You dismiss the entire video game medium because many games lack value. - Edit 1
Before modification by lord-of-shadow at 13/12/2011 04:01:50 PM
Which is similar to dismissing the entire medium of books because you see no value in the majority of books.
And obviously that would be ludicrous. Even though you (rightfully) see little redeeming value in the vast majority of books published, you just as obviously see immense value in reading challenging pieces or pieces that otherwise broaden your understanding, or display mastery of the art of writing.
Video games are a medium capable of immense expression of ideas, learning, story, etc. And beyond authorial expression, there is room for interactivity and user-directed exploration of the content - something you simply don't see as an inherent part of any other medium. Sadly, the majority of games do not even attempt to push these boundaries, due to business concerns (societal preconceptions limit audiences, experimentation on multi-million dollar projects is a risk companies simply aren't willing to take, etc.) and ridiculous societal expectations (that games must be fun above all else). In many ways, this mirrors the development of the film medium; for years it failed to really reach beyond base entertainment, but today it has obviously matured into a medium that is used in a broad variety of ways, including many that explore the human condition in much the same way that good literature does.
Your out-right dismissal of the entire medium is simply incorrect. It's understandable, if you haven't been exposed to much beyond the blockbuster games and trash like Call of Duty or your typical first-person-shooter - but it's still erroneous.
On a related note, I also think you are too ready to dismiss immersive gameplay experiences as unhealthy - playing a game for three hours may not be as edifying as reading the sort of books you value, but it is not inherently "damaging" or unhealthy. In much the same way that reading a fantasy novel or watching a movie for the same length of time won't hurt you. Nor is it a "conscious decision to neglect real life" - downtime is part of life, not a neglection of it. And where is the "fake decisions in a game where virtual characters will suffer either way" comment coming from? You can't have been exposed to many games if you think that that is representative of the entire medium. And in the context of the game, decisions you make are real enough - they will have a real impact on the game, assuming you're playing one that is well designed.
Taken to excess, gaming is bad for you in a myriad of ways - but that can be said for anything. Including reading. Or attending college. Or exercising. It's not even a comment worth making.
And obviously that would be ludicrous. Even though you (rightfully) see little redeeming value in the vast majority of books published, you just as obviously see immense value in reading challenging pieces or pieces that otherwise broaden your understanding, or display mastery of the art of writing.
Video games are a medium capable of immense expression of ideas, learning, story, etc. And beyond authorial expression, there is room for interactivity and user-directed exploration of the content - something you simply don't see as an inherent part of any other medium. Sadly, the majority of games do not even attempt to push these boundaries, due to business concerns (societal preconceptions limit audiences, experimentation on multi-million dollar projects is a risk companies simply aren't willing to take, etc.) and ridiculous societal expectations (that games must be fun above all else). In many ways, this mirrors the development of the film medium; for years it failed to really reach beyond base entertainment, but today it has obviously matured into a medium that is used in a broad variety of ways, including many that explore the human condition in much the same way that good literature does.
Your out-right dismissal of the entire medium is simply incorrect. It's understandable, if you haven't been exposed to much beyond the blockbuster games and trash like Call of Duty or your typical first-person-shooter - but it's still erroneous.
On a related note, I also think you are too ready to dismiss immersive gameplay experiences as unhealthy - playing a game for three hours may not be as edifying as reading the sort of books you value, but it is not inherently "damaging" or unhealthy. In much the same way that reading a fantasy novel or watching a movie for the same length of time won't hurt you. Nor is it a "conscious decision to neglect real life" - downtime is part of life, not a neglection of it. And where is the "fake decisions in a game where virtual characters will suffer either way" comment coming from? You can't have been exposed to many games if you think that that is representative of the entire medium. And in the context of the game, decisions you make are real enough - they will have a real impact on the game, assuming you're playing one that is well designed.
Taken to excess, gaming is bad for you in a myriad of ways - but that can be said for anything. Including reading. Or attending college. Or exercising. It's not even a comment worth making.