Kinds of Games

I read a lot of articles about game development. Pretty frequently I run into articles about “games as art,” which try to set video games up to be as respectable of a medium as literature, movies, and music. Whenever I read about this, it seems that the articles overlook the possibility that some games are not meant to be art and the creators had no intention of creating art. I think games can be art. I also think games can be not art. Here are some of my ideas about different kinds of games.

I suggest we have art games and non-art games. I think we can divide the non-art games into more defined categories, but we don’t need to do that much where I’m going. Some [most] games serve exclusively to entertain. Farmville, Fable, Fallout, Batman: Arkham Asylum, Plants vs Zombies, Peggle, etc. These is on par with most summer blockbuster action movies, Saturday morning cartoons, late night tv, romance novels, tabloids, etc. Now here’s something interesting. If you think about all the “classics” in literature, or all the movies of years ago the people still rave about, most of them were more than just entertainment. They either had important messages to tell or else they were crafted strongly enough around central themes that they held themselves up over the test of time. Alien, Lord of the Rings, Seven Samurai, The Odyssey, The Scarlet Letter.

I found a definition of artistry that I like a lot: “the selection and arrangement of elements in such a way that the artist's vision for the whole is fulfilled.” Artistic games present ideas and use every available element to support and enhance the presentation of those ideas. Maybe they explore a concept in depth. Maybe they reveal information that the artist deems important. Braid explored the concept of time manipulation. Portal has one mechanic and guides the player in using it in all sorts of ways. There are tons of Indie games that express things important to the creators.

Games are made up of several pieces. The player experience visual art, sound, story, and the game’s mechanics. These pieces can all work together to support each other, making a more compelling and artistic game. A case study: Braid. The story in Braid seemed to be about a fellow who was exploring the past and his decisions. The gameplay mechanics were all about manipulating time, and often reversing time to redo actions. The sound was designed to go along with the mechanics in that when the time slowed or reversed, so did the music and sound effects. It would be difficult to imagine how the visuals in a game could support a theme like time manipulation. Playing and watching the ending of Braid will give you a good idea how it can be done. Because all the elements of Braid are wound together and support the central ideas, I deem Braid to be an artistic game.

A game with a core concept or core mechanics, having all elements of the game designed to support, enhance, and explore the core, I consider art. I think artistic games stand the test of time and are still remembered long after they are made.

Extremely well balanced competitive games also stand the test of time. Chess, Risk, Magic: The Gathering, Soccer. One thing games can do that other forms of media can’t do is to provide competition. Sure, TV shows sports, but that’s showing a competition, it is not the competition itself. In fact, any competition you watch on TV is a game. Competitions are games. Video games can be played competitively like sports, player versus player. As examples, I propose Counterstrike, Halo, Starcraft, Modern Warfare, Team Fortress. Blizzard specially creates their games to be E-sports. Even in games not geared toward competitive play, people can compete to have the fastest speed runs, highest scores, or best character.

With the rate of competitive games being created now, there are new games at pro tournaments every few years. Sequels replace games, and new games come out that are better or more popular than earlier game. Maybe once console life cycles get longer, competitive games will last longer. Maybe (and I think probably) at some point there will be competitive video games that last as long as the sports and other games we know today. It is important to note that rules have changed in basically all competitively played games since they have been created. Chess has had rules added and changed since it was created. The shot clock in basketball. Ice skating scoring. Collectible card games have lists of banned and restricted cards that are always being updated. The evolution and iteration of games as sequels are developed might be on the same level as those changes. In that case, Halo games would be considered the evolution of the rules for the same core game, Unreal Tournament could be considered in the same way. Maybe competitive video games can stand the test of time.

Some games are historically significant. Sometimes that’s enough to make them popular, but usually not. Blizzard was not the first studio to make a MMOG, but it’s the one that most people will remember because it was done better. Whenever there is a significant innovation, people always seem to remember the first game to do it well, not the first game to just try it out. Perhaps there is a place, though, for innovative, ground-breaking games, but that’s going to be hit or miss, because you don’t know if your new innovation will stick. If your innovation doesn’t stick or isn’t done well, your game will be lost to obscurity like so many other games.

I guess my final point is that there are 3 types of video games: artistic games, competitive games, and forgettable games. What kind of games do you make?