Seriously? You can almost win an award for THIS?!

[OtherSideofSky]

This feels more like a proof of concept than anything else. Some flaws in the animation tended to throw me out of the experience, but I like what it's trying to do with atmosphere. I think this would work well polished up and inserted into a larger context, like more robust game. I suppose part of the reason we have indie games is to come up with the ideas for things like this, even if it often takes someone else to iron out the flaws and find something more to do with it. Definitely a worthy endeavor, although it seems a tad trite from the standpoint of the more developed and established art forms.

 

[imnot]

Wait why Have you qouted me, Ididnt right either of them!

Oh the dangers of Control+C...

I was quoting OP, and I must have mispressed something >.>

My bad.

Thats ok, Just found it kind of wierd

 

[IvoryTowerGamer]

The Graveyard and The Path are not supposed to be games, per se. They are supposed to be devices to challenge your emotional and intellectual ideals. One just needs to stop looking at the text (what you see) and start looking at the context (the meaning behind what you see).
If one does not believe they should be nominated for any awards, then I guess they don't believe games are an art form either.

If Tale of Tales are not making games, they should not be categorized as a game developer. Nor should their endeavors be similarly categorized. Lump them in with independent film production or separate them in a miscellaneous category. But do not consider them for awards for making games because that is clearly not what they are doing. This is not a question of "Is the game art?", it's a question of "Is the art a game?".

Despite what the person you quoted says, The Path is definitely a game. You can argue it's a bad game, but it has all the same qualities that other games usually have.

The Graveyard, as I remember it, might be up for debate.

 

[Celestico]

Sigh... Where have I heard this before? Oh yeah, the jocks in my class when we went to the art exibit.

"Oh yeah, that's just a bunch of colours thrown together. Even I can do that!"

This is something that disturbs me, as OP is almost claiming that these games should not exist. He shows great despise for it. But really, these games are VITAL for the gaming scene. Seriously, a medium needs diversity. Both for the pretentious artsy people and rabid action shooter fans. How would the movie industry be without the arthouse? All movies aren't explosions and actions, all movies aren't pretentious. Just because there isin't a clear objective does not mean it's shit.

Has it ocured to you that making a game in full 3D with detailed textures and advanced lightning costs... money? And since the idea behind the indie scene is low budget your arguments contradict each other.

This game isin't made to be played over and over again. And isin't it obvious?

Jesus christ, some indie developers are trying hard to push the medium in other directions and actually do something relevant.

And no I'm not really defending the game as much as "Art" games in general. This is just stupid. If it isin't your thing, and you can't understand anything about indie games, than stay the hell away from them. No one is forcing you.

 

[AngloDoom]

It's like art: (It is art?)

It's not how hard it is to create, it's the ideas behind this. I can't watch this video right now, but I'll give it a guess and say it's very much an experience you're supposed to feel emotionally rather than enjoy.

For example, I believe it was Marcel Duchamp who placed a urinal in an art gallery, put his signature on it, and asked 'is this art'? I'm not an expert in this field, but I believe Some interpreted this message as "Just because I'm an artist, does putting my name on any old crap make it art?" That message is, as such, encased within that urinal with his signature on it. Anyone could have done it, but he thought of the idea, and as such it is accepted by art by a large amount of people.

Not that it has to be your cup of tea, but obviously it appeals to some people otherwise it wouldn't have come close to winning an award. It depends on how much fulfilment you get out of those kinds of experiences, if you do at all.

EDIT -

Okay, after viewing the video, here are my own personal opinions on the subject:

- The game is trying to present an idea.
- The 'gameplay' is only a device to get to that idea.
- Although I personally believe games should make their ideas through a much more interactive experience, games like this are necessary for the next steps in interactivity.

 

[Azaraxzealot]

Sigh... Where have I heard this before? Oh yeah, the jocks in my class when we went to the art exibit.

"Oh yeah, that's just a bunch of colours thrown together. Even I can do that!"

This is something that disturbs me, as OP is almost claiming that these games should not exist. He shows great despise for it. But really, these games are VITAL for the gaming scene. Seriously, a medium needs diversity. Both for the pretentious artsy people and rabid action shooter fans. How would the movie industry be without the arthouse? All movies aren't explosions and actions, all movies aren't pretentious. Just because there isin't a clear objective does not mean it's shit.

Has it ocured to you that making a game in full 3D with detailed textures and advanced lightning costs... money? And since the idea behind the indie scene is low budget your arguments contradict each other.

