Mods are Odd: Do they detract from a game's artistic merit?

[Jennacide]

The best mods are the ones you can't tell aren't different from the base game. Of course, I hold mods to what some consider an absurdly high standard, but having done some modding myself and seeing the care people like my brother put into creation of mods that fit the aesthetics of the game instead of ignore them, I have a right to.

The problem with the mod community however is the truely astounding mods that stick to aesthetics are usually railroaded over in popularity by Sephiroth outfits, famous weapons like Frostmourne, or nude skins. This is partially because good world expanding mods are by and far the hardest to create compared to hammering out a quick model or texture reskin, so when quest/world mods come out, even the worst ones are applauded just for having bothered to do it. A great case of this is Project Valhalla for FO3. It got file of the month while still an incomplete beta, chock full bugs, oversights, horrible environmental design, and some of the worst acting I have ever heard. (Like, makes RE1's actors look professional.)

Also, the TES modding community is a lesser place now that greats like Martigen and Quazzy have called it quits.

first off in my opinion games are not "art" i wish people would stop fooling themselves and trying to put video games up on the art pedestal(true,now to some degree they are protected by the first amendment) but they they are entertainment no more no less and to this day

I honestly want to sucker punch everyone that makes idiotic statements like this. Entertainment can't be art? So movies and television can't be art? Or books and music? Cause, you know, those were FOR ENTERTAINMENT. Not every game is artistic, but blanket stating games can't be art is about as moronic as you can get. And leads me to guess you've never played Flower, Shadow of the Colossus, Limbo, Braid, or one of countless others. You simply cannot question the artistic merit of those games. Each one remains entertaining while being thought provoking while almost never uttering a word. (Braid being the exception to this part, instead it tells one hell of a twisted story open to interpertation)

 

[dyre]

If you want to compare video games to books, then mods are the fanfictions of books.

but most fanfiction is utter garbage, while mods contribute a huge amount to the quality of a game, especially Bethseda games, which are closer to platforms for mods than actual games

I'd say mods are closer to quality editors changing up a book rather than fanfiction

 

[Samuel Lombardo]

Extra Credits did an episode talking about the player as a part of the creative experience.

Think of it this way. The developer makes the playground, but the player has to decide if he wants to go on the monkey bars or the slide.

In the same way, do I want to play a mage, rely on swords, or make a mod.

 

[demoman_chaos]

Mods good,not having mods bad.
I can't tell youhow many more hours I've put into games just because of mods. PLay a game until tis boring, then mod the poo out of it and you have a like new game for nothing.

Like with Mount&Blade, I got the Star Wars mod and freakin' loved it. So much so I took teh time to conquer the galaxy.

 

[lacktheknack]

Imagine a book, where somebody decides they don't like a particular chapter (say, the epilogue to Harry Potter), so they rip out the pages, write their own chapter, tape it in, and then give it to all their friends to read. Isn't that odd?

Actually, it strikes me more as writing a fanfic, which isn't really all that odd. And all the Harry-on-Snape slash fiction in the world won't make Harry Potter less valid artistically.

Or a movie, where somebody decides they don't like a particular character (say, Jar-Jar Binks from The Phantom Menace) so they edit the film, replacing Jar-Jar's CGI with a model of their own design, dub over different voice acting and then redistribute the film to other fans. Sounds rather bizarre to me.

Actually, fandubs are pretty common (usually for comedic purposes, but some are straight redubs). And the only reason that someone hasn't replaced Jar Jar's character model is because that's really hard to do. If it was as easy as it is in games, then you can bet your bottom that someone would have done it by now.

Conversely, if you were annoyed by a book which was written entirely in first person, would you consider seeking out a "mod" that converted the book to third person (if that was possible)?

If the First Person was all that annoying, then yes. Yes I would.

My point is that, adding cool third-party content like extra spells, flying dragon mounts and new NPCs and altering gameplay mechanics and overhauling graphics... doesn't that fundamentally change the experience? If you play Skyrim with mods right off the bat, can you really say you've played Skyrim?

Keep in mind, I'm not saying mods are bad and shouldn't exist. I'm just wondering what they mean in the context of games as an artform. What do you think?

