That is why I think that, in particular, you as youtuber, participate in a positive way in these speeches for the whole community. I think after so long that you must have started your channel, you have realized that people want to hear this kind of thing told in this way. Redefining the value of games in new ways, rather than seeing them as mere entertainment. You give a good example of how to mix a narrative with a certain philosophical rigor, let's say so for now to the theoretical field of game design, without touching the pedantry and obscurantism typical of the absurd pretense of some (many) others*; Problems like this only detract from criticism, making it banal, and on the other hand, the mere spectacle for the mere purpose of entertaining, makes it conformist without a challenge to thought, detracting from its value.**
I wish more people realized it.
*Although, that thing about the "toaster uncertainty principle", and the recursivity for naming things as "a phenomenological conondrum grounded of art"... oh man... that's ok... but you need to be more precise in those terminologies, to avoid that problem which i talked about in the last paragraph.
The best critic of video games, by far, has always been Mathew Matosis. His works checks all boxes of what you said in your video as how videogame critic should be done.
A bad example in this case , for being mere purpose of entertainment that is, would be the case of VideogameDunkey.
** You could also refer to the body of work of the ontolgy from G. Deleuze to formalize more your thoughts. It is useful to distinguish meaningful problems from those that are mere "false problems".
Many of the thoughs frome the design perspective in the videogame theory are actually full of false problems when you realize it, and need more of the systemic thinking instead of recurring to the design multilateralism of valid and always good perspectives.
The resources are in Spanish, by the way:
ricardoetchegaray.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/el-pensamiento-de-deleuze-1-filosofia-y-ontologia-1.pdf
www.redalyc.org/pdf/104/10418753003.pdf
This is a great write up Antonio, and I appreciate the kind words as well!
On my use of expressions like toaster uncertainty principle and the like, I agree i should probably have more rigor if i'm defining things.....but these flourishes are done for humorous effect, or to get a strange concept in peoples minds. My essays are not published in academic circles so I can get away with this, but I take your point.
Besides that though, I agree with most of what you talked about, and the formulation about good criticism living on in memory is an interesting one. I actually saw Jacob Gellers video recently, and its interesting how he comes at the same topic, criticism, from a much different perspective, but converging on the same point . I am a very analytical thinker, so emotions don't come naturally to me. I have to formalize, deconstruct and render explicit what others often just feel, which is why my points may come out as mechanical to some. But the Dewey comparison is great, as well the other aesthetic traditions that talk about experience, and transmission.
In terms of great criticism, most great criticism I have read does not really exist on youtube or in the video space, it exists in journals, in books and in blogs, invisible to most of the public which makes it such a shame. There are exceptions, mathewmatosis is great and Noah gervais is fantastic as well, but in many ways, I feel the video essay format inhibits good writing more than it enables it. I use it because its an easy way to reach a lot of people, but I myself prefer writing.
Regardless , this is an ongoing discussion and I will probably refine my thoughts on this going forward, but I appreciate the thoughtful engagement and additional sources.
Thanks!
@@thegameoveranalyser4835 You know, as one more random person, of so many there are in the comments and in life in general, who can offer you some of their time to consume and criticize about your content, I can share some more things based on what you just said/write, in attention to your answer.
It seems to me that you are on the right track with these types of videos. I do not know why you do it, it may be a hobby that fortunately, with the quality that you show in each video, also provided you with the support of some patreons. Congratulations on that, my good man. Without a doubt, more critical quality content is needed on RUclips, even beyond the medium of video games. Things that really make people think critically and not only with contingent, reactionary situations*. With a little more work, this type of essay that you make could be published in an academic journal, believe me. However, I think that your work has as much value here on RUclips as what it could have in the academic meritocracy system. Both are two important parts of the transfer of "scientific" knowledge, and you do a very important part, the one which is the diffusion. No one else does the anlaysis of a bunch of videos and literature from this field the way you do, which is not to say less of the quality of your videos appealing to the lack of direct competition, but to the fact that it is really something Hard to do. Thought directly involves a creative act, following Deleuze, and what you do is very valuable to this entire community, among which there will surely be some developers looking for inspiration.
