Charlie Milroy, Monopoly was created by a marxist to show the dangers of capitalism. It's why the game is so damn boring, because the point of the game was never to have interesting mechanics, but to carry a political statement.
Man every video I watch this guy is growing on me. It's actually really refreshing to have someone reason through the more mental side of games rather than just offering gameplay of them. Kudos to you sir.
Honestly, this video deserves much more views. It has aged really well. Even with the shadow of a gaming AI (which may help to bypass the majority of described limitations) lurking in the distance. The plea for meaningful spacial interactions has been heard by some, e.g., Brothers: the Tale of Two Sons and, my favourite, Lovers in a Dangerous Spacetime. Thanks again for tackling this ever relevant and exciting topic. Let’s see what the future holds in store for us games design-wise.
Another point I would have mentioned (and you sort of do) is that Video Games can do simulations of violence that would be difficult in other games. For example, board games simulate business much better than they simulate violence, they're not spatial enough. "Physical games" like sports also have trouble simulating violence simply because it's difficult to have a physical representation of violence without actually hurting somebody (NERF, for example).
Oh wow, this really puts into words a bunch of things I've had stuck in my head. Although I honestly thought that prefering games based on physical spaces was partly a quirk of being me, especially considering how clumsy I am in real life, compared to being much more able to move fluidly and quickly in games. Of my favourite games to completely be non-violent is the board game Pandemic. It's a game where each person is a member of a team researching cures for diseases while minimising damage caused by those diseases. The game space is a map of the globe, with all the various cities, the research is heavily abstracted, and the main decisions are based on where in the world you travel in response to which locations are most hit by disease. Of course, that still means it's a game about saving the world.
the existence of visual novels proves that more variety _is_ possible. we should strive to diversify the world of video games, not stick with the status quo.
As far as dividing games into "spreadsheet simulators" and "spatial simulators", we could call "visual novels" a 3rd thing games are good at, which are basically choose-your-own-adventure books or TV shows. Which is a phenomenal art form but if you want something like a good D&D campaign you need other humans involved who can have non-scripted reactions to your choices.
I want to see a world war one trench warfare game where you play as a German soldier just trying to get out alive. One where you have the choice to actively take part in the combat or just try to keep your head down, possibly getting your allies killed in the process. One where morality is questioned and the so called good option is not always the best.
I have this hypothesis that in a game, you are inclined to use the interface you spend the entire game staring at. What do I mean by this? If you spend the entire game staring at a map of Europe and the military units you can use to paint that map your color, you will be more likely to want to declare war ingame. Likewise, what if there was a shooter game where the default character stance was having the rifle holstered rather than drawn? What if using that rifle in this game felt sluggish and bad by shooter game standards? My hypothesis is that you would be less inclined to shoot that gun.
I'm no scientist, but whenever I play a game of Civ 5 the game feels boring whenever I'm not at war, like the entire map has no purpose but to visualize how big our opponents are.
very interesting indeed, and i love that game idea. games inadvertently psychologically condition people, subtle differences like that must create behavioural changes. things we don't even notice. to digress slightly, i remember playing Halo 3 and Reach and having a beige Spartan with low level armour unlocks because i thought on some level it might make my competitors underestimate me subconsciously and give me an advantage, i don't know how well it worked though game ranking definitely does, you see an inheritor or 5-star general turn up in the lobby and you know they mean business, so you buckle down and fight them with fearful determination. did a similar thing on GTA V where i would have a pink car for racing with, but it seemed to have the opposite affect and make people more aggressive towards me..
That was a great vid to watch. Well researched and presented, I would recommend this as an educational piece to anyone still debating violence in gaming. Fantastic job, Campster
All Walks of Film yes until watching this video I didn't know that American football had colonial overtones. this guy is such an SJW that it almost entirely ruins all of his analysis
This might be the single best video about video games as a medium on RUclips. So well-presented. I've wondered before why video-games seem so tied to violence in a way other mediums aren't (and that's not a slight; I love the Doom series as much as the next person; and look, even the most family-friendly Nintendo classics are about characters coming to blows). Identifying that their niche, and easiest path into development, lies in spatial simulation -- and therein, for the sake of providing a game with rules, goals, and failstates, spacial conflict -- goes a long way toward answering that.