How can they detract from artistic merit? It's not like the game has been permanently changed on a whim from some random person. The original will always still be there. It's what gets installed from every download and disk. The mods are a completely different scene, and typically add content versus replacing it.

Besides, a good chunk of the modding population will say "Play the game vanilla first, THEN mod it to death". So it's not like many people are missing the intended experience (although most tweaking mods tend to FIX the intended experience rather than replace it, such as fan patches or experience rebalance).

 

[V da Mighty Taco]

If you want to compare video games to books, then mods are the fanfictions of books.

^ This. People write fanfictions of movies, books, and television shows (and yes, to a lesser extent video games too) all the time. Mods are in a way another form of it. Just remember that none of it's canon and everything's okay.

Another (probably better) way to look at it is that mods are the equivalent of house rules in board games. Keep in mind that video games are still games and that sometimes people like to play with a different set of rules rather than the official ones.

 

[Erana]

snip

first off in my opinion games are not "art" i wish people would stop fooling themselves and trying to put video games up on the art pedestal(true,now to some degree they are protected by the first amendment) but they they are entertainment no more no less and to this day I've not heard any arguments that convince me otherwise and i wait to hear yours.

I just have to know- have you had any form of formal arts education? I mean, something beyond basic instruction.

 

[lacktheknack]

first off in my opinion games are not "art" i wish people would stop fooling themselves and trying to put video games up on the art pedestal(true,now to some degree they are protected by the first amendment) but they they are entertainment no more no less

...

So Art:

http://www.vargagallery.com/Marcel%20Duchamp%20-%20Toilet%20ready-made%20-%20Dada-Movement%20-%201917%20-T1.JPG
-"Fountain" from the Dadaist Movement, comprised of a urinal turned on its side

..versus Not Art:

http://videogamewriters.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/elshaddai.jpg
-Screencap from recent game "El Shaddai", which isn't art because it is entertainment, artistic direction and color palette and graphic design be damned

Please define art for me. You eagerly anticipate other people telling you why games are art, but I eagerly anticipate YOU telling ME why art is mutually exclusive to entertainment (art galleries must be the most boring places in the universe). The best way for you to do this would be to concentrate your thoughts and tell me what art even is.

 

[MrMoustaffa]

My point is that, adding cool third-party content like extra spells, flying dragon mounts and new NPCs and altering gameplay mechanics and overhauling graphics... doesn't that fundamentally change the experience? If you play Skyrim with mods right off the bat, can you really say you've played Skyrim?

Keep in mind, I'm not saying mods are bad and shouldn't exist. I'm just wondering what they mean in the context of games as an artform. What do you think?

Its not really that much different than a musician playing a cover of a song and changing the song slightly (or radically) to their interpretation of it. Basically modders approach it the same way. They see a game and go "wow, this has a lot of potential". Then they realize that theres something missing for them. Maybe they think the spell system could be better, maybe there could be more zombies, or maybe they just want a really cool hat. They use the game as inspiration and a tool to make their own ideas a reality. I mean just look at some of the incredible mods people put into games like Oblivion and Fallout, some of which have almost double the content of the original game. Yet they would never have been possible without the original game to build off of.

The only way it "ruins" the artistic value I think would be just that maybe the people who originally made it dont really care for it. It would be like comparing the Kingsmen's version of "Louie Louie" to Motorhead's version of it. Yeah, I'm sure the Kingsmen arent too fond of Motorheads version, but there are people who prefer it over the original (and if you want to get really anal, the Kingsmen technically covered it off some guy from Washington, cant remember his name though)

 

[booker]

snip

first off in my opinion games are not "art" i wish people would stop fooling themselves and trying to put video games up on the art pedestal(true,now to some degree they are protected by the first amendment) but they they are entertainment no more no less and to this day I've not heard any arguments that convince me otherwise and i wait to hear yours.

I just have to know- have you had any form of formal arts education? I mean, something beyond basic instruction.

my i ask the same of you or anyone else on this page.imo art is open to the individual.i don't see it as art.now since I've admitted not having schooling on the subject E.T. would you please be oh so kind to show your degree in art.I'm pretty sure you don't have one either.

