Shaunodon said:
Torillian said:
Video games are a form of media like movies and music. Sometimes I watch/listen to them for "fun" (like watching a marvel movie) sometimes I do it to feel sad (music is particularly good at this). If you want to think of video games as children's toys then the idea that they need to be fun is pretty legitimate as we don't really need toys that make kids sad. I personally think video games are an art medium which means that "fun" isn't the only legitimate goal. Personally, one of my favorite games ever was To the Moon. It was beautiful, emotionally affecting, tear-jerking, but "fun" isn't how I would describe it.
|
It's amazing how asking a simple question like, "we are still talking about video games right?", lead to all these comments wanting to have a discussion about gaming as an art form, most of them taking my words out of context.
So by your answer, are saying you consider Shadow of the Colossus and Breath of the Wild to be games only aimed at children??
I'm not really here to engage people in a debate about 'can video games be considered art'. At the end of the day, video games are primarily a form of entertainment. There are many more classic titles that can be considered 'artistic' games, like Okami, Bioshock, Dark Souls, Ori, even indie titles like Bastion, Undertale, Cuphead... But even if they were all made with an artistic vision, none of them forgot to achieve the primary goal of a video game, which is to be entertaining (not that everyone will enjoy certain games like Dark Souls).
Titles like 'To the Moon', slow-moving walking simulators and visual novels only meant to invoke emotional interest are a niche sect of gaming, and rightfully have their own niche corners in the Steam store where most people buy them for $5 (I bought To the Moon years ago on Steam sale and have yet to play it, but I'm sure it's great).
Death Stranding however is a game with a planet size budget and a full retail price and therefore has expectations to meet every standard of a modern big budget game, not just to indulge Kojima's whacky artistic vision while putting gamers through several hours of tedium. That's why reviewers stating outright the game is not "fun" but giving it a near perfect score, look stupid as hell. Amazing I have to point that out, but here we are.
|
Nope, I'm saying that games don't have to be "fun" to be worthwhile. This has no baring on games that are fun being "only for kids" but that the stipulation that all games should be "fun" is only valid if you consider them to be toys for kids. If, on the other hand, it's just a form of art medium than it doesn't have to be "fun" to be quality.
Games don't need to be "fun" to be entertaining either. Again, I would have to read the review in question rather than just a single quote out of any context but I imagine that the writer's use of quotation marks around fun means that he thinks the game doesn't meet the standard definition of what people would find "fun" in video games, but is still a worthwhile, entertaining, and meaningful experience.
All that said, if you don't want to have the debate about whether games are an art form or whether games should have to be "fun" and instead want to just dunk on a particular Kojima game then you and I are on different pages. I don't have any interest in defending Death Stranding. You can think it's terrible and doesn't deserve its scores if you like, my only interest is in the more general topic which I find interesting and worthwhile putting thought into.