Your video is inspiring. Your analytic point of view always surprises me with the contrast of how original the idea is, with the obviousness it delivers, making me wonder: How did I not realize this before?
I always thought that we simulated violence through video games (or movies or books, which, let's be honest, are just as bad) because it's something we don't have in real life. Cooking, gardening, or bean-counting simulations seem really pointless because you can just leave your room and do that whenever you want, while war, murder, and slaughter are best experienced with a 4th wall in between you and the action.
+nessesaryschoolthing that's true of books, movies, poems and other forms of storytelling, too. But even then, combat-heavy movies or stories, like war movies or lord of the rings or action films, are much less violent than most video games.
+nessesaryschoolthing that's true of books, movies, poems and other forms of storytelling, too. But even then, combat-heavy movies or stories, like war movies or lord of the rings or action films, are much less violent than most video games.
Magnus Thirup Hansen I don't know where you're getting that statistic from, but it sounds like something impossible to prove. How would you even compare the two?
That's not a statistic, it's a qualitative, not a quantitative statement. That said, i think it would be rather easy to compare the amount of books or movies comming out each year were violence takes up a good part of the book or movie, with the amount of games, and compare the percentages. But more importantly, look at something like the illiad, Lord of the rings, star wars, or even die hard - how much time is spent on combat scenes? the conflict is obviously violent in all of those cases, but even then, the violence itself is very rarely a prolonged focus, the way it is in video games.
Magnus Thirup Hansen Video games are a prolonged medium. A long movie is 2 hours, while a short game is 4. Of course there's going to more violence when you have more time for it. It's also an interactive medium, meaning you have to have the player engaged and in control most of the time, which is easier to do with combat of some sort than it is with dialogue. Violence that is non-interactive isn't usually as engaging, so you can't have as much of it in a movie or book. That's why you spend more time on it usually, but I don't know if that really makes video games "more violent" on the whole. It's just that giving the player control of the action changes the nature of the experience.
Amazing video. I like the way you articulate. I found myself saying "ah!" and "you nailed it" several times. To everyone growing up with video games, they know that violence is separate from life. Im subbed now ur awsome dude
Brilliant video, perfect pace and understandability. I wish you had talked about games like Façade which seeks to simulate an argument between a married couple that the player tries to mediate.
Great video, I really enjoy your ability to succinctly break down a topic and analyse it. One thing I don't think you touched on, though, that I think is an important component: play, and I don't limit it to video games, has an evolutionary imperative: that is, it exists to teach us the skills that will give us an edge in a "live or die" situation. I suspect that in part also results in us gravitating towards spacial simulation games, whether they be call of duty or hide and go seek.
When did "power fantasies" became a "bad" thing? I thought those were one of the best things about videogames. They can provide power fantasies better than any other medium due to their interactive nature.
It's because it's a negative stigma about games. The idea that games are *only* about shooting things in the face and being badass is one that plagues popular culture, whereas the truth is that video games can be as expressive and thoughtful as any other form of art and, in fact, the power fantasies that they can provide are merely a result of their efforts to make the player feel rewarded for what they do. I play a lot of games myself and I can say that enjoy very few of them purely because of the power fantasy. Edit: I don't think power fantasies are inherently good or bad, I'm just saying that it's a bad thing that pop culture thinks that video games aren't (or can't be) about anything else.
SidheKnight power fantasies are a bad thing because they only provide escapism, and are disassociated from real life. Art forms bring up questions about the human experience. A power fantasy only states that the good things in life come from being more powerful than somebody else.
You need to go on a seminar tour, dude. If that would interest you, I'm sure you could make a great living, travel, an meet a lot of people. You know your stuff!
It's from a "Durch Die Nacht", what I *believe* is a German TV show that puts two artists together. That particular episode had Chris Crawford and Jason Rohrer going to GDC together; it's on RUclips if you search for "Into the night with Jason Rohrer and Chris Crawford." Interesting stuff.
The thing I find most astounding about the video is that there is no mention of a video game's original purpose, providing enjoyment, escape, or stress relief to a player, while there is plenty of only judging them on a subjective set of rules in which they must be an "enriching" experience to actually be meaningful and stick with us. Shoehorning a medium to a set of interactions you find adequately "enriching" is almost entirely subjective. When I play co-op, I make memories. That's for sure.
