So during todays TNT there was a magical moment

The guys were talking about this very rhetorical debate about maturity in videogames etc and then Ryan says "I think I might have this guy on the ropes". All of a sudden people are paying attention to the game and get excited about what's happening. The contrast of the situation really popped out to me and I feel it perfectly illustrates how irrelevant the whole debate is. Games aren't about all this style and flash and directed story-telling etc that this generation has enveloped itself in, it's about these dynamic moments created through player interaction. All that other stuff is just secondary background noise. None of the guys was concerned about the fact that Ryan was controlling a mutated reptilian shooting a plasma gun at this mechanized alien, they were just excited about him doing well.

I think it's important to remind ourselves about this fact at times, videogames are games. And while I'm not gonna completely invalidate any discussion about what's happening in games it should be acknowledged that there are plenty of very successful videogames out there that can be enjoyed both by older and younger audiences purely based on the fact that they are great games.

I think what you're talking about is competition. The only reason it was interesting is because Ryan was competing against a human. It's the same reason for watching Starcraft matches.

Agreed TC. Gameplay hooks, and player interaction rule still. Story and game design are important for sure, but it still comes down to the fun gameplay that ultimately determines a game's success and staying power. Tonight's TNT was a good example imo.

Personally I was bored to death and it became background noise after about 15 minutes of XCOM. I've seen and played too much of that game.

@golguin: No, it's not just that. The XCOM QL got my attention when Ryan saw who his enemy was and his and Jeff's reactions made it all seem like some dire shit. It's the tension and riskiness of XCOM that made it interesting to watch then, and what made it interesting on this TNT as well.

I must have missed that, X-COM isn't very spectator friendly for me compared to the games I usually watch, my attention to TNT waned after about 15 minutes.

Pretty much. If I'm playing a game only for the story, then I'm going to go read a great book. Seriously, good books are pretty fucking rad you guys.

It really depends on what the game is going for. There's no reason Multiplayer focused competitive games and games that tell a great story can't and shouldn't coexist.

Thankfully, I don't think either of them are in danger of going away either.

This sounds like something against storytelling in games. Is it something against storytelling in games?

I disagree. This is what I know: in the last few years the masses have been let in on a secret that many of us have known all along. Games are not just a powerful vehicle for mechanics but story, character, deep, meaningful (sometimes strategic sometimes not) thought.

Some people yap about it too much or in a not so easy-to-take way and in fact very few games really deserve the praise they sometimes receive but they are hinting at possibilities that are incredible.

@TheHT said:

@golguin: No, it's not just that. The XCOM QL got my attention when Ryan saw who his enemy was and his and Jeff's reactions made it all seem like some dire shit. It's the tension and riskiness of XCOM that made it interesting to watch then, and what made it interesting on this TNT as well.

I hadn't played XCOM when giantbomb played the game so it simply looked like a normal tactics game to me. I played and beat the game toward the end of 2012 and learned it was essentially a tactics game for beginners and didn't deserve its praise for its difficulty and depth. I'm glad that Patrick took the dive into the genre and became aware of how lacking XCOM was when compared to other games in the genre.

Watching this TNT and knowing how to use the units and their abilities caused me to get lost in the chat and the side conversations. I probably paid attention to about 5 minutes of the actual game.

@Video_Game_King: I'm not necessarily against story in games. My point is more that the idea that we have to create mature stories and settings in games for them to appeal to mature gamers is false. Games like chess and football and poker appeal to people of all ages purely because they are great games, and I don't see any reason why videogames should be any different.

@Ares42: I don't really see your argument. Games that you could say have attempted to focus on storytelling use gameplay hooks to make the drama in those stories work. That is why things like Heavy Rain or The Walking Dead work as games when, if told in a film, might be pretty mediocre stories. No one is asking for gameplay to go away.. some people are just recognizing that gameplay is a powerful thing and, when matched with a suitable story, it can really bring that story to life. People who say they just want their games to be fun use the "not a game" argument all the time toward more arty games, but their real issue is they don't have the attention span to get through the story parts between gameplay.

