This blog has moved. Visit Groundswell Games for the latest. Remember to update your bookmarks and RSS feeds.

Sunday, September 30, 2007

The stuff of innovation

Independent Gaming posted a link yesterday to a panel discussion about innovation in games. The panel took place during the Independent Games Summit at this year's Game Developer's Conference (GDC), which happened back in March.

There was a distinct counter-cultural feel to the discussion, even to the point that all the panelists expressed a distaste for the pursuit of innovation (which of course happened to be the subject of the panel). Ok, that last sentence wasn't entirely fair -- I think the panelists' complaint was against innovation as an end in itself. Innovation for innovation's sake leads to gimmickry, so the feeling went, and gimmicks never lead to compelling or enduring art.

Yes, the "A" word. It didn't surprise me that artistic expression was a major subject of discussion. Two of the panelists in particular felt that games should be viewed through the same hyper-individualistic lens as writing, (indy) film making, painting or any other form of individual/small group expression. To these people, games are about the game designer, not the player.

This position ignores the vital question of entertainment. Any public expression (artistic or otherwise) is meaningless without an audience. Readers, viewers, and players contribute to the meaning of an expression by the act of participating and interpreting. Without participation, expression is moot. Participation in games by definition requires the potential for entertainment. For me the appeal of video games as art lies in the fact that the audience can now play an active role. Artists no longer need to dish out meaning and/or entertainment; they can facilitate it.

Unfortunately, high art in games is still just an academic dream. Even recent attempts at forcing players to make difficult moral decisions (see Bioshock) seem superficial at best. Maybe the issue is some incompatibility between gameplay and story. Maybe it's just the youth of video games as a medium. Either way, when you really get down to it, the exploration of these ideas is the reason I'm creating a game. It's not so much a way to express myself as a way to communicate with someone else about something both fun and meaningful.

3 comments:

  1. To paraphrase Foucault, "The game designer is dead."

    ReplyDelete
  2. What Cader means is, "To paraphrase Roland Barthes..."

    ReplyDelete
  3. There's nothing like scholarly disputes to keep a marriage interesting. :-)

    ReplyDelete