Possibly, if you only look at the non gameplay parts of the single player and completely ignore the multiplayer but if you do that then your just looking at a 30 minute cutscene
You are correct that Activision doesn't seem to care about meshing gameplay and story. In fact, I'm going to guess that Activision doesn't care about story /at all/ and sees its games more as competitions and logic puzzles (like chess) rather than interactive stories. It's not a Deus Ex game. Of course, this doesn't excuse itself entirely for having writers who clearly never talked to anyone else on your team.
Yah...a German/French co-production, which applies to both, the show and the channel that airs it. It often featured a person specifically popular in Germany/France meeting with a more internationally famous person (such as Dolph Lundgren with Ralph Herforth). But there's also episodes like Juliette Lewis visiting Crispin Glover in his movie production set, in the Czech Republic. Thanks for the plug to the Crawford episode!
I agree with you. Playing a good, balanced fighter against a skilled opponent is very much akin to chess in regard to forethought, anticipation, and overall strategy, with the addition of reaction time, hand-eye coordination, and an overall much faster pace.
Violence sells: One of the reasons you touched upon as to why violence in video games is here to stay. I'd go a step further in that direction as I feel it is a far bigger contributor than you alluded to. Humans are drawn to violence, either for cathartic release, self-empowerment or morbid curiosity. It is one of the easiest yet most effective ways to show climatic buildup in a drama or to express dominance. This is obviously not exclusive to video games either. I do agree with it being rather lazy to default to violence from a video game scenario creation standpoint but there's no denying the amount of power violence has to grab us and not let us go. I do not see violence ever becoming a non-centralized focus in our games, let alone our media. Even if a large American cultural shift away from violence was to take place and technological advanced in such a way to allow for an easier way to create compelling non-violent game experiences, we would still predominantly focus on violence for entertainment and expression in our games and media.
I remember when I played Undertale and was left wondering whether Toby Fox like, really really likes this video - cause the whole to me seems like a commentary on how systemizing violence into fun mechanics can desensitize us to harm we're doing. The game even points put how we try to revert the harm we did via savescums.
Amazingly insightful and well thought-out, as usual. I'm finishing my master's dissertation on literature and I only wish a fifth of the literary criticism I had to read had your lucidity and pertinence.
Anyways, awesome video again. I think you hit the nail on the head. And more and more, we're seeing indie games explore how space can be used in interesting ways. Just look at Fez, Antichamber, etc. etc.
Very good video; you have a new subscriber. I'd also like to add though, that it's kind of a self-fullfilling prophecy; violent games sell well, thus they fund the industry, thus the industry focuses on developing the medium to be better at rendering violence. With all the billions pumped into computer and software development, I think we could very well develop good dialogue-focused games of a spatial type, but as long as violence sells best there's no reason for the companies to do that.
Very, very good discussion about how games are spacial in nature. Taking a class on computer graphics has really enlightened me about how the hardware (specifically the graphics card/GPU) is completely built around pushing 3D polygons onto the screen and very little else. However, it is possible to use GPUs for other things (general-purpose computing on graphics processing units, or GPGPU) which is pretty interesting. I wonder if that could someday be used to make a less spacial sort of game.
If you think about it, chess is really violent, just not graphic. Every time a piece is "taken", it is killed. Chess is a war/strategy simulation that's been very abstracted.
True,you're right about reliability being up to the story. However, that's something that you have to look for by a game-by-game basis. Unlike books and movies which have their enjoyability hinging on plot and narrative, games are defined by their interactivity and thus most center around that. In fact, the fast growth of tech. has placed a focus on improving systems and inventing better mechanics for bigger co. Thusly, indies w/ limited production must rely on story like early 8-bits did.
best use of spacial, how midna bounces up and then clasps on to wolf link when dashing, because when your dashing your usually going a long way that coupled with for instance the day night cycle in hyrule field, that piece of cinematography beats a hundred lines of dialog in mass effect.
The medium of painting is limited to a 2d plane but you don't see many people issuing sweeping dismissals of painting being taken seriously as an art form.
