How bad is MGS4 for the image of our hobby?

[Garcian Smith]

jman8 said:

Garcian Smith said:

@ TheBigFatJ: That's exactly what I'm talking about. As I said, I've enjoyed the MGS games that I've played (except MGS3, which I didn't like due to the lack of HUD radar and constant need to navigate menus, and not for anything related to the story or presentation.) But anyone who reads into them as anything more than a bunch of over-the-top silliness is fooling themselves and hurting the public image of gamers.

@ jman8: But a lot of gamers - a very large amount of them, in fact - state that the MGS games ARE art. Take DTG earlier in the thread, for example. In addition, where did you get the idea that I'm saying that games can't tackle themes that literature can? On the contrary; I'm saying that they can, but they won't until gamers can properly differentiate good art from mere fun/entertainment value.

 

Seriously, look at DTG's post again. There is not one single mention of art. All he does is say that MGS tackles some mature and thought-provoking themes. He never ever equated MGS with literature. Pretty much no one has done that. You're not actually debating against a real opponent. It's all in your head.

 

Just because he doesn't use the word "art" doesn't mean that he doesn't mean something along those lines. I mean, hell, he used the words "adult, mature, and intellectual" to describe the series. What does that say, if not exactly that?

Or I could point out how, say, Spankey compares MGS4 to Seven Samurai, or how el_rika implied that anyone who doesn't think the series is art is an ignorant "casual gamer," whatever that means.