Portal 2

ok... but if i say "this game is ART" i'm talking about the whole package. Change the presentation, and it might not be art anymore. in Brian Moriarty's phraseology, the identity of a game emerges from its mechanics and affordances, and the presentation that exposes them.

xp. my code is art.

I mean, this is bread and butter stuff and is played out across the industry in the form of genres and the expectations of gameplay that go along with them, and how the games that do something different in a way that people like tend to generate new genres (look at the whole "survival horror" sub-genre of adventure games started by "Alone in the Dark", for example, and how that was built upon by "Resident Evil").

Obviously all of these games within these general categories try to do SOMETHING differently in order to make themselves unique/desirable, some of which ties into developing specific mechanics to go along with the storyline/level design, but boil it down to, say, chess games; most of them play exactly the same way because the rules of chess are very strictly defined and well understood. If someone started a chess game and the first move was the black king leaping across the board and taking the white king, that game would not be chess.

xp: you realize that, at that particular point in time, he is talking about games in general and not specifically videogames, right

lol no not at all

I had a joke all typed up and ready to post before I saw that

he doesn't make that distinction, is the problem.

now I just typed up a post about your chess analogy

a joke, not a post

they are different, much like games are

I will never read a fucking thread is all I'm saying

really, your bone of contention is that you wholesale reject the idea that art is something you contemplate without rules or direct input

which is a fair oppositional position to take; I was more interested in reading and understanding the argument being advanced

wait I realized you are actually talking to ledge in your posts which makes it even more confusing holy shit delete all my posts

it's actually kind of funny because based on the argument advanced here, Final Fantasy VII is the most artistic game I've ever played

xp: lol no don't delete them, I treasure each and every one

("here" being that article; it also explains why what is ultimately a mediocre game managed to become such a mainstream hit)

*dusts off boring philo paper on Wittgensteins discussion of games, hovers over submit button, thinks better of it*

whose argument did it support

because if it supported mine you should totally post it, but if it supports ledge than keep that shit to yrself IMO

really, your bone of contention is that you wholesale reject the idea that art is something you contemplate without rules or direct input

Well, I do reject that. Probably. But my bone of contention upthread is his unfair conflation of games in general, which stand and fall purely on their mechancis, and videogames, where the presentation *can* be much more intrinsic. His 'All Your Art Is Belong to Us!' example is a horrible straw man.

Curiously he does actually say "Does it even make sense to speak of mechanics and affordances apart from presentation? Isn't it all one piece?" - but then he goes nowhere with it.

I think the counter-argument is that a videogame is still a game and, as such, the mechanics play a huge part in its success; in fact, one could argue that a videogame with excellent mechanics but poor presentation will trump a videogame with excellent presentation but poor mechanics.

the basic vibe of the wittgenstein thing is that there are no set of criteria that can actually define "game", but rather we appeal to a list of things we already understand to be games and assign the term according to our sense of it fitting in that set or not.

so it really doesnt help anyones argument.

youre welcome

lol I was misunderstanding the function of the set and sitting here going "uh, why are we evaluating a set of things we consider to be games to see if we think they are games or not" for way too long

It's such an unfocussed essay, all that stuff about mechanics, and kitsch, and Sturgeon's law - OMG Ebert thinks most movies are crap! Stop the press! - has no bearing on his Schopenhauer fanboy conclusion. And this - 'All sublime art is devotional' - thrown in there without defence or justification, pisses me off.

lets see if we can start an in depth discussion of set theory and get everyone to quit ilx within 24 hours! xpost

now I am REALLY looking forward to your bachelor party

its funny because games are such a great example of what hes trying to get across because they are readily agreed upon but every attempted categorical description you try to build has exceptions

is there a game without rules?

LIFE

well no, you have to spin the spinner to move your piece and draw cards or move forwards or backwards when you land on certain squares, there are definitely rules

i cant remember his example at the moment, but it was a good one - the only thing i can think of off the top of my head is frisbee (non ultimate) or something

like you could say that "try to catch" is a rule, but its a pretty weak rule and there is no penalty or point loss for not catching so

if there is no existence without motion then there are no games without rules

RULES OF FRISBEE:

- throw the frisbee
- try to catch the frisbee

xp: lol

I think there is a penalty, which is usually "looking stupid/uncoordinated" or "getting hit in the face with a frisbee"

the rules of frisbee are physics

physics or chemistry or biology

lets see if we can start an in depth discussion of set theory and get everyone to quit ilx within 24 hours! xpost

― The Band Perry is the drummer for Gay Dad (jjjusten), Tuesday, May 3, 2011 2:31 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

now I am REALLY looking forward to your bachelor party

― Dreaded Burrito Gang (DJP), Tuesday, May 3, 2011 2:32 PM (6 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Might see some great sets on a bachelor party excursion.

I just got to chapter 2 and this game seriously has me lolling a lot

Makes me want to go back and play the first one

first ones humor is even more deadpan.

I know that even picking this one up spoils a lot of the story of the first one but I get the sense that it would still be mad fun

oh wait have you never played the first one?!

also so obv the real key question about my wedding is how we convince our ladies that we are doing important wedding stuff and then hide out and blitzkreig our way through the portal 2 multiplayer coop at my house

see this is why having separate apartments before marrying is a good idea, if you recall at my wedding we accomplished a lot of critical drinking by virtue of being across town from where the ladies were assembling invitations

lol @ critical drinking

finally took a shot at coop with a stranger last night. p fun, but I got d/c'd and the dude was sorta dumb

okay just hit chapter 6

this is way too addictive and fun; the only puzzle I've had severe problems with so far is one where I couldn't actually see there was an extra reflection cube

blowing up turrets is too fucking fun

I cannot wait to make my wife try this game

I completed the single player game a few nights ago, probably the most fun I've ever had playing a game. Some of the puzzles came close to driving me insane, but at no point did it ever get frustrating enough for me to look up walkthroughs online. Planning on starting the splitscreen co-op tonight, hope the PSN comes back on soon.

Finished SP, am disappointed. This guy's right, especially about the on rails nature of the puzzles this time round.

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/reviews/2011/05/portal-2-a-good-game-but-not-a-great-one.ars

Couldn't disagree more, tbh. I don't recall using any unconventional solutions in the first game - some might call that laziness (on his part I mean). I thought the new toolkit really threw open the gameplay, and made solving the puzzles hugely enjoyable.

I do kind of agree with him about the Cave Johnson part of the story, that was all a bit too implausible and thinly sketched, more of an excuse than a proper support for the 50s throwback salt mine section - incredibly atmospheric though it was.

Can't believe how many times I've read people complaining that this was easier without acknowledging that as a nearly inevitable result of retaining knowledge and skills from the first game.

this captures my take on the game pretty much exactly.
http://www.brainygamer.com/the_brainy_gamer/2011/05/there-really-was-a-cake.html
really pissed (maybe even moreso than IDENTITY THEFT) that PSN's crash promptly after P2's release has stopped me from playing the multiplayer which sounds VERY interesting

Good post. I agree with many of his points, though I must defend that that the puzzle design and curve in the second game in general was superior to the first game IMO, especially since they removed those puzzles that required very fast twitch reaction time.

His points about about the balance of narrative and how it served the design were still on point, though I didn't have a problem with it - but then, I loved Bioshock.

Still waiting for a friend to get his act together to do the co-op as well, from most accounts I've heard the puzzles are much more interesting.

finished this (with my gf) over the weekend, really enjoyed it.

This guy's right, especially about the on rails nature of the puzzles this time round.

have you seen that video of the guy hurling cubes around in portal 2 to create alternate (or at least shortcut) solutions?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UjApKHyEGTc