He did a video on Oxenfree. I would agree it does have one of the better conversation systems out there, but it's not a perfect one. Don't get me wrong, it's miles ahead of, say, Bioware's dialogue system or Fallout 4, but it does have some odd limitations, which he talks about in his video. Not to demean Oxenfree, which truly does have an interesting approach to dialogue. (Titanfall 2, of all games, also has a similar system, if not as implemented as fully as it could have been.)
I agree with Chris Crawford. It is currently a massive limitation on games as an artistic medium. We desperately need to find a better way to tell story. Something that is comparable to film in terms of provoking emotion. It seems like "a good story" for one person can be a horrible mess for another and although it is personal preference it goes further than that. The Currently implemented systems are just too dependant on chance and the games that succeed are generally linear.
I love your videos man. I dont know how much you care about being popular but I think a but if of putting yourself out there on the reddit gaming circles would get you some new viewers. Anyways thanks man for the great commentary.
Great video ... the intelligence of the analysis is completely at odds with anything entitled "Violence In Games" written on either side of that debate!
Yes ofc we can. But i expect those games to come from indie developers, not the gaming industry in its current form. That aside, when dealing with violence in video games i've now felt myself drawn more along the lines of exploring & understanding the different types of violence and their effects, on an individual & social level. Pleasantly suprised by your thoughts, thanks for sharing them.
Interesting points, I disagree about one minor -but imo important- thing though. You mentioned early on, that "computers think in ways that are fundamentally different than human beings. Computers lack empathy, creativity or a sense of narrative. etc." I agree within the limitation of adding the word "yet". I personally think that we will eventually be able to create simulations so real that they become indistinguishable from human beings. Thanks for sharing.
There was a racing game on Sega CD where you did get paused and choose your directions. It was like a cartoon and I happened to love it back then. Anyone remember it?
No violence in monopoly? You've never played with my step dad.
John Smith also Monopoly isn't about the dangers of capitalism it is just about capitalism. this guy is such a cultural Marxist
Charlie Milroy, Monopoly was created by a marxist to show the dangers of capitalism. It's why the game is so damn boring, because the point of the game was never to have interesting mechanics, but to carry a political statement.
Charlie Milroy you got schooled bitch
@@SuperHipsterGamer I know it's old, but prototype of the game was made not by marxist, but by georgist.
Man every video I watch this guy is growing on me. It's actually really refreshing to have someone reason through the more mental side of games rather than just offering gameplay of them. Kudos to you sir.
Honestly, this video deserves much more views. It has aged really well. Even with the shadow of a gaming AI (which may help to bypass the majority of described limitations) lurking in the distance.
The plea for meaningful spacial interactions has been heard by some, e.g., Brothers: the Tale of Two Sons and, my favourite, Lovers in a Dangerous Spacetime.
Thanks again for tackling this ever relevant and exciting topic. Let’s see what the future holds in store for us games design-wise.
Vending machines don't kill people, Jensen does.
The worst thing about Oblivion's conversation system is the fact that you had to look at those hideous Oblivion faces.
Another point I would have mentioned (and you sort of do) is that Video Games can do simulations of violence that would be difficult in other games. For example, board games simulate business much better than they simulate violence, they're not spatial enough. "Physical games" like sports also have trouble simulating violence simply because it's difficult to have a physical representation of violence without actually hurting somebody (NERF, for example).
Miss that kinda videos, i think you can shine here much more then in a single game "breakdown".
Today 10/3/2021, after watching Squid's Game, I can't say Red Light, Green Light is a non-violent game.
Oh wow, this really puts into words a bunch of things I've had stuck in my head.
Although I honestly thought that prefering games based on physical spaces was partly a quirk of being me, especially considering how clumsy I am in real life, compared to being much more able to move fluidly and quickly in games.
Of my favourite games to completely be non-violent is the board game Pandemic. It's a game where each person is a member of a team researching cures for diseases while minimising damage caused by those diseases. The game space is a map of the globe, with all the various cities, the research is heavily abstracted, and the main decisions are based on where in the world you travel in response to which locations are most hit by disease. Of course, that still means it's a game about saving the world.
The depth and vastness of your knowledge on the video game industry is really incredible. Great job dude keep it up.
the existence of visual novels proves that more variety _is_ possible. we should strive to diversify the world of video games, not stick with the status quo.
***** yes they are.
Visual novels are just picture books.
