Dirty Hipsters said:
_Depression said:
If you want to compare video games to books, then mods are the fanfictions of books.
Well there goes my answer for this thread.
zehydra said:
absolutely. I've used this analogy quite a bit.
Irridium said:
As others have said, mods to games is pretty much fanfiction to books.
That keeps coming up, but here's where I think that analogy breaks down:
Fanfiction (or covers of other songs, as someone else said; or fan films in the context of movies) are inherently distinct from the experience of the original work. A fanfiction is derivative, and relies on the original work, like a mod, but it doesn't change how you perceive the original by altering the original in any way.
For example, one of the things that got really boring and irritating in Oblivion was the lame puffs of coloured smoke that all spells produced. Even when I made a super ultimate spell that could take down a Minotaur in one hit, it was the same effect from the initial "frost" spell. It's one of the primary reasons I never completed that game (as a mage, it made combat very unsatisfying). Now, if I had used a mod that added a bunch of awesome spell effects (I was on the XBOX360, so I had no access to them), it might have been a different experience that actually kept me interested long enough to complete the main story.
My point is that's something fanfiction doesn't really do. It can never really directly change the experience of the original work. I think fanfiction is to books what fan games are to games (example [http://www.sonicfangameshq.com/games.html]). Mods are something different, something unique to games.
mew4ever23 said:
You can't do a straight comparison between games and other artistic mediums, and anyone who says so is a bloody fool.
Gaming is all about player interaction, and modding a game is a more involved interaction with a game.
Anyway, modding just doesn't make a lick of sense in any other medium.
Hmm, those are all good points, very succinctly made.
My point is that -- and this might be just me -- but I think art is about control. It's about guiding someone through a story (even in paintings and sculptures). A game has rules and limits set by the game creators, designed to guide you through the game. With mods, you possess the ability to break those rules and readjust those limits as you see fit. But in the process, doesn't that remove some of the artistry of it? Even if it's an improvement, the mistakes an artist makes are as much a part of his creation as the accomplishments. Modifying someone's work, I think, will always remove a part of what the creator put into it (even if it's a part you don't enjoy). And so it detracts from / dilutes the artistic merit (even though it might be more fun). But that's just me. (And again, I'm not saying mods are bad. It's just something to consider)