What happens when a non-gamer judges for game award?

[shiajun]

The fancy dudes over at Rock, Paper, Shotgun put this [http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/41f8bcc0-1158-11e2-a637-00144feabdc0.html#axzz29H2l6XIP] in their Sunday Papers column. This woman, who has never ever played a game in her life, and actually has a inherent distrust for them, agrees to judge games for an award show (I'm guessing game of the year). I found it quite an amusing and intersting read. This is not conan o' brian being funny and snarky for entertainment, this is someone with literally no skill or practice in games trying to get into games that came out this year (including this weird jousting thing she mentions): Super Mario Bros.3D land for the 3Ds, Catherine, Fez, Mass Effect 3, Proteus and Journey. The most interesting thing to me was how the only game she seems to have actually gotten a hang of and enjoyed was Journey. Maybe thatgamecompany is on to something after all. Or maybe not, I don't know. I'm too immersed in gamer culture to get the sort of perspective this article alludes to. Anyway, read an enjoy.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

I thought you meant someone who didn't play games had been chosen to select a winner for a normal award. And I was not in the least bit surprised. I think that either says something really bad about me or something really bad about gaming media.

Pretty interesting article though, thanks. Best line by a mile: "I was gobbled up by a brown thing that might have been a toad, though the screen was small and I didn't have my glasses."

However, I agree with the following spiel from the comments. I don't understand how their plan will accomplish their goal and I'm not sure their goal makes sense. I also don't see the point in providing a space for a batty old woman to frig herself to the opinion she already has and brag about how she isn't really learning anything from the games she isn't really playing.

Spoiler

Russ Clarke

My stepfather, who learns everything he knows about games (among other things) from the FT, referred me to this article. I have read the FT's coverage of video games before, so I'm not surprised but can't help being disappointed by this shallow, dismissive effort.

The very idea of a film maker who is too concerned about his "dignity" to participate, wanting to "start a cultural conversation" about video games is too ridiculous. That conversation has been going on for decades, but the participants have been the open minded and the young, who come to the medium without preconceptions. This exercise seems like an attempt by people who feel left behind by their children, to reassert some sort of intellectual grip, without taking any risk of disrupting their world view - like the philistine who trudges round the gallery once every few years, under protest, moaning that modern art is rubbish.

It is slightly refreshing that despite her obvious lack of desire to learn, the writer can't help but have some feelings playing games like Journey and Proteus. You would have to be a stone not to be moved by these works, and they are among the most accessible to gaming virgins. But overall, her attitude is intellectually lazy, akin to a bored teenager mooching around a museum complaining that it's all crap except the samurai swords, and wanting to go home to his playstation. She actually draws no conclusion whatsoever about the cultural impact or emotional content of anything she saw.

Games are not films or novels, and can't be looked at through the same lens - but like films or novels, games span a spectrum encompassing high art and base entertainment, education and escapism, beauty and crass vulgarity. As with other media there is an inevitable pressure between artistic truth and commercialism. There are games that will be played and discussed a hundred years from now, and summer blockbusters that will be forgotten next year.

The medium is here to stay, and long past needing validation from dilettantes who don't really want to broaden their horizons. There is plenty of quality journalism, artistic discourse and philosophical study on the subject for those who actually wish to educate themselves. For the rest, I'd say don't worry yourselves about it. My mate Dave has never read a book and he's perfectly happy.

 

[T_ConX]

Having non-gamers be judges for a game award is like filling the Booker Prizes judging panel with illiterates. She outright admits to being terrible at all the games, which is like a literary critic saying he couldn't get past the third chapter in novel because 'Some of 'em words have, like, SEVEN letters!'

?Vincent is trapped in a nightmare, facing a choice of marrying his longtime girlfriend Catherine or moving on the incredible blonde he just woke up next to ... ?

Are you dead fucking serious?

All you had to do was copy the text from THE BACK OF THE BOX and you still managed to fuck that up! Katherine is his longtime girlfriend! Catherine is the other woman!

English majors...

 

[distortedreality]

People like that woman hurt my head. If you're disconnected from your son, it's because you're an ignorant and arrogant hack. Last time I checked, gaming wasn't to blame for that.

 

[Keoul]

At least it gives us an outside perspective of how the non-gaming community views videogames?
Just saying.

 

[IvoryOasis]

When I want to know what games are good...I ask my mom too

"Oh dear! You shoot little birds at these pigs! And things fall down! This is the best game ever ".