As far as dividing games into "spreadsheet simulators" and "spatial simulators", we could call "visual novels" a 3rd thing games are good at, which are basically choose-your-own-adventure books or TV shows. Which is a phenomenal art form but if you want something like a good D&D campaign you need other humans involved who can have non-scripted reactions to your choices.
I want to see a world war one trench warfare game where you play as a German soldier just trying to get out alive. One where you have the choice to actively take part in the combat or just try to keep your head down, possibly getting your allies killed in the process. One where morality is questioned and the so called good option is not always the best.
I'm not a shooter fan, and I would play the everloving hell out of this.
I have this hypothesis that in a game, you are inclined to use the interface you spend the entire game staring at. What do I mean by this? If you spend the entire game staring at a map of Europe and the military units you can use to paint that map your color, you will be more likely to want to declare war ingame. Likewise, what if there was a shooter game where the default character stance was having the rifle holstered rather than drawn? What if using that rifle in this game felt sluggish and bad by shooter game standards? My hypothesis is that you would be less inclined to shoot that gun.
Mark Burgess
Oh, I like this. What a great observation!
I'm no scientist, but whenever I play a game of Civ 5 the game feels boring whenever I'm not at war, like the entire map has no purpose but to visualize how big our opponents are.
very interesting indeed, and i love that game idea. games inadvertently psychologically condition people, subtle differences like that must create behavioural changes. things we don't even notice.
to digress slightly, i remember playing Halo 3 and Reach and having a beige Spartan with low level armour unlocks because i thought on some level it might make my competitors underestimate me subconsciously and give me an advantage, i don't know how well it worked though game ranking definitely does, you see an inheritor or 5-star general turn up in the lobby and you know they mean business, so you buckle down and fight them with fearful determination. did a similar thing on GTA V where i would have a pink car for racing with, but it seemed to have the opposite affect and make people more aggressive towards me..
That was a great vid to watch. Well researched and presented, I would recommend this as an educational piece to anyone still debating violence in gaming. Fantastic job, Campster
Great work. I was recommended this video, and wow I was impressed.
sry i disagree with his opinion cuz i played to much mario...
dude im a ITALIAN ND KILL SO MANY PEOPLES CUZ THEY WHERE UNDER ME!!!
All Walks of Film yes until watching this video I didn't know that American football had colonial overtones. this guy is such an SJW that it almost entirely ruins all of his analysis
This might be the single best video about video games as a medium on RUclips. So well-presented.
I've wondered before why video-games seem so tied to violence in a way other mediums aren't (and that's not a slight; I love the Doom series as much as the next person; and look, even the most family-friendly Nintendo classics are about characters coming to blows). Identifying that their niche, and easiest path into development, lies in spatial simulation -- and therein, for the sake of providing a game with rules, goals, and failstates, spacial conflict -- goes a long way toward answering that.
Smart man says smart things.
One of my favorite videos. I come back to watch at least once a year.
Just as a small correction, Computer Space/Space War was not turn based. It was real time.
Your video is inspiring. Your analytic point of view always surprises me with the contrast of how original the idea is, with the obviousness it delivers, making me wonder: How did I not realize this before?
I always thought that we simulated violence through video games (or movies or books, which, let's be honest, are just as bad) because it's something we don't have in real life. Cooking, gardening, or bean-counting simulations seem really pointless because you can just leave your room and do that whenever you want, while war, murder, and slaughter are best experienced with a 4th wall in between you and the action.
+nessesaryschoolthing that's true of books, movies, poems and other forms of storytelling, too. But even then, combat-heavy movies or stories, like war movies or lord of the rings or action films, are much less violent than most video games.
+nessesaryschoolthing that's true of books, movies, poems and other forms of storytelling, too. But even then, combat-heavy movies or stories, like war movies or lord of the rings or action films, are much less violent than most video games.
Magnus Thirup Hansen I don't know where you're getting that statistic from, but it sounds like something impossible to prove. How would you even compare the two?
That's not a statistic, it's a qualitative, not a quantitative statement. That said, i think it would be rather easy to compare the amount of books or movies comming out each year were violence takes up a good part of the book or movie, with the amount of games, and compare the percentages. But more importantly, look at something like the illiad, Lord of the rings, star wars, or even die hard - how much time is spent on combat scenes? the conflict is obviously violent in all of those cases, but even then, the violence itself is very rarely a prolonged focus, the way it is in video games.