The vocabulary you use is also to be admired, for a person not a native of the English language, but who has read a lot of crazy things about philosophy and management in English, you have a very good vocabulary, and I don't see any problem with you taking it out, afloat , or as you say "get a strange concept in peoples minds". That's what actually reading poetry does to your vocabulary, and seems you get a good grasp of the importance of American literature in general when relating structural concepts of its narrative to games. So man, get loose, but remember that some words, not by themselves, are sometimes seductive, so don't blindly follow the trap when building a concept towards a serious intention. The extreme of this is demagoguery, technocracy, and that doesn't help towards building a participatory communicative openness, political natalität (Habermas, Arendt).
Not all publications, nor all videos of the GDC are truly useful to advance in the construction of a serious theory for game design. If anything, it is more about orienting the theory towards a perspective of dynamic systems design, like what you talked about in your video about the "emergence", that create virtuous cycles of interactivity between its elements for the future of the decisions of the players . The experience that the player obtains from this interaction is fundamental from the aesthetic point of view of all those involved in its design. Good books, good videos also of the GDC, there are above many that are of mere opinion, not even in salty art anymore, and I am glad that you have mentioned many of them **, but to concretely formalize a PHILOSOPHY of game design , It requires more than using a semiotic approach over the hermeneutic of the original works in a critical way. So don't worry, you have build a good path. Remember that only a good artist is one who always questions what he is doing, how to do it better, who is always looking for new challenges. So be it for your channel, and may it continue to find a much-needed audience for good game design theories review and analysis content in you. May you last as long as you have to last with good and health.
Good luck.
@@thegameoveranalyser4835 * That is something that I have seen in all the media around the world: a penchant for the "cheap" show, an economy of "cheap" memes (maybe Jaques Ellul could have been right about his conception of the technique in this, You know, have you ever mentioned part of Baudillard's work, something has to do with it too ... well, I don't deviate from the topic). The RUclips platform, and in general all the content and communities created around video games, are really, in my opinion, an incredible evolution of the media without equal. You have also already talked about the limitations of the game medium in some video, but just to mention briefly, what other type of media content, technical or artistic artifact gives you the possibility of infinitely randomizing its contents and creating narratives by procedural generation? ? Perhaps this would be the closest to the way Leibniz conceived it with his concept of the Monads and the best of all possible worlds. In what other medium can the idea of an Italian plumber traveling at negative speeds through vertical, horizontal and diagonal parallel universes be conceived? And even how to describe the cultural richness of a phenomenon like it was the year before, of the different versions of the "Steam Hams" videos? What motivated you to create these media innovations? This is something that if you are interested, you can check the video of Ernesto Castro: ruclips.net/video/oxaa0pSJgvk/видео.html
I regret that there is no version similar to any reference in English, but it is truly invaluable to study due to all the references that Ernesto gives, both from the game design and from the field of media theory. Really, when you have time make notes on this one, which is very good.
** Chris Crawford's, for example, is an excellent one that I wouldn't have found out about had it been through your channel. A book you mentioned too was VideoGame Lenses; very good book for every designer. I had read that before, when I was starting to make my design pdf library, lol.
***And yeah, sorry for the bad english in some parts.
I seriously thought you had 1 million subs or something
Damn your content is cool!
You should have an associated blog page where you drop the written version, would prefer that, as it's a bit hard to absorb in a short time
Yo wtf this one of the best videos I’ve ever seen on the topic video games criticism.
1:09 well yes.. but Games..are expected to be ..."GAMES"
thats not to say they dont have potential as a medium .. but the very essence of the market they are part of will hold back their potential as art.. which is why the most interesting artistic games outthere are in the indy market and not made by triple A studios.
also this is an issue of art being a businesses.. its not unique to videogames.. it also happens to movies.. which is why they have become worst over the years and obsessed with formulas trying to makes them perfect products..
The more I watch your videos the more I love games. This is, by far, my favourite channel it opens my mind to a lot of things and possibilities. Thank you!