@Ares42:

Because video games are trying to achieve something different? They're trying to be more than games? Hell, the term just feels silly for a lot of games today. What game aspect is there to Fragile Dreams? How is 999 fun? Hell, there's an entire genre throwing a monkey wrench into the game-focused side of...well, games.

I thought you were going to say you had a boner. I know I had a pretty awesome stiffy.

@golguin said:

@TheHT said:

@golguin: No, it's not just that. The XCOM QL got my attention when Ryan saw who his enemy was and his and Jeff's reactions made it all seem like some dire shit. It's the tension and riskiness of XCOM that made it interesting to watch then, and what made it interesting on this TNT as well.

I hadn't played XCOM when giantbomb played the game so it simply looked like a normal tactics game to me. I played and beat the game toward the end of 2012 and learned it was essentially a tactics game for beginners and didn't deserve its praise for its difficulty and depth. I'm glad that Patrick took the dive into the genre and became aware of how lacking XCOM was when compared to other games in the genre.

Watching this TNT and knowing how to use the units and their abilities caused me to get lost in the chat and the side conversations. I probably paid attention to about 5 minutes of the actual game.

Oh no, I was mostly following the side-discussions and the chat as well, but the moments I did pay attention to the game (the ending in particular) were because of how by the hair that shit was. I couldn't tell you anything that happened during that second match where Ryan was handly beating the other duder, other than the fact that he won.

@Video_Game_King: Sure, there's definitely some games experimenting with other concepts, but I don't think I can agree with the idea that videogames over-all are trying to be something different. Look at popular games like CoD or Angry Birds, or the whole Rock Band/Dance Central fad, Wii Sports, League of Legends, Starcraft 2. There's a plenty of these hugely successful very gameplay-focused videogames still being released every year.

video games

@Brendan said:

Pretty much. If I'm playing a game only for the story, then I'm going to go read a great book. Seriously, good books are pretty fucking rad you guys.

Good anything is pretty fucking rad.

@Ares42:

But a lot of the games you have listed still have some attempts at a narrative (CoD especially). For the most part, games have to have some type of story going on to tie things together. The Atari days of "here's some shit" are long gone, or at best, migrated to the low budget iPhone market.

@Video_Game_King: Ofc they do, as I said, I'm not against story in games. I'm just saying that focusing on story and setting in videogames to make them more enjoyable for a mature audience isn't necessarily that important.

@Ares42:

More enjoyable, then, I will concede, since that may very well connote game-y aspects. I'll still say games should strive for greater use of interactive elements in their narratives, even if they've been doing a pretty damn good job for quite a while (there's a good example in this video).

I couldn't agree more! Interaction is quite important in video games because it just brings you in and gives us the adrenaline to keep going with the flow. Story does help with that though, at times.

If you think of Journey, that's a great example of just getting the story through interaction. More games should be like this... not all of them, just a hand full~

I was watching this TNT and have to admit, besides Dave coming on, Vinnys happy birthday segment, and the tracker grenade which people thought was a real grenade and Vinny exploded the screen it was largely boring. I'm going to assume the magical moment came with the last match and for me it wasn't that magical, rather Ryan accidentally handicapped himself with only 2 units and that was pretty funny along with good play and some dicerolls. For me, this was still sidetracked with some beta chat business where it got pretty awkward with the cooldowns and a person whose name i forgot.

EDIT: bad typing on my part.

@Ares42: I left before this point, so I haven't seen the discussion yet, but I strongly object to the notion that maturity, artistry and storytelling in videogames is at odds with emergent engagement, excitement and entertainment. Entertainment is better entertainment when it's clever and well designed and meant to signify something.

@evanbower said:

@Ares42: People who say they just want their games to be fun use the "not a game" argument all the time toward more arty games, but their real issue is they don't have the attention span to get through the story parts between gameplay.

That's not even remotely true.

@Video_Game_King said:

@Ares42:

But a lot of the games you have listed still have some attempts at a narrative (CoD especially). For the most part, games have to have some type of story going on to tie things together. The Atari days of "here's some shit" are long gone, or at best, migrated to the low budget iPhone market.

What about games like The Sims, or MOBAs like DOTA or LoL? There are a number of successful games out there, especially in the PC environment, which rely nearly entirely on players generating their own stories rather than a traditional narrative.

