Final Fantasy 7....by a non gamer

keane2097

Subjective opinions and definitive statements coming together in ever more wonderful ways in this thread!

RedXIV

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I really wouldn't class the MGS games anywhere near art. They're action films with clever ideas and god awful dialogue, nothing more.

As for the FF games, not even close. I have to agree with Mindkiller but they never go past the level of the average anime. Even the emotional moments are manipulative no matter how effective. Read some Murakami or finish Earthbound if you want to see how to do it without dramatic manipulation.

I think as mentioned below here, We really need to redefine what people are calling art. I'm gonna throw it out there, I really don't get poetry. I think that its simply a lazy form of literature and a night at a poetry reading is probably what Satan has waiting for me in hell. It just does absolutely nothing for me. I don't get why its "Art", yet I can get emotional responses from games which are not "Art"?. Is Art a defined set of activities or is it a term used to define something that evokes a response? I'm not sure. Best I can do is sum up Art is something I'm expected to respond to on an emotional level and games do that better than most other media at this stage.

noodler wrote: »

For MGS the best example re: MGS3's ending has already been mentioned.

However, I think the pure cinematic nature of the original puts it into the art category (remember I am focusing specifically on MGS 1 and 3).

Dramatic manipulation?

Watching Yuna send the spirits of a devestated village to the farplane (even ignoring the aesthetically pleasing imagery on screen) was a pretty "artistic" moment (I leave the subcateogries to somebody else).

The story, even before it is actualised as you play the game, of a society living in constant fear of attack and deliberately holdingback technologcial advancement as a result was also rather "Artsey" for me.

I think we need to expand the definition of art a little. FF games are too big and diverse to simply say the game is a piece of art but there are undoubtedly elements in each one which fit the cateogry imo.

I agree here 100%

Mindkiller

I think this is a point that Ebert also made in his infamous article, but one thing I think really hamstrings games is the interactive element. Almost all games are skill and goal-based. They almost all involve triumphing over overwhelming odds or completing some mission. Even a game as ambitious as Bioshock is like this. Despite all the technology on our side, art in games is even more limited than literature or cinema. I guess the question is whether games can evolve out of this.

Here is that article. I don't agree that video games can never be art, but he makes some valid points.

One obvious difference between art and games is that you can win a game. It has rules, points, objectives, and an outcome. Santiago might cite a immersive game without points or rules, but I would say then it ceases to be a game and becomes a representation of a story, a novel, a play, dance, a film. Those are things you cannot win; you can only experience them.

RedXIV

Mindkiller wrote: »

I think this is a point that Ebert also made in his infamous article, but one thing I think really hamstrings games is the interactive element. Almost all games are skill and goal-based. They almost all involve triumphing over overwhelming odds or completing some mission. Even a game as ambitious as Bioshock is like this. Despite all the technology on our side, art in games is even more limited than literature or cinema. I guess the question is whether games can evolve out of this.

Here is that article. I don't agree that video games can never be art, but he makes some valid points.

One obvious difference between art and games is that you can win a game. It has rules, points, objectives, and an outcome. Santiago might cite a immersive game without points or rules, but I would say then it ceases to be a game and becomes a representation of a story, a novel, a play, dance, a film. Those are things you cannot win; you can only experience them.

I call shenanigans on his point. Paintings have rules. You need to be looking at the painting, It needs to be bright enough to see it, you probably won't get the full effect if colour blind or partially sighted.

Deaf people won't experience music the same way, the may be able to feel the vibrations but they won't hear the difference between a harp and a piano. Non deaf people still need to have the volume for the music set so they can hear it. If you need to turn up the volume, is that a rule that detracts from the experience, essentially making a symphony art no longer?

Just because a game has well defined scope and rules that can help and hinder the experience doesn't mean it shouldn't be classed as Art.

Mindkiller

RedXIV wrote: »

I think as mentioned below here, We really need to redefine what people are calling art. I'm gonna throw it out there, I really don't get poetry. I think that its simply a lazy form of literature and a night at a poetry reading is probably what Satan has waiting for me in hell. It just does absolutely nothing for me. I don't get why its "Art", yet I can get emotional responses from games which are not "Art"?. Is Art a defined set of activities or is it a term used to define something that evokes a response? I'm not sure. Best I can do is sum up Art is something I'm expected to respond to on an emotional level and games do that better than most other media at this stage.

