Anyone else a bit offended at claims Heavy Rain's writing is Oscar Worthy?

[LordTheNightKnight]

First of all, the reason I'm putting this up now is hopefully the "Must shut down all criticism of the game to prove games are art!" wave has died down (and I'll get to the art thing shortly).

Second of all, this isn't about the game itself. It's not about people who like the game. It's not about people who find the plot compelling. It's about those who claim the writing, story, and voice acting (didn't have enough space in the title) are Oscar worthy*, or that it's as good or better than any TV show or movie.

Some of you might say "but isn't quality subjective?". Yes and no. There are subjective opinions, but when enough gather, the fact that a lot of people have those opinions is an objective fact. So those turn into quality standards. When it comes to the middle, there is some disagreement (such as the notion of a "critic proof" film), but at both ends of the bell curve, the standards are clear.

Technically, Leonard Part 6 and Batman and Robin failed to meet a hell of a lot of people's subjective opinions, but those films still failed to meet them. On the other end, we have Blade Runner and The Godfather. Now honestly, those aren't part of my top movies list, but because they meet the quality standards, I still say those are really good movies. So this is not bias that makes me say Heavy Rain doesn't hold a candle to those movies. I would be championing it myself if it was. The quality of the writing isn't Resident Evil levels of stupidity, but we aren't claiming those games are up their with masterpieces like The Godfather. That doesn't make Heay Rain written well.

The emperor has no clothes, and it's offensive to claim it's our fault for not seeing any clothes.

Some of you might ask if I had actually played it. That's a false question, because that assumes you can't tell how good the writing is unless you have a controller in your hand. How would that change the quality of the story? The only way that requirement would make sense is if the writing had different quality if you were playing it or not. It doesn't work that way. It would be a good idea to watch some gameplay first to get context for each line of the story, but that still just requires watching video  of the gameplay as well as the cut scenes and writing.

Now why is this important? Why should you at least consider what I am writing? It's because if you really want games to be art (regardless of what Roger Ebert thinks), then you have to actually hold games like this to the standards of art, not commend it for meeting those standards when it doesn't. The medium of gaming can't grow when we pretend any game with supposedly mature themes is automatically good. That line of thinking smacks of desperation for games to be art. It's like you so want for there to be a Watchmen for video games, you kept any good critical analysis of the writing out ina corner, as if the writing will then become good from that. Who do you think you were fooling with that?

* If you're not familiar with that term, it doesn't have to do with what actually wins Oscars. It has to do with something that is supposedly so good, it should win an Oscar, even if it's something that couldn't (due to medium). And many films that actually get Oscars are said to be not Oscar worthy.