@cmblasko:

I'd say that those are in the minority, but I won't stand by that statement without some sort of statistic.

@NoelVeiga said:

@Ares42: I left before this point, so I haven't seen the discussion yet, but I strongly object to the notion that maturity, artistry and storytelling in videogames is at odds with emergent engagement, excitement and entertainment. Entertainment is better entertainment when it's clever and well designed and meant to signify something.

I'm not saying they are opposed at all. What I'm trying to say is that it's a false notion that videogames has to have mature artistry and storytelling to appeal to a mature audience.

I don't believe meaning in entertainment universally makes it better. It makes it different and you appreciate it in a different way, but I would say it's much more a "different but equal" thing rather than a "better or worse".

@Ares42 said:

@NoelVeiga said:

@Ares42: I left before this point, so I haven't seen the discussion yet, but I strongly object to the notion that maturity, artistry and storytelling in videogames is at odds with emergent engagement, excitement and entertainment. Entertainment is better entertainment when it's clever and well designed and meant to signify something.

I'm not saying they are opposed at all. What I'm trying to say is that the it's a false notion that videogames has to have mature artistry and storytelling to appeal to a mature audience.

I don't believe meaning in entertainment universally makes it better. It makes it different and you appreciate it in a different way, but I would say it's much more a "different but equal" thing rather than a "better or worse".

We disagree.

Nothing needs to have mature artistry to appeal to a mature audience. Mature audiences find watching golf appealing, too. Anything that entertains is entertainment, from that perspective. I do think things that are mature, well crafted and meaningful are better entertainment, though (and more entertaining, while we're at it). At least I think this is true from a critical perspective, as an insider, or as an aficionado.

Now, we may disagree about what that means, too, because I think XCOM is definitely meaningful. I think the very clever guys at Firaxis, and Julian Gollop before them, set out to create a strategy game in which players grew attached to their sci-fi commandos, felt tension and fear and gratification for playing a hard game and experienced emergent, interesting little action vignettes. That's artful. That's them setting out to create a feeling in an audience and executing on that goal beautifully. XCOM was my favourite game last year, bar none, because of that moment you described, and because it is generated on purpose as part of the design.

I think perhaps the distinction you want to make isn't between artful, or even mature, and emergent fun. Instead, I'd say that you're arguing for a distinction between having a game create an emotion through gameplay versus creating it through noninteractive means. I don't disagree with that, although I do believe games are so universally nerdy and low-brow that anybody complaining about some more serious exploration of interesting, complex themes has a seriously skewed perspective.

emergent

i know it's an old as shit game but that reminds me of the looking glass game terra nova, where in the beginning the whole thing just seemed so dull, the graphics weren't that pleasing even back then, and the cutscenes were pretty painful to watch, but then as i was going through the missions, more options were unfolding and i was starting to use the terrain strategically i really started getting into it. i even started caring for some of my squadmates, and their banter even made it more lifelike generic though it was. i do appreciate those moments where the game takes a life of its own, or where you and a group of friends are doing everything in your power to break the game and marveling at the results. i played one mario kart 64 course for hours with friends just repeating the same jump over and over again just to see how chaotic our attempts became in the process.

i'm getting similar vibes from sleeping dogs right now (probably the only open-world game i've really gotten into for some reason...)

I just wish the archive was up :/

TNT is hit an miss, but I always like to watch it for a bit to see if anything funny or interesting happens. ARCHIVE, WHERE ARE YOU?

Not to be a jerk, but lack of archive on the last two things is really messing with my schedule. I have a night job, so I've gotten used to coming home and settling down to a two hour show before bed on Thursdays and Fridays. It's almost been a full day, are they just going too long on all these videos now?

Yeah was looking forward to watching more XCOM but guess they are busy with new site

@Video_Game_King said:

@cmblasko:

I'd say that those are in the minority, but I won't stand by that statement without some sort of statistic.

Yeah probably in the minority, but there are some really big outliers like Minecraft. I'm just happy that there seems to be room for games all along the spectrum. Although I prefer the "make your own narrative" end of the spectrum.