Intro Intro

I am not concerned with prestige. These following posts serve only one major purpose and that is to chronicle my thoughts of certain video game titles I've played and any accolades or critiques I can bring to them. Any outsiders stumbling across my thoughts may feel free to stop and go on as they see fit.

Video games are a great passion of mine and they are increasing in popularity around the world. I feel it safe to assume that they enjoy the reputation as one of the world's fastest-grown industries. As someone who has borne witness to the changes our world has been subjected to in the past couple of decades, and simultaneously as one who cannot stem the outpour of thoughts and questions from his head (indeed, "The brain secretes thoughts as the liver secretes bile."), I relish the thought of jotting down my opinions on cyber-paper, coming back to them after some time, watching them age like stationery in the arid desert sun. The prospect of philosophizing about something I love piques my love for that something still further. So without any more delay, I will begin—as all philosophers do—with a question.

The increased and yet increasing popularity of video games has been aforementioned. It would be foolish to think that video gaming is an obscure pastime (like pogs, or something). Multitudes of people, spanning all across the demographic board, flock to electronics stores, video game shops and conventions to play, peruse and purchase these games or enhance their gaming experience.

But—and here's my question I promised you—I still cannot admit that most people take them seriously. Wait, that's not a question! Okay here it is: why is it that people don't take them seriously?

Okay, now here's the part that, for philosophers, is necessary and enjoyable: defining terms. Now, when I use the word "seriously", do not think of the guy who honestly and literally believes that Alex Mason was President Kennedy's assassin. To put it another way, I recognize the fact of "make believe." I understand why more video games are including the warnings at the beginnings or ends stating that it's all a work of fiction; "Any entity, person or organization represented in this game are fictional despite their apparent similarities in real life... blah blah etc. blah."

No, my question is a bit deeper and complex. Take my roommate for example: he loves movies. Actually, virtually every soul at the college I attend loves these Hollywood films. My own father is readily willing to sit down at and watch a motion picture with me, but when the game console turns on, he's gone. In fact, I'd wager were some psychopath to put a gun to his (very politically conservative, by the way) head and give him the choice to either watch American Pie or play Portal 2 (or of course barring these, die a besplattered death), He'd pick the movie, despite it being the last one on earth he'd watch willingly (and even then I'm convinced he'd induce vomiting right afterward). Oh, and in case you were wondering, he wouldn't even have to beat Portal 2, just play it for however long American Pie lasts.

Suffice it to say that people these days may enjoy video games, but it's the movies that are socially acceptable to hold in-depth conversations about. I think out of all of the things people talk about when they meet someone for the first time, occupation is first, movies second, hobbies a close third. Maybe I'm wrong, but shouldn't movies be considered a hobby on par with video games? Wait, no! A better solution! Shouldn't video games be elevated to the social pedestal along with movies?

I admit up front I'm not that keen on films, be they Hollywood or otherwise. As a medium, I think they are growing inferior and obsolete. Someone in the movie business told me that Hollywood is in a panic. The industry is facing a catch-22; they want something new and different, but they cannot have too different. Hence we are faced with remake after remake. I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw that they were going to redo the Spiderman series for instance. But I hear any ideas introduced to Hollywood that are too original are rejected on the basis that it might not sell. Additionally, it's my opinion that the movie medium itself is overburdened. A three hour time limit is pushing it and people are only willing to pay attention to something for so long. Oftentimes a movie will feel like it cut out at the end, and viewers feel as though the producers were going along with the film just fine until they realized that they were approaching the time limit, and felt compelled to wrap it up quickly. Then there's the whole problem of sequels and prequels; when a movie has gone on long enough, it's become customary to set the end up so that the audience can see where things might pick up again when the next installment comes out, or in the prequel's case, tease the audience with the backstory to those classic films we've grown quite fond of.

To all these problems (and any other's I might have missed), I'd suggest that television could be a remedy. Things are getting so that anyone can fabricate decent-looking CGI without much cost. Shows like Firefly and Band of Brothers are proof of this. Intricate plots can be made. Story lines can weave and cohere neatly with each character. Sets, special effects and the like can be done rather excellently. And ultimately, the tale is not as restricted by time limit, allowing one to watch an episode at his or her leisure.

Alas, television too poses some problems, the biggest one being many don't know when to quit once they've gained the public's interest. Actually, that's what I find to be the bane of many a medium. Popularity seems nice at first. What is our zeitgeist these days if not democracy? Interestingly enough, many music lovers have found this to be the direct opposite. With the advent of the hipster, more and more people are finding out that the band they discovered last year (who could only boast of a fan base of a couple hundred), are now leading the charts, but for some reason, they don't sound as good as they did back then.

In the realm of TV then, it's the same fate. Friends, Buffy, Scrubs, Smallville, That 70's Show and others have run for a long time indeed. But there comes a point where the producers realize people have stopped watching, and it's time to let the show die. And when that time comes, can people relate the end of the series like they relate to the end of a good movie or book? Something's telling me the answer is no.