This game isin't made to be played over and over again. And isin't it obvious?

Jesus christ, some indie developers are trying hard to push the medium in other directions and actually do something relevant.

And no I'm not really defending the game as much as "Art" games in general. This is just stupid. If it isin't your thing, and you can't understand anything about indie games, than stay the hell away from them. No one is forcing you.

i'm no jock who can't appreciate art or thoughtful uses of certain mediums, but seriously? this is not a "game" worth praising or giving awards to. it's just a granny who sits on a bench and (maybe) dies that costs you money. seriously.

minecraft was more artful AND fun, and it's overall a better example of "games as art" than this piece of crap is

 

[Celestico]

Of course you're not, your arguments are by coincidence very similar.
As the chap just behind you was saying, these games are necessary for the next step in interactivity. It's not suposed to be a 10 hour + epic adventure with space marines and violence and what not. It's conveying an idea. The length of the game is not relevant when you look at quality. Are short movies irrelevant to the movie industry? Nope.

 

[Celestico]

Except that Minecraft is not a game. Just like The Path is not a game, nor is The Graveyard.

A game is leisure activity involving one or more participants where a set of challenges are completed to achieve a definable goal.

None of those programs fit this description. Path and Graveyard are devoid of any challenges, while Minecraft lacks any sort of definable goal.

So games MUST have a definable goal? Is playing in a sandbox not leisure?

 

[Zeetchmen]

An awesome indie-artie game I saw was called The Path.

Its pretty deep stuff.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEI9a2nedEs

 

[Celestico]

Except that Minecraft is not a game. Just like The Path is not a game, nor is The Graveyard.

A game is leisure activity involving one or more participants where a set of challenges are completed to achieve a definable goal.

None of those programs fit this description. Path and Graveyard are devoid of any challenges, while Minecraft lacks any sort of definable goal.

So games MUST have a definable goal? Is playing in a sandbox not leisure?

Yes, playing in a sandbox is a lesiure activity. No it is not a game. Though one might find a way to make a game with the sandbox, the sandbox itself is not a game.

I find your logic a bit flawed to be honest.
A "Game" is a term that is used for anything with gameplay. I think your usage just creates confusion.
I also disagree, saying that minecraft is not a game just does not ring my bell for a number of reasons. If your logic is to be applied, minecraft would be a game when you have a project, like bulding a giant creeper or play capture the flag, but as soon as one does not have a project, it ceases to be a game. Am I right?
Also, isin't staying alive from zombies a clear challenge and goal? I would say that it most definitely is.

 

[jowo96]

First off, I agree that The Graveyard looks just terrible although not having played it I accept that I may be missing the bigger picture. Regardless to look at one bad game (refering to the original post now)and say that the entirety of the indy games scene is low quality tripe is a hugely unfair suggestion, if we ignore all of the cool little artsy games like Limbo, Today I die, Everyday the same dream (which I personally liked) As for the good 3D games look at games like Killing Floor, Red Orchestra, Overgrowth, Interstellar Marines, Zeno Clash and The Ball.


And you can't make huge sweeping statements like "ALL INDIE GAMES ARE RUBBISH" and then dismiss studios like Mojang for being too successful.

 

[IvoryTowerGamer]

Except that Minecraft is not a game. Just like The Path is not a game, nor is The Graveyard.

A game is leisure activity involving one or more participants where a set of challenges are completed to achieve a definable goal.

None of those programs fit this description. Path and Graveyard are devoid of any challenges, while Minecraft lacks any sort of definable goal.

By that reasoning, The Sims, the new Prince of Persia, and Farmville also wouldn't be games. If they aren't games, what are they?

Nowadays very few developers use the definition you posted above. They recognize that goals can be implied (as in the case of Mincraft), and that difficulty can be mitigated for players who enjoy creativity and storytelling more than overcoming some arbitrary challenge. These type of games might not be for everyone, but neither are challenge-based games.

 

[BlackWidower]

How have you not heard of Minecraft?

Minecraft sucks. It's empty and hollow. There is literally nothing there.

Minecraft is only what you make it. That's what makes it so different. What does your statement say about you?

Nothing. It says that Minecraft sucks. What your statement says is Minecraft is as much a game as Photoshop is a game.

I enter Minecraft, and there is literally nothing to do. If I have to come up with my own fun it's not really a game is it? More of a creativity tool that just happens to be in 3D and first person.