|
So, I think there is a difference between something that isn't filled in, in the game (where the heck do people sleep in Myst?) also in resolving some small inconsistencies. To me that seems fundamentally different from a complete recast of something fundamental to the game, the concept of The Stranger. From a story perspective, it doesn't seem to be there in Myst. I realize I'm not exactly objective here, but I just can't see it. That seems fundamentally different from resolving inconsistencies. And of course, people can and do think whatever they want, and love filling in the details of the world. You know that Rawa, and you know that I know you know that!
Zardoz (think I'm responding to Zardoz, possibly others), we don't look at what's in someone's head when we review a work of literature, even if the author is still alive. When I read and review "Cavalier and Klay", I don't look to Michael Chabon to see what he meant to do. I read his book. If the world and the characters aren't what he intended, exactly, he doesn't get to fix it, to take it back. I don't look to Michael Chabon to see what he meant. I can, perhaps, looking at his other works, say in my review that it might not be what he intended, but the work is the final arbitrator. What's in the work is in the work. In visual art, the same thing happens. A family member taught life drawing at the college level. When she reviewed her students' work, and said, for example, "it looks like that person doesn't have an arm", the person would say "that's not what I meant". Her response, "it's not what you meant to do, it's what's on the paper, it's what people see". Historical works tend to have their own issues, because works are intended for an audience of the time and culture. When we read, for example the works of Jane Austen, we may see something different from what she intended. In the case of Jane Austin, I think it works out for us, the reader, fairly well, because what she writes about is still part of our culture. Some things make no sense unless we have at least a small understanding of the historical period and culture of the times. That's why, in some of the movies of Pride and Prejudice they, rather sweetly describe what is so horribly scarily awful about Jane's sister running off with an unmarried man -- the whole family sinks into destitution,
In Tolkien, I look at the books and the movie as two separate things, though the movie is based on the book. They tell slightly different stories and have their own internal consistencies and inconsistencies. That's the same with the games.
So, here's my question -- and yes, it drives me stark raving mad -- why do we put video games in a different category, which we do when we recast the player as The Stranger in Myst. This isn't resolving a minor inconsistency -- this is a significant recast to the game. We take something that is, as far as I can tell, simply not there, not there are all, not an inconsistency, not something left out, not a minor problem, and we say -- not it's not "you", it's not the player, you are playing as someone else. This isn't something that was done for what appears to be technical limitations. It appears to be a very fundamental change to the story, a change to something that is integral feature of the game.
That's what drives me crazy, why we don't seem to have the same respect for a work of art in video games that is commonly accepted in books, movies and visual art.
Now, perhaps it's different for a virtual world.. Rawa, I think, you could make a strong case that something about a virtual world is different. By its very nature, it thrives on extensions, additions, changes. In that case you could say that the virtual world is never done, it's always changing, and what's in someone's head, or on the whiteboard, or in a document, that applies to the virtual world. I think you could make the case for that, and it's a very interesting proposal.. So, in the world of D'ni, and Uru, your words are valuable, important, a resource, part of the creation. But, I just can't see it applying to the single player games, and the books in the same way. We can say that the books and the games may not represent the world of D'ni as seen in Uru. I think it make sense to say that. What I think is problematic -- putting a fundamental story change into a game, when it's just not there.
As always, comments gratefully encouraged.
_________________ mszv, amarez in Uru, other online games, never use mszv anymore, would like to change it
Blog - http://www.amarez.com, Twitter - http://www.twitter.com/amareze
|
Login
FAQ
Search
. Now, excuse me for a moment. *tackles lonely*
[/spoiler]
