Slashdot Mirror


Fun is Fine - Toward a Philosophy of Game Design

David Kennerly writes "The Entertainment versus Art debate flares perennially. These participants may be having fun, but the dichotomy is uniquely inappropriate to games. By the end of this article, we may disentangle the faulty dichotomy. After reconsidering what we think we know about a game, fun, and art we may come to discover that Nomura and Costikyan are correct: 'If you were to write a Seven Lively Arts for the 21st century, the form you'd have to mention first is clearly games.' --Greg Costikyan"

2 of 189 comments (clear)

  1. please stop, think of the children! by sweeney37 · · Score: 5, Interesting
    "It is unproductive to think of games as âinteractive movies,â(TM) although many people tend to think of games in those terms. Let's be clear: games and films are different media. The techniques, processes, and skills involved in the creation of each are unique and not interchangeable. The metrics by which each is judged are also different, meaning that many of the properties that make for a good film would lead to a lousy game, and vice versa."

    How true this is, let's see a list:

    Popular/Good Games - Awful Movies
    • Super Mario Bros.
    • Street Fighter
    • Wing Commander
    • Tomb Rader
    • Mortal Kombat


    Good/Popular Movies - Awful Games
    • Enter the Matrix
    • ET
    • Many (but not all) Star Wars games
    • Many (but not all) Star Trek games
    • The Die Hard Series


    And yet, these trends will probably never stop. We keep hearing rumblings about a Duke Nukem Movie, a Doom movie, and we're already getting another Tomb Raider flick. But as long as people keep buying these games, and going to see the movies we'll keep being exposed to this dreck.

    Why can't we see more games like GTA that skirt the fine line between movie and game?

    Mike
  2. FIRST POST! by Snowspinner · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I find, as a graduate English student, that I can't really think of any generation or era where the intellectual art has really lasted well. The popular stuff tends to be what survives, largely because it was actually designed for people to enjoy, rather than praise.

    If, in 100 years, we look back at any games as great works of art (And we may not - games are so dependent on the technology they run on that they may fail one of the basic tests of art, which is survivability), I do not think it will be deep and contemplative games. I think it will be things like SimCity, Zelda, and other games that were designed, first and foremost, for their players.