by Draal Ranger » Wed Apr 30, 2008 4:40 pm
Out of curiousity, why has the last two generations of consoles become the pre-emptive "Great, Grand, Truly Unique" venue of people who look to idolize and create a framework for "Great, Classic, and Timeless" video games? I've heard nothing but press, hype, and people quoting other people about how the games in the title have become the most oft believed examples of how and what video games should be.
What is also somewhat startling, is that the reviewers of these games have also had their words taken to "on high" in creating a sort of mythos around them; its difficult to get two words in about these games being something less than a grand Olympia of miracles, seeing people form their lives around a sort of "soft understanding" of taking these games as something more than games. Just that, suddenly everyone is into video games and the generation of consoles this occurred on, has become the only interesting/worthwhile example of entertainment?
Its also interesting to note that the whole ah... Video game scene has kinda delved into two halves; those being aware of everything before the Dreamcast launch, and those who are just getting into guitar hero. And as stated already, those that do write about this sort of thing, have suddenly found their words to be taken into the larger sphere of the major media outlets. Suddenly everyone reads IGN or 1up or whatever, but what everything lacks is any real sincerity that comes from actually reading about people caring about a topic, while also being aware of the flucuating movement that formed and bent into the forms of game studious and talent we are now aware of.
Or maybe I'm just sick of hearing about how all of these franchises have become franchises, and am not sure how they really matter, while its become a chore to actually find an article about video games that actually looks into the idea that these damn things are made by humans, have a history, and an accounting of ideas that are beyond four two sentence paragraphs.
Maybe it is just a retelling of the age old story of how a castle has been built up over the years, but it appears that the application of an idea, has become more important than the idea or form itself. Just as an example, many websites cover gadgets that are basically the same; any stupidly large number of televisions or mp3 players that basically repackage the same idea. But as some of these video games do, it garners attention for the specific application, instead of the underlying currents of what the thing actually is, and where its come from.
Its somewhat embarressing to hear about a company shoving a few processors into a new plasic case and then hearing even a select few people try to idolize or destroy the premise of this thing in a small, quickly parsed blip of words. Don't reviews just come down to being a badly translated expierence? Why constantly try to take every single derivative, pretend that it is good or bad, then toss it back out into a forum that prizes itself on propagating that idea?
As video games go, its hard to argue that they haven't become known by a larger base of people, that they have become known and accepted as part of normal life, but there appears to be a shallow pool that devides a sort of rampant fascination of where they have come from, against what they now are, and I've never understood why one must be seperate from the other. All of this appears to give into a sort of shallow understanding that forgets to look and say that there are ideas that underlay these devices, be them video games or dvd players, and that repackaging and declaring this thing new or somehow novel or worthwhile may make them appear interesting, all of this has been done before and the current application is just that; a sort of dead fish created from the framework of the old, except without the knowledge that it is so.
Leading into a sort of stagnation as the ideas are forgotten and the framework, the routine usage of reapplying an idea that wasn't obvious and was originial at one time, was then viewed worthwhile and so someone sought to make it predictable, becomes used over and over again, creating derivatives of a single thing.
Maybe this is merely an appreciation of the past, or that the past has finally coalesced into a framework of itself and so it has become the past, distinct and absent from the current reality. Either way, its a forgotten lesson and idea, a sort of awareness that appears to be lost in trying to make these idea overly general and easily assimilated.
Or maybe not.
Out of curiousity, why has the last two generations of consoles become the pre-emptive "Great, Grand, Truly Unique" venue of people who look to idolize and create a framework for "Great, Classic, and Timeless" video games? I've heard nothing but press, hype, and people quoting other people about how the games in the title have become the most oft believed examples of how and what video games should be.
What is also somewhat startling, is that the reviewers of these games have also had their words taken to "on high" in creating a sort of mythos around them; its difficult to get two words in about these games being something less than a grand Olympia of miracles, seeing people form their lives around a sort of "soft understanding" of taking these games as something more than games. Just that, suddenly everyone is into video games and the generation of consoles this occurred on, has become the only interesting/worthwhile example of entertainment?
Its also interesting to note that the whole ah... Video game scene has kinda delved into two halves; those being aware of everything before the Dreamcast launch, and those who are just getting into guitar hero. And as stated already, those that do write about this sort of thing, have suddenly found their words to be taken into the larger sphere of the major media outlets. Suddenly everyone reads IGN or 1up or whatever, but what everything lacks is any real sincerity that comes from actually reading about people caring about a topic, while also being aware of the flucuating movement that formed and bent into the forms of game studious and talent we are now aware of.
Or maybe I'm just sick of hearing about how all of these franchises have become franchises, and am not sure how they really matter, while its become a chore to actually find an article about video games that actually looks into the idea that these damn things are made by humans, have a history, and an accounting of ideas that are beyond four two sentence paragraphs.
Maybe it is just a retelling of the age old story of how a castle has been built up over the years, but it appears that the application of an idea, has become more important than the idea or form itself. Just as an example, many websites cover gadgets that are basically the same; any stupidly large number of televisions or mp3 players that basically repackage the same idea. But as some of these video games do, it garners attention for the specific application, instead of the underlying currents of what the thing actually is, and where its come from.
Its somewhat embarressing to hear about a company shoving a few processors into a new plasic case and then hearing even a select few people try to idolize or destroy the premise of this thing in a small, quickly parsed blip of words. Don't reviews just come down to being a badly translated expierence? Why constantly try to take every single derivative, pretend that it is good or bad, then toss it back out into a forum that prizes itself on propagating that idea?
As video games go, its hard to argue that they haven't become known by a larger base of people, that they have become known and accepted as part of normal life, but there appears to be a shallow pool that devides a sort of rampant fascination of where they have come from, against what they now are, and I've never understood why one must be seperate from the other. All of this appears to give into a sort of shallow understanding that forgets to look and say that there are ideas that underlay these devices, be them video games or dvd players, and that repackaging and declaring this thing new or somehow novel or worthwhile may make them appear interesting, all of this has been done before and the current application is just that; a sort of dead fish created from the framework of the old, except without the knowledge that it is so.
Leading into a sort of stagnation as the ideas are forgotten and the framework, the routine usage of reapplying an idea that wasn't obvious and was originial at one time, was then viewed worthwhile and so someone sought to make it predictable, becomes used over and over again, creating derivatives of a single thing.
Maybe this is merely an appreciation of the past, or that the past has finally coalesced into a framework of itself and so it has become the past, distinct and absent from the current reality. Either way, its a forgotten lesson and idea, a sort of awareness that appears to be lost in trying to make these idea overly general and easily assimilated.
Or maybe not.