If you believe that art is up to one's own individual preference then how come you insist that others do not find certain video games as art? Who says it's a great achievement that some work or craft is considered to be an art?

 

[Erana]

snip

first off in my opinion games are not "art" i wish people would stop fooling themselves and trying to put video games up on the art pedestal(true,now to some degree they are protected by the first amendment) but they they are entertainment no more no less and to this day I've not heard any arguments that convince me otherwise and i wait to hear yours.

I just have to know- have you had any form of formal arts education? I mean, something beyond basic instruction.

my i ask the same of you or anyone else on this page.imo art is open to the individual.i don't see it as art.now since I've admitted not having schooling on the subject Erana would you please be oh so kind to show your degree in art.I'm pretty sure you don't have one either.

I have a BFA, and I'm starting grad school in fine arts this Tuesday. At one of the top five schools in America. I left my degree in another state, sadly, so I can not show you it.

 

[lacktheknack]

snip

one art definition coming up.


art

?noun
1.
the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.
2.
the class of objects subject to aesthetic criteria; works of art collectively, as paintings, sculptures, or drawings: a museum of art; an art collection.
3.
a field, genre, or category of art: Dance is an art.
4.
the fine arts collectively, often excluding architecture: art and architecture.
5.
any field using the skills or techniques of art: advertising art; industrial art.

Awesome! So entertainment isn't mutually exclusive from art?

By definition one, we have games that are appealing and beautiful and significant, such as Psychonauts, El Shaddai, Crysis, etc.

By definition two, we CAN ascribe aesthetic criteria to games, such as its art direction, modelling, animation, color choices, and such. Certainly more than we can give to books, which many claim to be art, so that's a big bump in video games' favor.

By definition three, we have WHOLE SCHOOLS dedicated to 3D modelling and digital art design, usually used in games.

By definition four, well that's pretty exclusive, and doesn't include video games, but hey, they have company with books and films and comics and other forms of "not fine art". Of course, this clearly doesn't matter, what with these all being universally accepted as art forms.

And definition five, video game creation is CHOCK FULL of people skilled in art doing what they do best! In fact, there's more art direction needed in games than some forms of theatre and dance!

So, I guess you've gone and proven that games are art. Huh, how about that.

 

[booker]

snip

one art definition coming up.


art

?noun
1.
the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.
2.
the class of objects subject to aesthetic criteria; works of art collectively, as paintings, sculptures, or drawings: a museum of art; an art collection.
3.
a field, genre, or category of art: Dance is an art.
4.
the fine arts collectively, often excluding architecture: art and architecture.
5.
any field using the skills or techniques of art: advertising art; industrial art.

May I also say that, in composing my previous reply, I was struggling to find an adequate personal definition of "art". And it just so happens that the very first definition you provided I think is "in the ballpark."

Super Metroid is art because it is a work that is of more than ordinary significance. The level of effort in many areas: the music, the art direction, the controls (the controls!), the creatures' behaviours, the storytelling through gameplay (write that one down) that really makes Super Metroid "significant". Notice how this is just a standard video game? It's not meant to be "art-y". Yet it still manages to be so much more than a normal video game. And that, my friend, is art.

 

[booker]

snip

first off in my opinion games are not "art" i wish people would stop fooling themselves and trying to put video games up on the art pedestal(true,now to some degree they are protected by the first amendment) but they they are entertainment no more no less and to this day I've not heard any arguments that convince me otherwise and i wait to hear yours.

I just have to know- have you had any form of formal arts education? I mean, something beyond basic instruction.

my i ask the same of you or anyone else on this page.imo art is open to the individual.i don't see it as art.now since I've admitted not having schooling on the subject Erana would you please be oh so kind to show your degree in art.I'm pretty sure you don't have one either.

I have a BFA, and I'm starting grad school in fine arts this Tuesday. At one of the top five schools in America.

maybe you can actually come up with an actual real reason for me to change my mind.(though honestly you probably won't)

If you're so dead set with games not being art, then how come you're still posting here?