• Brian Moriarty goes to the mat to argue that "video games can never be art" in "An Apology for Roger Ebert", a speech he presented at the 25th Game Designer's Conference in March 2011. Movie reviewer Roger Ebert caught flak from thousands of gamers after making statements along this line in 2005 and again in 2010 – yet Moriarty points out that Ebert was correct in noting: "No one in or out of the field has ever been able to cite a game worthy of comparison with the great dramatists, poets, filmmakers, novelists and composers."
Moriarty delves into the history of art in many media, draws classic games into the argument to broaden the scope – "If Chess and Go, arguably the two greatest games in history, have never been regarded as works of art, why should Missile Command?" – and discusses the nature of kitsch and Arthur Schopenhauer's world view in order to get at the heart of why Ebert's statement is true. From Moriarty's essay:
Quote:
In my "Digital Game Design I" class, I define "play" as superfluous activity. I define a "toy" as something that elicits play, and a "game" as a toy with rules and a goal. Games are purposeful. They are defined as the exercise of choice and will towards a self-maximizing goal.
But sublime art is like a toy. It elicits play in the soul. The pleasure we get from it lies precisely in the fact that it has no rules, no goal, no purpose.
A brilliant essay that provides much to ponder, no matter where you fall on the games are/can be/never will be art spectrum. Check it out!But sublime art is like a toy. It elicits play in the soul. The pleasure we get from it lies precisely in the fact that it has no rules, no goal, no purpose.
• Spielbox has opened voting for its "Guess the Spiel des Jahres" contest. Enter early for your best chance at winning. Oh, and choose the right game, too.
• Codito Development has posted screenshots of the Tikal and Puerto Rico iPad apps that it has in the works.
• As for other cardboard-to-digital developments, I had previously overlooked this Geeklist from Maciek Kasprzyk and others, which looks ahead to all the iPhone/iPad conversions coming in 2011.
• Designer Richard Garfield was interviewed about Netrunner at the Cannes game festival in February 2011. Netrunner, for those who don't know, was a collectible card game created by Garfield and published by Wizards of the Coast in 1996 in the unbelievably large wake of Magic's success. Fifteen years on, Netrunner still has a pool of devoted fans who would love to see the game return.
• Matt Morgan from MTV Geek interviewed Steve Jackson at PAX East in March 2011.
• On his Board Game Back Room blog, Matt Stevenson interviews Sean Ross, designer of Haggis.
• Issue #421 of WIN: The Games Journal is now available in English and German. The issue can be downloaded for free from the website, or ordered through the website with a bonus Ö-deck for Agricola.
• German publisher DDD Verlag has sold out of its Spiel 2010 release 1655: Habemus Papam. DDD is making small changes to the graphic design, while leaving the game play untouched, for a new edition to appear in April/May 2011.
• Check out this ridiculously detailed 3D version of Forbidden Island. Do it make you jealous or inspired?
• Designer Seth Jaffee pontificates on the nature of deck-building games, starting with granddaddy Dominion and ending with a current design project of his – Alter Ego, a superhero-based deck-building game that Jaffee has been brainstorming and testing since mid-2010. (Thought on Jaffee's Eminent Domain are also in the mix.) From Jaffee's post:
Quote:
I think the single most interesting thing about deck building is that the iterative small scale decisions you make throughout the game have a direct relationship with your late game position. Every card you add to or remove from your deck has a lasting impact on the game for you. Which means that you need to consider long term ramifications of short term decisions, making even somewhat trivial choices more interesting.
What does this mean in terms of designing a deck building game? It means that for one thing, the end game goal should be clearly stated from the outset, so you have some way to reasonably know what cards you'll want in your deck later on.
Has he diagnosed the pulse of deck-building games the same way that you would?What does this mean in terms of designing a deck building game? It means that for one thing, the end game goal should be clearly stated from the outset, so you have some way to reasonably know what cards you'll want in your deck later on.
• Courtesy of Thomas L. McDonald, I present to you squirrels playing cards.
/pic947044.jpg)
:strip_icc()/pic913167.jpg)
:strip_icc()/pic830183.jpg)
/pic844487.jpg)
/pic827293.jpg)