Probably going into embarrassing, pretentious undergrad mode here but anyway. T.S. Eliot's 'The Wasteland' is a good example of art in poetry. It's generally taken to sum up the modernist movement all by itself. Modernism is characterized by a sudden break with the past after World War I and a questioning of moral certainties. Going back further Tennyson's In Memoriam is informed by Darwin's theories and a dismantling of religious orthodoxy. But mostly it's about dealing with the new image of nature as 'red in tooth and claw', ie survival of the fittest. Both of these poems have much more to say than either MGS2 or MGS3, imo.

Mindkiller

RedXIV wrote: »

I call shenanigans on his point. Paintings have rules. You need to be looking at the painting, It needs to be bright enough to see it, you probably won't get the full effect if colour blind or partially sighted.

Deaf people won't experience music the same way, the may be able to feel the vibrations but they won't hear the difference between a harp and a piano. Non deaf people still need to have the volume for the music set so they can hear it. If you need to turn up the volume, is that a rule that detracts from the experience, essentially making a symphony art no longer?

Just because a game has well defined scope and rules that can help and hinder the experience doesn't mean it shouldn't be classed as Art.

And if you have no hands or opposable thumbs you can't play games, but that isn't what he means by 'rules'. The 'rules' he mentions concern the way we absorb and reflect upon art, but not whether we had our legs amputated or our eyes gouged out.

Retr0gamer

I think interactivity doesn't just suddenly stop games being art, I think it's a ridiculous statement by Ebert. However I go think that if something is made for entertainment then it kind of really isn't art and well the MGS and FF games are really just entertainment.

As for winning a game making it not art, well that's silly and especially in these days when games are so easy that it's hard not to be able to finish them. Ebert seems like someone that hasn't played a game since playing them in the arcades in the 80's. In the same way you could call finishing a long boring arty book like Ulysees an achievement, I'd actually think finishing that ****er is more a 'win' situation than finishing Dark Souls. You're getting to the end of a narrative, just in one you read dialogue, in the other you use a joypad.

Mindkiller

Well some people find reading Ulysses entertaining. Some have even claimed to enjoy Finnegan's Wake. Anyway, I haven't read it but Ulysses is not just meant to be about getting to the end, like Dark Souls. You're meant to extract some sort of meaning from the whole thing, some sort of message, whatever that might be. At the most basic level, Ulysses is filled with classical allusions to Homer so starting with the Illiad and the Odyssey might be the best way to go about that.

Retr0gamer

Mindkiller wrote: »

Well some people find reading Ulysses entertaining. Some have even claimed to enjoy Finnegan's Wake. Anyway, I haven't read it but Ulysses is not just meant to be about getting to the end, like Dark Souls. You're meant to extract some sort of meaning from the whole thing, some sort of message, whatever that might be. At the most basic level, Ulysses is filled with classical allusions to Homer so starting with the Illiad and the Odyssey might be the best way to go about that.

Yes but there's nothing stopping you from extracting some kind of meaning or message from a game either. Dark Souls might not be a good example but take something like Silent Hill 2 and how it deals with guilt and the male libido or earthbound and how the entire game is meant to illicit the emotional response of the moment childhood ends. It's just different ways of getting to the end of a narrative and shouldn't just make it not art because of how it's told or presented.

Mindkiller

I agree that games don't stop being art because they're interactive. But that extra dimension does a lot to limit what they can do. Just off the top of my head, how would a game of the Great Gatsby work? No-one would want to play it, the narrator doesn't even do anything other than stand around watching stuff happen. Games are much more involved, but they're also kind of stuck into telling one or two kinds of stories. When they branch out into crime thriller stuff like LA Noire and Heavy Rain you get into a situation where the games only seem to emulate other mediums.

Horror doesn't have this problem because with Silent Hill 2 there's no limit to the types of **** that James' subconsciousness can conjure up. Twin Peaks and Lynchian horror is amenable to game adaptations as well, as seen by Alan Wake and Deadly Premonition.

Retr0gamer

Agreed, although it's up to developers to come up with more interesting stories to tell in the medium that work instead of emulating other mediums. Horror is one that works really well but I think there's some new ground to explore with games.

I do agree though that the underlying game mechanics really can't be called art. However I think saying all games aren't art because of this is like criticising literature because the paper it's on isn't art or sculting because the rock it is built from isn't art. It's a delivery device. However there's the potential for some very clever people to use game mechanics in artistic ways, just there's not a lot of people that have managed it and as you say it's kind of limited to by the interactivity element at the moment.

viclemronny

The thing about horror mentioned there is that I think it's just a case of luck. What we don't always pay attention to is that games are the first new way of delivering stories that we've had in about 5000 years. Television is an extension of theatre. Of course, there's more that's capable in a modern film/television series than an ancient greek theatre thousands of years ago, but it's still a passive story.