Magnus Thirup Hansen Video games are a prolonged medium. A long movie is 2 hours, while a short game is 4. Of course there's going to more violence when you have more time for it.
It's also an interactive medium, meaning you have to have the player engaged and in control most of the time, which is easier to do with combat of some sort than it is with dialogue. Violence that is non-interactive isn't usually as engaging, so you can't have as much of it in a movie or book.
That's why you spend more time on it usually, but I don't know if that really makes video games "more violent" on the whole. It's just that giving the player control of the action changes the nature of the experience.
Amazing video. I like the way you articulate. I found myself saying "ah!" and "you nailed it" several times. To everyone growing up with video games, they know that violence is separate from life. Im subbed now ur awsome dude
9:21 This is so incredibly well put. like so elegantly and simply summarized
This totally blew my mind.
Brilliant video, perfect pace and understandability. I wish you had talked about games like Façade which seeks to simulate an argument between a married couple that the player tries to mediate.
Great video, I really enjoy your ability to succinctly break down a topic and analyse it. One thing I don't think you touched on, though, that I think is an important component: play, and I don't limit it to video games, has an evolutionary imperative: that is, it exists to teach us the skills that will give us an edge in a "live or die" situation. I suspect that in part also results in us gravitating towards spacial simulation games, whether they be call of duty or hide and go seek.
This channel is way underrated!
Man, you're like a walking thesaurus! It just completely enthralls me. :)
Makes me wish I had such a grasp of the English language as you do.
Wow, thats an immensely in depth and well thought out argument.
I want to thank you for taking the time to make it.
Excellent job on the video. That was simply incredible. I stumbled on the video without excpectations and were speechless through the whole video!
When did "power fantasies" became a "bad" thing?
I thought those were one of the best things about videogames. They can provide power fantasies better than any other medium due to their interactive nature.
It's because it's a negative stigma about games. The idea that games are *only* about shooting things in the face and being badass is one that plagues popular culture, whereas the truth is that video games can be as expressive and thoughtful as any other form of art and, in fact, the power fantasies that they can provide are merely a result of their efforts to make the player feel rewarded for what they do. I play a lot of games myself and I can say that enjoy very few of them purely because of the power fantasy.
Edit: I don't think power fantasies are inherently good or bad, I'm just saying that it's a bad thing that pop culture thinks that video games aren't (or can't be) about anything else.
SidheKnight power fantasies are a bad thing because they only provide escapism, and are disassociated from real life. Art forms bring up questions about the human experience. A power fantasy only states that the good things in life come from being more powerful than somebody else.
Pochogo I don't see how that's bad. Those are features, not bugs.
Of course they're not bugs. It's an ethical evaluation, not a technical one.
Pochogo My point stands. Nothing makes realistic stories about people suffering objectively more ethical than power fantasies.
great video man. you sir are truly an intellectual saviour of the masses
You need to go on a seminar tour, dude. If that would interest you, I'm sure you could make a great living, travel, an meet a lot of people. You know your stuff!
Wow!! I didn't expect anything nearly as cerebral or thought-provoking as this.
Fantastic.
Your videos always blow my mind, I love you man.
It's from a "Durch Die Nacht", what I *believe* is a German TV show that puts two artists together. That particular episode had Chris Crawford and Jason Rohrer going to GDC together; it's on RUclips if you search for "Into the night with Jason Rohrer and Chris Crawford." Interesting stuff.
Man, you really think things out. I love your style.
I was sent here by that PBS guy.
You sir are a genius. I wish I had a fraction of your articulation.
You have great insight! i really do look forward to your videos campster. please keep them coming
The thing I find most astounding about the video is that there is no mention of a video game's original purpose, providing enjoyment, escape, or stress relief to a player, while there is plenty of only judging them on a subjective set of rules in which they must be an "enriching" experience to actually be meaningful and stick with us. Shoehorning a medium to a set of interactions you find adequately "enriching" is almost entirely subjective. When I play co-op, I make memories. That's for sure.
COD is actually anti-war; it's just hard to catch because violence is what makes the game fun.
