• TheDCSniper - March 16, 2012 10:52 p.m.

    So where's our high art, then? I see our equivalent to The Expendables and Clash of the Titans, but where's our equivalent to The Seventh Seal or 8 1/2? The reason I don't see them is because they don't exist. Sadly, the vast majority of video games still target teenage boys and overgrown children like Andrew Groen who are easily impressed by the pseudo-profundity of games like Bioshock and Heavy Rain. It's the video game equivalent of people who think The Matrix is a deep movie or someone who reads garbage like The Da Vinci Code and think that they're a well read person just because they read anything.
  • - March 17, 2012 10:53 a.m.

    Rofl, well that was a completely unnecessary shot at me personally. Attack the argument, not the person you know nothing about. You only weaken your own argument. Where's our high art? How about Today I Die? Journey? Passage? No medium ever has high art mixed with its blockbuster entertainment. Gaming actually comes closest. Bioshock does an absolutely amazing job of telling a story through architecture and tone.
  • DualWieldingIsNotFeasible - March 16, 2012 10:32 p.m.

    A well-written article, but the idea that there are no new worlds for games to conquer is patently ridiculous. That was always true for film, because film is a fundamentally different type of experience, i.e. a passive one. Movies are just stories, and all the broad genres of story had been discovered and explored thousands of years ago. The love story, the scary story, the great hero, the story of things past, the story of things to come, etc. They already existed, film was just a way to show us what the storyteller saw in his own head. Games are different. Games are fundamentally about gameplay, and the infinite potential of technology means that the potential of gameplay is also infinite. Gaming IS in its infancy, because it has limitless potential to grow and change.
  • - March 17, 2012 11:01 a.m.

    Well said, but I disagree. Like I said in the article, new genres and potential will be mined out of gaming (I agree with that part,) but it will all be built upon the foundation of player engagement that was built over the past 30 years.
  • aberkromby - March 16, 2012 8:43 p.m.

    Very well written. And utterly useless and overly-analytical article, but a very well written one nevertheless.
  • Redeater - March 17, 2012 7:45 a.m.

    Yeah you are right. I wish they would have published something more interesting like Ivy's breast size or baldest space marines instead of this insightful look into something most people dismiss as a waste of time. Looks like we need a High Horse section for comments as well.
  • Moondoggie1157 - March 17, 2012 7:58 a.m.

    Mmmm boobies. Me no need analytical words, Grimlock king of comments. But really, Mmmm boobies.
  • - March 17, 2012 11:03 a.m.

    Haha Thanks for the...complement? There seem to be some people here who got something out it, so I don't think I'd call it useless. Then again, every article written about gaming is probably useless when you get down to it.
  • Hobogonigal - March 16, 2012 8:12 p.m.

    First. wow, great article! You have made a lot of valid points and I have to agree that games are looking back in the past to what they began as. Not only do we have loads of HD remakes but games are becoming more streamlined and easy to pick up and play. Games definitely are different to film and as you have pointed out, the greatest games embrace this principle.

Showing 61-68 of 68 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000


Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.