 

[Jak23]

I don't know why but that article made me angry...

 

[Full]

...This was developed by a young man in Elvis Costello spectacles who spent five years ignoring his girlfriend in order to make a game...

Oi Vey.

Anyway, besides that line the rest was a pretty cool read, albeit rather predictable. Premises need to mature and publishers need to not be EA, etc.

 

[Tdoodle]

The concept behind the awards itself seems a little patronising to me. Having an awards show to encourage the discussion of the cultural impact of video games is fine, but only inviting novice gamers? I'm probably being paranoid, but I think that comes with a fairly strong whiff of "gamers aren't cultured enough to discuss the cultural impact of games". At least stick a couple of game journalists or developers in there.

I haven't seen the other judge's comments so sorry for what will probably be a hugely sweeping statement, but based on that article the whole "starting a cultural conversation" notion dies on it's arse when you hand the controller to someone who has no idea what they're doing. In the same way I'd fumble with Ian Macewan's latest novel for a bit before complimenting it's pretty cover, she's got stuck in a corner, missed the jump and handed the controller to someone else in despair, and has a result hasn't got things from the games that someone who played games might.

Encouraging people to try and start a cultural discussion about video games is admirable, but I can't help but feel the current execution is somewhat misguided.

 

[Tdoodle]

[double]

 

[Netrigan]

I think it's an interesting perspective on it. Assuming the others approached it as she did, in which she made an effort to find something positive to say about something she recognized she didn't understand, then what's the harm.

There have been journalists who have waded into worlds they considered just as alien, and so long as they're not there to mock and denegrate its denizens, then there's something useful that can be gleamed from the experience. I'm slightly reminded of Hunter Thompson's book on the Hell's Angels, in which he did his level best to understand them even when he wasn't painting a flattering portrait of them.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

I don't know why but that article made me angry...

Probably because the lady never misses an opportunity to imply that she is too good for video games and you are an idiot for playing them. Oh, also, aspects of her lifestyle that have nothing to do with video games are better than yours somehow by magic. It's true that some people play too many video games when they should be doing other things but assumptions are fucking rude.

I think it's an interesting perspective on it. Assuming the others approached it as she did, in which she made an effort to find something positive to say about something she recognized she didn't understand, then what's the harm.

There have been journalists who have waded into worlds they considered just as alien, and so long as they're not there to mock and denegrate its denizens, then there's something useful that can be gleamed from the experience. I'm slightly reminded of Hunter Thompson's book on the Hell's Angels, in which he did his level best to understand them even when he wasn't painting a flattering portrait of them.

While it was good she found something positive to say, I definitely think she went into this looking to validate her own opinions by playing just enough of a game to be able to say she tried it and found it lacking. She didn't finish any game and it doesn't sound like she ever intended to put significant time into any. Her attitude came off as very dismissive and immature to me. When someone who REALLY really REALLY hates something and takes great pains to make their hatred known says they are finally going to try to like it, you know they are probably going to do the exact opposite. That's what I think this lady does. There are few hints in there that she was even trying to appreciate or understand what was happening when she was playing the game. And it is frickin' drenched with her opinions about what kind of people gamers are and what aspects of her own lifestyle are distinct from and better than theirs.

I don't know, I just don't think she went into this for the right reasons. She came off as really dickish to me actually. The outsiders perspective was interesting, I'll give you that. But I don't see what insights we're going to gain from a bunch of old ladies telling us why they don't like video games, which is essentially all this boils down to as I see it.

 

[teebeeohh]

I love her last statement about parental approval stopping her son from helping her with me3 says that there is no inherent worth to games and the only reason to play them is to piss of your parents. Besides, isn't it much more likely that he didn't want to help her because she clearly hated the game before trying it and didn't put much effort into it.

While the outsiders perspective was interesting I couldn't get into it because she constantly feels the need to mention how what she decides to do is better because a wizard did it. Or something

 

[Evilpigeon]

I think the article is really fascinating, it never really occurred to me that people really could just miss the point of all of these different games. I guess when you're used to passive entertainment it can be difficult to understand something more interactive. The whole article was about her passively waiing for these games to 'wow' her, that's not how games work, they're about challenge, competition, investment in things you've helped to create. They're fundamentally different from most other forms of media, I don't think you're ever going to be able to appreciate gaming in the same way you can appreciate a book because being a part of something is so vastly different to being an observer.