Comment by anon1253 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by anon1253 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Being a huge fan of the genre of "interactive narratives", I have to disagree. Games like Gone Home, Life is Strange, Mass Effect, Skyrim, Fallout, Deus Ex, and others have had a profound impact on me. The author doesn't seem to make a compelling point why they would be better as books or movies. I haven't really been able to derive a more coherent argument from the article than "they're worse because they're worse, so they should not be games". I think that is a bit harsh on the incredible achievements of the games that painstakingly build an interactive narrative on a medium that is both technically and artistically extremely challenging. Take Mass Effect for example, to me the whole franchise has been one of the most successful science-fiction stories ever. It rivals Star Trek, Star War, and The Expanse. Especially since Mass Effect came out during a period where Hollywood had pretty much given up on the genre as a whole. Mass Effect constructs this beautifully detailed and coherent universe set in a future where mankind discovers advanced technology from an ancient race. This propels mankind into a new era of exploration, conflict and intrigue. Te reason why Mass Effect "works for me", besides the "world building", is that you have the ability to construct a secondary narrative on top of the one presented by the game itself. You are allowed, and encouraged, to make decisions and reflect upon them. While it's all arguably superficial and closed-world, the moment you immerse yourself /in the character/ it offers something very few books and movies can: the ability to guide the story, and become a "person" in a complex world. Then again, I'm biased…but so is that author it seems.

I'm a game designer and a hobbyist writer, and I traditionally have had a terrible time of putting stories into my designs...but yeah, there's some really fun interactive narrative / rpg games out there and I don't think the author has bothered to give them a try (he's only focused on the recent 'walking sim' genre in the article).

Phoenix Wright, Danganronpa, Persona 4 and 5, Life is Strange... all really great, and that's just what I've played in the last year. I've already got Nier Automata on deck for whenever I finish Persona 5.

I also tried playing Steins;Gate this year, one of the more influential graphic novel games, but I'm having a harder time getting into that one (I already saw a good chunk of the anime, so the game feels like a major downgrade visually).

The multiple path/ending thing is something books and films have never done terribly well. Clue is the most effective and successful movie that has attempted multiple endings, and even that could only provide 3 ~5 minute endings to an otherwise static (but really fun) movie.

Meanwhile quite a bit changed in my playthrough of Life is Strange based on my choices (although still not quite as much as I would have liked, certain plot points couldn't be altered), and I got 3 different endings in Persona 4 Golden, with each of the endings leaving some of the mysteries left unanswered (I haven't gotten the 'true' ending yet).

> I don't think the author has bothered to give them a try

The author is Ian Bogost, a veteran game designer, developer, and and critic. Check out his biography: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Bogost#Bibliography

Ah, Ian Bogost. Yeah, I'm familiar with him. Professional critic, seems to turn just about everything he writes into the equivalent of literary criticism; full of vocabulary but lacking meaning and authenticity.

Also obsessed with 'games as art pieces or commentary' and not for fun and entertainment. Two examples: Cow Clicker, a commentary on human's instinctual responses to Skinner Box design, and A Slow Year, a game about 'observing' where one of the mini-games has you drink coffee while staring at a window, which how that won awards is beyond me.

It's working great for him, I wish I had half the success he's had, and I do read his work from time to time, but we definitely don't have the same approach to games. He spends most of his time thinking about academia and politics, while I prefer to spend my time thinking about interesting mechanics and making things fun.

I'd say both are important, and before he came around his side wasn't really out there at all, so I'm glad he's around, but it's not surprising we have different opinions on the matter.

> I'd say both are important, and before he came around his side wasn't really out there at all, so I'm glad he's around, but it's not surprising we have different opinions on the matter.

I certainly don't always (often?) agree with him, either, but I do expect he's at least familiar with what's going on, especially in regard to game narratives.

Yeah, he most likely is, although it's certainly difficult to keep up to date with all games out there. There's just so damn many of them nowadays. I still haven't gotten around to playing the highly acclaimed Gone Home he talks about in his article myself, for instance, and I've stopped trying to keep up with most mobile or Steam releases.

And my backlog of games I actively want to play is at least 20 games long at this point, and then I've got 50 more that own but have barely played, but not actively wanting to play (maybe eventually, when/if I play the others).

I mainly made that comment without realizing who the author was. I'm sure he's at least heard of games like Phoenix Wright and Life is Strange, even if he hasn't been able to play them.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com