Anyway, that's all food for thought. In respect to video games, I would like to propose that they too can achieve (and in some cases already have achieved) the medium value on par with that of a book, movie or TV show. And that's what I mean by seriously.

Why I think they don't get recognized as such is how I think they're still seen by culture. Many people (my father included) think gaming is a childish or inane act, regardless of how much violence, sex, drugs and/or rock 'n roll is portrayed. In their minds, it all boils down to sitting in front of a series of images that can be controlled by pushing buttons and moving analog sticks or clicking a mouse, so ultimately one can fulfill a goal that is about as worthless as winning five bucks in the lottery. Big whoop, eh? The point of gaming to them seems to be tantamount to purposely inducing oneself into deep sleep so one can achieve a lot of fun things in their dreams.

What I've just described might sound to you like a non-gamer. Actually, I believe gamers like this exist, and they might even compose the majority of gamers. They will heartily acknowledge that the games they play have no effect on the reality around them and admit the only reason they play the things is because it's a great new-fangled way to have some fun. That's odd, that's exactly how I would describe watching a movie... they have no effect on the reality around me and I only see them as a great, new-fangled way to have fun.

That's not entirely true, I'm just biased against movies. For the record there have been one or two that moved me to think deep. I can still count more video games that have stimulated thought within me, and as long as we're at it, hundreds of more Japanese anime and thousands of more books.

And that, my friends, brings us to the Great Divide, which is another thing philosophers inevitably run into... and very much enjoy.

I will close this post explaining what I mean by this Great Divide and I will open my closing harkening once again to my father. Remember his disposition toward gaming? Well to be fair, there was no such thing as video games when he was a lad. Furthermore, when gaming hit the market in the form of Gameboys (with their black-and-white screens and their four AA battery requirements... sorry, writer's moment of nostalgia), Ataris and what have you, games were still very basic content-wise. They were fashioned back in the days when being a nerd was something to be ashamed of. After all, they were, by and large the products of computer programmers, AKA nerds. Computer nerds back then weren't interested in plot structure, you see. And if they were, then they took poetry and theatre electives, dressed up like Shakespeare, got called a faggot, and got beat up for it. At least the computer nerds could stay inside their labs and homes all day, where no one might come around and give them trouble.

But the nerds needed something to do in their free time (yes, even most nerds have free time) and they would have liked to play a game with someone, but since nerds didn't have friends back then, they decided to program a little game on the side (believe me, they have free time). These first gen games, as a result offer the player with some kind of challenge with the computer being the opponent. People like the nerds began to say, "This is great! Why play a few rounds of spades with those bothersome neighbors when I can play infinite rounds of Tetris with myself?" People like my dad began to say, "This is dumb! Why play a solitary game with a score that doesn't matter when you could be having fun with real human beings in a friendly game of cards?" Needless to say, my father is one of those bothersome neighbors... Anyhoo...

But let the reader check him/herself lest he/she (screw it) think that's what the Great Divide is all about! The reason my dad has always despised gaming is what he thinks of the content. I've noted similar complaints in other men of similar standing. "It's all about how much non-existent points you can rack up while not paying any attention to your dog/baby sister/whatever." But wait! Aren't video games more than that nowadays? If I ever took that route that no teenager ever takes and tried to explain to pops that video games are more narrative-driven now, would that make him understand? Actually, it doesn't. He just tells me to read a book instead if I want narrative. Figures. How many times do I see him reading a fiction novel? Never. On the extremely rare cases where I do see him playing video games, are they narrative-driven? Nope. Hypocritical bastard. But I digress... and I'm supposed to be concluding too... Oh the humanity!

THE POINT IS that the Great Divide I'm dealing with here, is the divide in the driving purpose of the game itself. If you've been following along, you'll know which side of the divide I take. If you haven't been following along (Heck, I understand if I lost you at paragraph one!), I'll tell you now: in this world where video games tend to be driven by 1) gameplay, competition and high scores, or 2) narrative, in-depth characters and beauty, I choose..... *drum roll*

Number 2! When it all comes down to it, I think the purpose of the bulk of our entertainments should be, as Sir Philip Sidney said, to delight and teach. There sure are a surprising amount of people out there these days that don't know how to think! I'm convinced many of these people don't want to think, and so they avoid daily the issues that plague us in current events. Some avoid the issues by drowning themselves in the newest movie release every weekend. Others do it through blind and meaningless competition. A disturbing amount of people think they can achieve absence of thought by turning to drugs, legal or no. Even more disturbing are those that believe drugs are what's helping them to start thinking, or enhance their thinking.

No. Narrative does this. Good narrative poses questions. Attentive listeners dwell on these questions. The fortunate ones obtain wisdom from their struggles with their thoughts. The wise become great leaders and raise greater leaders in their footsteps. So get ready, gird up the loins of your mind and let the thinking begin.