Possibly, if you only look at the non gameplay parts of the single player and completely ignore the multiplayer but if you do that then your just looking at a 30 minute cutscene
You are correct that Activision doesn't seem to care about meshing gameplay and story. In fact, I'm going to guess that Activision doesn't care about story /at all/ and sees its games more as competitions and logic puzzles (like chess) rather than interactive stories. It's not a Deus Ex game. Of course, this doesn't excuse itself entirely for having writers who clearly never talked to anyone else on your team.
Agreed.
You, sir, are brilliant. I salute you.
This guy's good at that talkin' thing.
THANK YOU for elucidating the intricacies of video games in an erudite manner.
Yah...a German/French co-production, which applies to both, the show and the channel that airs it.
It often featured a person specifically popular in Germany/France meeting with a more internationally famous person (such as Dolph Lundgren with Ralph Herforth). But there's also episodes like Juliette Lewis visiting Crispin Glover in his movie production set, in the Czech Republic.
Thanks for the plug to the Crawford episode!
found you through tgs podcast, watched 2 videos, and subbed just now, really well done!
Don't know why but this video feels longer than it really is.
These videos are amazing. You have to keep making them.
I agree with you. Playing a good, balanced fighter against a skilled opponent is very much akin to chess in regard to forethought, anticipation, and overall strategy, with the addition of reaction time, hand-eye coordination, and an overall much faster pace.
Violence sells: One of the reasons you touched upon as to why violence in video games is here to stay. I'd go a step further in that direction as I feel it is a far bigger contributor than you alluded to. Humans are drawn to violence, either for cathartic release, self-empowerment or morbid curiosity. It is one of the easiest yet most effective ways to show climatic buildup in a drama or to express dominance. This is obviously not exclusive to video games either. I do agree with it being rather lazy to default to violence from a video game scenario creation standpoint but there's no denying the amount of power violence has to grab us and not let us go. I do not see violence ever becoming a non-centralized focus in our games, let alone our media.
Even if a large American cultural shift away from violence was to take place and technological advanced in such a way to allow for an easier way to create compelling non-violent game experiences, we would still predominantly focus on violence for entertainment and expression in our games and media.
I remember when I played Undertale and was left wondering whether Toby Fox like, really really likes this video - cause the whole to me seems like a commentary on how systemizing violence into fun mechanics can desensitize us to harm we're doing. The game even points put how we try to revert the harm we did via savescums.
Amazingly insightful and well thought-out, as usual. I'm finishing my master's dissertation on literature and I only wish a fifth of the literary criticism I had to read had your lucidity and pertinence.
Incredible work. Keep making these!
I like that you use a song from *Killer* Instinct in a discourse about video game violence.
I loved your analysis on this topic, and you are very informative. Thanks for the video, I subscribed!
As every other video from you that I watched, highly interesting. Thank you!
Anyways, awesome video again. I think you hit the nail on the head. And more and more, we're seeing indie games explore how space can be used in interesting ways. Just look at Fez, Antichamber, etc. etc.
Very good video; you have a new subscriber.
I'd also like to add though, that it's kind of a self-fullfilling prophecy; violent games sell well, thus they fund the industry, thus the industry focuses on developing the medium to be better at rendering violence. With all the billions pumped into computer and software development, I think we could very well develop good dialogue-focused games of a spatial type, but as long as violence sells best there's no reason for the companies to do that.
Very, very good discussion about how games are spacial in nature. Taking a class on computer graphics has really enlightened me about how the hardware (specifically the graphics card/GPU) is completely built around pushing 3D polygons onto the screen and very little else. However, it is possible to use GPUs for other things (general-purpose computing on graphics processing units, or GPGPU) which is pretty interesting. I wonder if that could someday be used to make a less spacial sort of game.
If you think about it, chess is really violent, just not graphic. Every time a piece is "taken", it is killed. Chess is a war/strategy simulation that's been very abstracted.
The board game section was the best thing ive ever seen.
Your Oblivion scene was the first time I have ever seen a character respond positively to boasting.
Interesting Video you got here mate, well researched and put together. look forward to more content from you.
True,you're right about reliability being up to the story. However, that's something that you have to look for by a game-by-game basis.
Unlike books and movies which have their enjoyability hinging on plot and narrative, games are defined by their interactivity and thus most center around that. In fact, the fast growth of tech. has placed a focus on improving systems and inventing better mechanics for bigger co.
