You are viewing an old revision of this post, from December 21, 2010 @ 21:38:51. See below for differences between this version and the current revision.
(And now, a temporary break from Bible commentary to our traditional fare of video game related navel gazing!)
So: Ben wrote this thing. Which I feel like responding to, and I can’t very well do that on his blog! Therefore:
- Yes, we absolutely should experiment more with rhetoric. Forget “we”: I should experiment more with rhetoric.
- Or rather, we should experiment more with form. But, while I would be happy if some of that formal experimentation took the form of rhetorical experimentation (i.e. using that form for persuasive purposes), I am completely unconvinced that improved persuasion should be a key goal for video game writers right now.
- In fact, stepping away from persuasion might be a better goal. Yes, an excess of concern with objectivity is a serious problem; to that end, embrace the subjective, present views upon the world without worrying about whether anybody is convinced by them, or indeed about whether they contain an argument either explicit or hidden.
- But: talks about the effects of changes in sniper rifle reload time are fabulous. Embrace details!
- The work that Kill Screen is doing is an excellent example of breaking out of our formal ruts, but that doesn’t mean that we should fetishize print. I like books more than your average person (in both readings of that sentence), but there’s so much experimentation that can be done within an online format, not to mention the possibilities that the iPad and video games themselves allow.
- Also, Kill Screen has a long way to go before their contribution matches that of Michael’s blog.
- Yes, the fact that video games are played on computers has had an effect; I suspect, however, that video game programmers are less influenced by computer science than most other programmers. And video game bloggers less still.
- C.f. Richard Bartle’s “Do you like beer? Why aren’t you doing a degree in brewing?” Though perhaps that quote goes against my argument; but his talk was awesome!
- (Incidentally, my relationship with computer science is a strained one.)
- My candidates for original sin are reviews (as practiced by large traditional sites) and (the various forms of) preview coverage.
- I should read Prince of Networks.
- Not a fan of Indie Gaming Bingo.
- I like the phrase “there is currently no commenting”.
Post Revisions:
- December 22, 2011 @ 21:30:05 [Current Revision] by David Carlton
- December 21, 2010 @ 21:38:51 by David Carlton
Changes:
There are no differences between the December 21, 2010 @ 21:38:51 revision and the current revision. (Maybe only post meta information was changed.)
Posts
Such a convincing series of points deserve some responses of my own (the persuasive power of the list is undeniable!), so here’s mine in reply, keeping your numbers.
1/2/3. I’m not sure why you think now is a bad time to try and be persuasive in our arguments about games – if not now, when?! I’m tired (and bored!) of waiting. There’s definitely something of a conflation of issues here, but I’m not entirely sure what they are and if I’m doing them or you are, or both. Your example response to point 3 on avoiding the subjective/objective question by just “not worrying about it” forgets the problem of needing to *persuade* the reader that the author had this one particular response. I might want to make this point clear in future, but it’s been made abundantly clear to me that this is a *gigantic* hurdle to overcome, and much harder than it seems (another reason for my great admiration for those who succeed). I learnt the lesson the hard way when writing and reading responses to my Permadeath piece last year (as well as with a few other similar attempts in different times/places).
4. Details are great! A mere assemblage of details does not make a Dr. Zhivago, however.
5. If it seemed I was fetishizing print in my rhetorical questions it’s only because that is the one other form that game criticism has so far been found. As soon as we get our first game criticism game (or film even – I’ve raved about a few video essays in TWIVGB!) I will fetishize that! =P A couple of good attempts at game-criticism-games come to mind: ‘You Have To Burn The Rope’ & ‘Achievement Unlocked’, which are both near-critiques, more parodies, of their respective subjects.
6. What I meant with the comment you are responding to here was that the potential pool of people available to be convinced by a *blog* about videogames seems (almost paradoxically, given the size of the internet) smaller than the same pool willing/able to be convinced by a printed artifact. That situation will, and is, changing but not quicker than other generational changes which move at the rate of births & deaths. This is definitely an issue worth thinking about more and expanding on, however. (Oh, and also I knew writing it that I was kind-of ‘wrong’ about it, but included it for the sake of hyperbole and exaggeration – I was trying to utilize persuasive rhetoric!)
7. Whether videogame bloggers are all that *directly* influenced by computer science is debatable. Yet the mere existence of the computer sciences suggests something (some assumptions?) to someone who is even superficially aware of it’s existence – that computation is a ‘science’; that binary is irreducible; that logic always ‘works’ in our universe, etc, etc. Granted, not all of my examples are exclusively the providence of the Comp. Sci. but if I thought harder I might have some that were.
8. I will use my GDCVault access to watch this excellent talk.
9. Don’t hurt yourself! =P
10. Those are worthy targets, but they are not mine.
11. Definitely.
12. That’s a pity. But in all seriousness, I think Indie Gaming Bingo is closer to something like the aforementioned You Have To Burn The Rope than the kind of persuasive game criticism I am imagining. As an alternative use of the blog and bingo card forms, however, I can’t help but appreciate it. And if I never play another indie platformer it will be too soon.
13. And yet I am definitely a fan of commenting *in the right place*. Like here, for instance. And on The Brainy Gamer. For me and my site, I’ve decided in advance that it’s not the right place, nor do I want to make it the right place. And it’s been such a controversial feature for some that I can’t help but feel it’s definitely a good one. There’s something poetic about the phrase too.
Thanks for reading my perhaps over-long piece, David, and for your very thoughtful comments. I hope my points help clarify a little, but like you said, I think we agree more than not.
12/23/2010 @ 7:03 am
Persuasion isn’t a key focus to me right now because we have an overabundance of people who are ready to fight over whether something is right or wrong (e.g. justifying their choice in game / platform / etc.), and because we don’t have enough examples of different ways people might look at games. In general, I would prefer not to meet those ready to fight with a battle with new rhetorical tools; I’d rather instead accept their energy, learn what they’re seeing that makes them so excited about whatever they’re championing, and see where that leads me. So, in answer to “if not now, when?!”, I’ll say: if you really want to, then sure, now, but otherwise, wait until there’s not so much heat about PC games versus console games versus Facebook games, AAA games versus indie games versus serious games.
I’m curious, were you intending your Permadeath piece to be persuasive? If so, what did you wish your readers to be persuaded of? Or, better yet, persuaded to do? “Persuade” is a vague term – e.g. when I wrote about operas, musicals, and video games, yes, there was some intent to persuade. But the persuasion was, in my mind, mostly telling people to not get so worked up over a specific analytical bent rather than telling them that they should actively embrace the model I was presenting there. It was a model that helped me at the time, and that I’ve been playing around with since then; but I imagine that, soon enough, it will simply be one of many arrows in my quiver. If other people have it as an arrow in their quiver, great; if not, I hope I’ll be able to learn from the particular approaches they take. (E.g. Roger’s approach to video games as epics.) So, while I would be happy to have persuaded people that that approach was an interesting one, and that they shouldn’t get too wedded to approaches that require a weighty narrative is video games, I didn’t intend to persuade people that they should spend time themselves looking at video games through opera glasses.
12/23/2010 @ 11:59 am
I, too, want to hear more about this perceived need to increase persuasive rhetorics. I say this as someone who was trained to understand that all communication is properly understood as an act of (attempted) persuasion.
12/29/2010 @ 11:52 am
[…] would write a blog post instead of leaving a comment?—except that I’ve done that twice myself in response to Ben! In both instances, I probably would have left comments on his blog […]
3/8/2011 @ 10:21 pm