Stories as we know them were never told in an interactive manner. Surely, the achievement of that on any sort of a decent level is a representation of the creativity and expression of the human desire to engage in emotion that is requisite of art.

noodler

Mindkiller wrote: »

I don't really think there's anything that profound about MGS3.

I think its just really well done. I could post too many paragraphs. The story itself is really well told rather than out of the ordinary.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

There's cetainly elements and moments you might come close to being classifiedas art but really as a whole MGS and the FF games don't come anywhere near it. Honestly forgetting the originality ofthe settings do the FF games ever go beyond the level of your pulp sci-fi or fantasy novel because for me they certainly don't. Everything in those games is really just manipulative and in your face, you're basically told to feel emotion by the narrative. As for the themes, it's way too in your face and you're pretty much told what it's all about, MGS being really awful in this regard.

Art is impossible to define but really MGS and the FF games are nothing more than escapist entertainment and never transcend that. Clever narrative, plot twists and manipulative emotional scenes and imagery aren't what defines art.

I don't really follow you regarding the emotions you feel from MGS or FF being too "manipulative" or "in your face".

I mean, what emotions recieved from a game are not? The Horse in SOTC

falling

was clearly there to illicit an emotional response, the death of the

boss

in MGS3 too.

If I follow what you are saying to the logical conclusion it would appear you are saying that only unintentional emotional respoonse count?

Retr0gamer

It's more the subtext and how it is presented. It's pretty in your face that the developers wanted the player to fall for Aeris and it's not very subtle about it. Then when she dies what does it represent? Really it's just there to make us feel sad about Aeris, nothing more. It's not exactly the height of narrative writing. It's effective but still a narrative device that's been used for years and really doesn't serve much purpose other than a cheap shock. It's the closet jump scare of emotional responses if you will. Sure RPG's have been using it since Phantasy Star 2 in 1989 and by that point games like Lufia 2 were being far more creative about how emotional connection with characters could affect a games narrative.

As for Shadow of the Colossus for most people it was a surprise since you didn't realise how much of a bond was formed between the played and the horse. Also this death represented a whole lot more. It represented the selfishness of the the wanderer and how this selfishness hurt everyone around him even the only thing he had left.

Then again there's people out there that will argue that SotC was cheap as well in that regard but one thing is sure, it's a lot better written and explores its themes a whole lot more than FFVII every did.

Retr0gamer

Oh by the way, we're dropping this line of discussion after the next update, it's gone way off topic, but until continue. It's been interesting.

ghostchant

I never like the 'are games art' discussions, mainly because it really doesn't affect me whether they are or they aren't. My stock answer tends to be 'no' though.

But then there's Journey. I've never felt so sad finishing a game, for the amazing sense of loss I felt knowing that I'd never have any more contact with this other person who I'd spent a couple of amazing hours exploring the gameworld with. Not sure if that's 'art', but I certainly want more gaming experiences of that nature.

Brenda Brathwaite is the closest a game designer has gotten to making games that might qualify as art in my opinion, although her games are board games. Look up her game 'train' for instance.

chopperbyrne

Good thread Red.

If you have a Wii (or Gamecube), get Skies of Arcadia: Legends.

Another game with a very simple battle system, colourful world and fun characters that's not too hard.

Fergus_

I'd recommend her to try Suikoden 2, it's my favourite JRPG and I think she will really like it

YayForYuffie

All this anti-Yuffieness makes me sad.

Arawn

shhhhh everyone but red shut up, i keep getting excited and let down by no updates

Sephiroth_dude

HAHA dont update :-D keep this thread going

_AVALANCHE_

It was raining all day, what else had she to do!

I am disapoint.

RedXIV

chopperbyrne wrote: »

Good thread Red.

If you have a Wii (or Gamecube), get Skies of Arcadia: Legends.

Another game with a very simple battle system, colourful world and fun characters that's not too hard.

I actually have Skies of Arcadia for the Dreamcast but haven't tried it yet. Might be interesting for her to try an RPG that I've no experience with next

Arawn wrote: »

shhhhh everyone but red shut up, i keep getting excited and let down by no updates

_AVALANCHE_ wrote: »

It was raining all day, what else had she to do!

I am disapoint.

Sorry guys kids have been very uncooperative lately.