Thank you for the kind words Pedro, comments like these make it all worth doing!
@@thegameoveranalyser4835 I know that youtube it's a complicated platform but we need content like yours, it makes the difference!
I'm sorry, that's a whole lot of writing for such few statements, maybe I should not write comments, when it's 1 am and I haven't slept the night before😅
Anyway, I totally agree and I really think, this channel should be spread under people like most parents, to help them better understand the importance videogames have to their children. I think most parents either play themselves or at least understand, that it's ok for their children to play games, but can't really see what is it, that's so fascinating about this medium so it would help them to connect more with their childrens hobby, by understanding the artform.
What I want to say is, that I really think these Videos could even be helpful for non gamers to understand the fascination about this medium. They may be even more valuable for people who don't play but want to know why games are fascinating, than for people who played the game(for which they are still amazingly valuable) because people playing games understand at least unconsciously. This is not meant to say, that these Videos do not have values for gamers. In fact I think you are the best video game channel I know, and I know a whole lot of channels. Understanding and analysing Art is always important and not only elevates the fun, but also the impact games have to our life
I think video games should be judge both as art and product, it has many people coming together to create a merger between the two. You only praise on the basicals of art than you aren't judging the technical aspest of the game. The reverse is true. When you focus on just one of those elements you are devaluing the other. The merger of the two and how well one works with the other should be included in the critique.
You can also have standards for both. Both art and products should have a purpose even if that purpose is more abstract in nature.
Absolutely excellent essay!
Very important video. Videogame enthusiasts and casual fans need this, for sure.
So, if you were the editor of a games magazine, what review methodology would you suggest adopting? (vs. if it's an independent blog maybe)
Games magazines are expected to produce "MC" scores so, throw that out the window? Some kind of formalism is needed
The way I see it, criticism of the game and especially "grading" a game and giving a note, works "technically" (toaster) up until you reach the 80-90 marks.
At that point, it stops being relevant, because the difference you'll have at these levels aren't differences in "the toaster's quality", but basically, you'll be comparing a toastre....and a coffee machine. And there's no point doing that.
The ultimate thing we should compare games to is "authenticity of feeling", or, how well the game fulfilled the core fantasy. Of course, technical success and flaws etc factors into that, but once you have a perfect execution, the only thing left is to compare and talk about these experiences, without really being able to say one is better than the other.
For example Last of Us 1 and MGS2, probably impossible to say which one is better, both are works of Art. But I would argue, it is possible to compare Last of Us 2 to these two, because Last of Us 2 has flaws (design) that makes it get a lower "authenticity of feeling" score overall: it's a work of Art that has less impact on you because it talks less about things that are "real", the reality of how characters would behave in certain situations (even in fantasy or sci-fi worlds), and the reality of the lessons we can learn from these. This in turn is what breaks immersion.
You should play Pathologic 2 and The Void (ice-pick lodge is an amazing art studio in video games) 👀
all that stuff said, just to end with "it matters, but also not, it's fine"
Don't mind me, I'm just here to appreciate the inclusion of Nier Automata's OST
Cyberpunk’s review scores lol.
Great video, and very interesting! I think I'm going to give this one a second watch. Do you have any favorite critics who you think are exploring these ideas and forms of game criticism?
- Bryan
Thanks Bryan!
I don't have any favorite critics per se, just pieces of criticism I think are great regardless of the author. Some that come to mind are actually buried in longer books. In Colin Milburne's book respawn, he does an ecological and systems critique of final fantasy 7 that functions as an analysis of the game as well as a distillation of his thesis in the book. Its great.
Another is in the book ludopolitics, where the author does an analysis of bastion using Nietzsche's ideas, again to make his claim about games being about the aesthetics of control
The best place for writing on games i've found though is in the well played journal, which is available for free online. It routinely has some of the best writing on games all compiled in one place.
@@thegameoveranalyser4835 Thanks so much! These all look fascinating, looking forward to reading them.
great video, like always
love this one! 🙌
"Does this mean FF XIII is a good or a bad toaster?" [on that field]
A good toaster.