Thusly, indies w/ limited production must rely on story like early 8-bits did.
Riptor master race! That aside, I can't be the only one who got chills as the music started, right?
Fascinating input, really thankful for your video!
Wow. I've heard of the Crawford sword thing, but didn't know a video of it existed. This'll be so fun to watch.
best use of spacial, how midna bounces up and then clasps on to wolf link when dashing, because when your dashing your usually going a long way that coupled with for instance the day night cycle in hyrule field, that piece of cinematography beats a hundred lines of dialog in mass effect.
This is my favourite show!
The medium of painting is limited to a 2d plane but you don't see many people issuing sweeping dismissals of painting being taken seriously as an art form.
I clicked this expecting it to be stupid... but it was actually quite interesting. Good job sir!
I'm not sure if this was out when this video was released but oxenfree has one of the best conversation system around.
He did a video on Oxenfree. I would agree it does have one of the better conversation systems out there, but it's not a perfect one. Don't get me wrong, it's miles ahead of, say, Bioware's dialogue system or Fallout 4, but it does have some odd limitations, which he talks about in his video.
Not to demean Oxenfree, which truly does have an interesting approach to dialogue. (Titanfall 2, of all games, also has a similar system, if not as implemented as fully as it could have been.)
I like this. A logical and intelligent look at violence in video games.
5:12 "Fuckin' lag." -Goomba
Well the short answer is, chaos is entertaining, chaos tends to involve violence
That was fantastic, keep it up and no matter how many idiotic comments come your way, do not dumb it down!
I agree with Chris Crawford. It is currently a massive limitation on games as an artistic medium. We desperately need to find a better way to tell story. Something that is comparable to film in terms of provoking emotion. It seems like "a good story" for one person can be a horrible mess for another and although it is personal preference it goes further than that. The Currently implemented systems are just too dependant on chance and the games that succeed are generally linear.
I love your videos man. I dont know how much you care about being popular but I think a but if of putting yourself out there on the reddit gaming circles would get you some new viewers. Anyways thanks man for the great commentary.
you sir have gotten yourself another subscriber
Great video ... the intelligence of the analysis is completely at odds with anything entitled "Violence In Games" written on either side of that debate!
Wow. This was actually a very insightful video! I'll be sure to remember things if I ever get around to making a game myself.
@countchocula86 Basically the best summation.
This is probably the best, well-rounded POV regarding this subject I've seen in a video so far.
someone give this man a medal!
I got a violence in video games cause violence in children Cornetto ad before this video.
Well, that's a well informed and articulate (if a bit beardy) young man.
I shall subscribe to his chatty shenanigans, and stroke my chin thoughtfully.
DUDE I LOVED CRIMSONLAND! Part of my late childhood
Nice touch with the killer instinct theme on the intro
freaking love the intro/outro music
I love your show and I really hope someone picks you up for a partnership!
You, my good sir, are the man.
Wow. This really capture the essesence of our games and media!
Somebody knows where can I find this particular interview of chris crawford? - the one talking about the spacial nature of videgames - 10:03
Words I learned today:
obfuscation
grok
swank
Yes ofc we can.
But i expect those games to come from indie developers, not the gaming industry in its current form.
That aside, when dealing with violence in video games i've now felt myself drawn more along the lines of exploring & understanding the different types of violence and their effects, on an individual & social level.
Pleasantly suprised by your thoughts, thanks for sharing them.
that calvin ball reference just got u a sub. :)
Interesting points, I disagree about one minor -but imo important- thing though. You mentioned early on, that "computers think in ways that are fundamentally different than human beings. Computers lack empathy, creativity or a sense of narrative. etc." I agree within the limitation of adding the word "yet". I personally think that we will eventually be able to create simulations so real that they become indistinguishable from human beings.
Thanks for sharing.
Was I the only one who had a moment where I went. "Wait, what was he talking about again?"
There was a racing game on Sega CD where you did get paused and choose your directions. It was like a cartoon and I happened to love it back then. Anyone remember it?
This will be a featured section on The Escapist by the end of the month. Calling it now.
Love the choice of Killer instinct music for a video about violence ;D
(♥ Jago >.>)
This is brilliant. Great job