However, due to overwhelming demand (and me sitting in front of the PS3) we picked it up again last night! Now its important to note that she hasn't just ignored the game since the last update. We've talked about it a few times and the fact that she's just about to start disk 2 has been slightly daunting and she has pretty much expecting to be blown away by oodles of video and very little gameplay. We also talked about other RPG games that she could try and she's really set on keeping the materia system now that she's more comfortable with it. Its actually somewhat inspiring to see someone who new to this genre sit down and tinker with a menu for a full 10 mins before heading off anywhere. I've explained anyway that the FFX system is somewhat easier (in my mind) and how I think she'd take to FFIX as well but, and I'm sorry to the fans, FFVIII has a horrible system to get to grips with. But as noted above, we're not limited to FF series, I've tons of RPG's so I'm sure she'll find something else she likes.

Ok so we reconvened after disk 1 where Sephiroth has said he's heading past the ice fields to the north. After her maintenance of her equipment and materia (and the obligatory "oh......there's all Aeris's materia.....Poor Aeris ") she started through the path north. At this point in the game, her HP are around the 2K to 2.5K mark and her characters are getting close to 1000 points of damage for normal attacks. Very little in the way of enemy battles gave her trouble going through the cave to get to the ice fields but she did have a wtf moment when she came across the little Hungry guys that eat your characters. Barret was lost from the battle and when he didn't show on the winners screen for EXP and AP, there was a momentary moment of panic (am I gonna lose all the characters!?) but once she got back onto the main map and then into the menu, all was well again.

She then navigated towards Icicle Inn and in true RPG spirit, watched every single one of the Gast tapes. Some of it was undoubtedly over her head, the WEAPON stuff in particular but she really enjoyed the parts where you see Gast and Iflana fall for each other and the first mention of Aeris. As Retr0 says previously, its the little hints of Aeris after her death that seem to be hitting home hardest. But she took alot from the tapes anyway and I'm sure some of will click into place soon enough if not already understood.

We had awful trouble trying to find a snowboard, the map was simple enough but we spend a good 5 mins running around otherwise looking for it. As for the Elena punch. Well she had one chance in three in avoiding it, she pressed up and was knocked cold. A shame really but no real harm done.

The snowboarding was......slow. She's really not taking to these mini games, and for those who haven't done this in a while, I'm pretty sure the snowboarding part here is a lot longer than the game in the gold saucer. She was giving out that "this is a game for fighting! not snowboarding!" and she was pretty disgusted when I told her the snowboarding game was released as a standalone game on phones in Japan. But she got through it in the end and has landed in what I think is the bottom right corner of the map. We spend about 10 mins looking around different areas before I started getting threats to help her. At this stage, those uncooperative children I mentioned previously started up and at midnight on a Sunday, she decided to call it a day.

She's already stuck back into it and really determined to beat it. The cliffs of Gaea are coming up and we all know how big a pr1ck they can be so this could result in some short and frustrated updates for a while but at least then you know its the genuine article

She's enjoying all the support by the way So feel free to comment away. She's always been very competitive so encouragement is always appreciated.

Till next time!

MitchKoobski

I hate FFVIII's system with a passion.

chopperbyrne

RedXIV wrote: »

I actually have Skies of Arcadia for the Dreamcast but haven't tried it yet. Might be interesting for her to try an RPG that I've no experience with next

The Dreamcast version has a far higher encounter rate, which is why I recommended the GC version instead.

Still a great game though.

Retr0gamer

Yup, DC encounter rate will drive her insane!

I still think go for Suikoden 2, Grandia or if she wants another FF then 9 next.

wobbles-grogan

RedXIV wrote: »

< This whole thread >

I wish my girlfriend would like FF, or even games in general.

And yes, I hope she finds this post! :rolleyes:

Retr0gamer

Was playing through Secret of Mana co-op with my girlfriend at the weekend. Gamer girlfriends are indeed awesome

Actually, thinking of it, Secret of Mana or Seiken Densetsu 3 would be good one to play next since it's 2 or 3 player so you can both play them co-op. The fact that they are amazing games is also a bonus.

RedXIV

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Was playing through Secret of Mana co-op with my girlfriend at the weekend. Gamer girlfriends are indeed awesome

Actually, thinking of it, Secret of Mana or Seiken Densetsu 3 would be good one to play next since it's 2 or 3 player so you can both play them co-op. The fact that they are amazing games is also a bonus.

That would either make or break us as a couple. Probably break. We're both very stubborn so her going all out and me trying to be overly strategic would probably end up in a very explosive falling out. Am sure it'd be hilarious to watch though?

IRL_Sinister

On the topic of theories, I personally love the mystery behind Zack!