It projects, it achieves. That's what a good toaster should be, good for it's own purpose. Not good for the user of the toaster, but competent in making the toasts it wants to make. It's all about the perspective of what is the toaster. Everything can be technical and deconstructed for its purposes.
But what is a good toast worth, when it takes so long that in the end, nobody stays to eat it
@@sdrawkcab_emanresu
Products -> please the consumer
Art -> communicate, especially by challenging the consumer.
Its worth as a commercial product will be different from its worth as an artwork.
In my opinion, if someone can't finish something, it's on them. Art is not made
to please. It's not Béla Tarr's fault if someone can't watch the 7 hours of 'Sátántangó'.
And the quality of the artwork is not affected by that. Just because someone's will
was not fulfilled, it doesn't mean the toaster is good or bad. I would say that that is only a problem when adopting a product consumer perspective. And while both artwork and product overlap nowadays, we should turn ourselves to the artistic side when talking about criticism, much like this video proposes.
@Elektrospektrus While I mostly agree with you. Especially with the part, that we need to see videogames more as an artform as we do right now. But I think we have to ask ourselves, what is the purpose of art. I think the purpose is to reach the audience and to tell, what they want to tell or let the audience feel, what it wants them to feel. And if it does not reach the audience, it might have failed (just a little, we are talking about it rn, so it's not like no one knows it). The key is the audience. Someone who watches a 7 hour long film, knows, what they are getting into. People watching these films may be at least partly another audience, than people playing a game like final fantasy, with the intention of just having some no brainer fun. That's the people who are disappointed in this game and the message never reached them except they are watching this video. Unrelated we must accept, that art is not the most important, and not more important than time. And if a game wastes that much time in not good gameplay, I can understand the critic.
However, I in my opinion it's a bad toaster, because in a toaster rating(funktionality), it doesn't really work
@@Gazinne I must add, that by audience I mean the head space the audience is in. I'm not implying, that people playing FF or something are less likely to watch these Films or play games like papers please or bioshock. I just mean, that the important part is the mindset we play in
Absolutely, without audience there would be no art. I agree that if the artwork doesn't reach the audience it failed a little bit, sure, but only if it did fail in its proposition, failed to follow its own intentions, not the audience's ones.
Reaching the audience is not the purpose of art, but a required condition. That is the purpose of a product, that’s marketing. The purpose of art is, above all, expression. It’s communicating through beauty and technique, it's raising awareness to something or evolving how we look at things.
To me, art and time don't mix when making a comparison about importance. I would rather say that art is a solution to time.
What if the purpose of the game is to waste time? To make you, with that, understand time? A great game to show this is 'The Longing'.
It's all about the purpose of the artwork and not the expectations of the audience. We must follow their flow to understand, not the opposite, otherwise, we'll be closing doors to creative freedom. If we set limits, like wasting time (which is quite a relative thing) being forbidden, we'll be holding back art. That's why what Marcel Duchamp did is so important.
If some people are playing 'Final Fantasy' to get some no-brainer fun, that's on them. You can play every game with that intention (and since you mentioned
'BioShock', I can assure you most people have played it like that), you can even watch 'Sátántangó' just for no-brainer fun. But all artworks can be consumed without that end, that's why they are artworks and not toys.
I don't see any reason to categorize FF and "these films" differently. On a personal level, you can do it, create a folder on your PC and put FF in the "Things For No-brainer Fun" and "those films" in the "Things Not For No-brainer Fun", but everyone will have it different. If you want to use a chair to hammer nails, you can, but when discussing its quality, in this case, on a functional level, do it in relation to its own purpose. And remember, perhaps that purpose is not sitting, you have to analyse the craft to understand what's the creators purpose.
Why doesn't it work? If the game direction intended that and it was accomplished, it’s functional. If a game was a gun that was meant to shoot ice and it shoots ice, it's functional. But if it was meant to shoot ice but it shoots water, that's failing. They can never "fail" the audience's wishes, as every single person will have a different one.
So deep, awesome video!
Glad you enjoyed it Mihaita!