Times chief film critic on videogaming

[pancho]

Excellent article in the Times last week which I've only just got around to reading through. The premise is that James Christopher, chief film critic for aforementioned broadsheet, a gaming virigin, spend a week or so delving into videogaming to find out how the synergy between both art forms is coming along.

The article begins with the (slightly late to the critical party) words "I'm deeply unimpressed by Mark Hammond". Although he goes on to criticise The Getaway's lacking out-of-car physics as "bumbling", his main disppointment is spared for the mission failed screen. More damning to the form than the "forumlaic scripts" and "lacking cyber-scanned" images of actors is the fact that, for Christopher at least, apparantly games are just too hard.

Ok- so far so foreseeable- after all The Getaway demands its players to deftly work around and within its numerous shortcomings in order to find any progress or fun. But, of more interest, at last to a forum such as this, is Christopher's subsequent grappling with, and perhaps weak bladdered fanboys should clutch their branded lunchboxes tight, Ico.

So the article takes an unexpected turn in that it holds up for review a title that firstly most specialist press glossed over and secondly, a game held up as the acme of artisitc gaming by the principle commentators on our pastime. Of particular interest is that this reviewer has never reviewed videogames before (and so has no agenda when it comes to Ico) but is also one of the highest profile film reviewers in the country. Here's what he has to say:

"Take Sony's classic title. Ico, a heroic adventure that requires the mental agility of a crossword puzzle genius. A young boy is whisked from his medieval village and imprisioned in a gothic castle. He has to use wit rather than weapons to negotiatea labyrinth of vast stone chambers. A lever on the handset allows you to scrutinise every corner of each room; a button allows you to zoom in on specific details; and a gear stick allows you to move the yung turk with extraordinary sensitivity. the complexity and "realism" of this interactive film is the beautiful, spooky thrill. The atmosphere reminds me of Hayao Miyazaki's 2002 Berlin Film Festival winner, "Spirited Away" and I derive a great deal of pleasure from making this spindly youth charge full tilt into brick walls. This proves to be the only lean pleasure that I can "direct" in Ico because I can't for the life of me figure out how to get past the firest (and presumably easiest) reel of the story. What's undeniable is the addictive misery of the challenge. Hours of frustration turn me into a bleary-eyed ? Frankly, its a humiliation I could do without"

Ok- Its hardly apocalyptic reviewing now but he raises a valid point. Indeed, Christopher explains his take on why gaming cannot go truly mass market earlier in the article, and perhaps this is the crux of his point, " The problem for people like me is this: hardcore game players have become bored with the cliches of their chosen pastmime and developers have responded by making their games more intracate and therefore more baffling to the novice".

So- lazy reviewing or incisive reasoning?

[Garibaldi]

I have to agree on the ICO point actually, I recently went back to it after purchasing a spanking new t.v and, much to my confusion and frustration, couldn't get past one of the first areas. This was mystifying as I completed it before without too much trouble, yet all of a sudden I had no idea where to go and what to do, ended up turning it off after half an hour of frustrated bumbling.

[roadkill]

He's right. I get bored with how difficult some games are near the beginning. Getting the learning curve right is essential, and very few games get it right. Oddly, the best one I can think of is Chu Chu Rocket's puzzle mode, where it seems to gradually make you work out the various stratefies to complete it.

Things like Skies of Arcadia become tiresome, just because of artificial difficulty put in to amuse people that have too much time on their hands.

[Monkichi 2.0]

It's no more frustrating than not being able to complete a crossword puzzle or one of those 1,000 piece jigsaw puzzles.

The problem with a film reviewer reviewing a game is that he's used to sitting through an experience and then making comments about it. With games you are part of the experince, and effort and skill is required of you.

[roadkill]

The problem with a film reviewer reviewing a game is that he's used to sitting through an experience and then making comments about it. With games you are part of the experince, and effort and skill is required of you.

That's incredibly patronising.

Plenty of the best movies require a level of attention from the viewer most people aren't going to invest.

[Rushy]

I totally agree, games are far to difficult and unacessable to the non-gamers. I'm not saying remove the need for skill in our games but instead make control systems easier, slower learning curves and have clearer goals.

I consider myself an excellent games player, but at times I get baffled by certain games logic and get stuck on unfair or difficult areas.

[Pob]

I totally agree, games are far to difficult and unacessable to the non-gamers. I'm not saying remove the need for skill in our games but instead make control systems easier, slower learning curves and have clearer goals.

I consider myself an excellent games player, but at times I get baffled by certain games logic and get stuck on unfair or difficult areas.

I've said it before, but Metal Gear Solid's codec hints system is the best way forward.

If you're struggling, it detects this and gives you a clue about what to do/where to go. If you still don't get it, it just tells you

[pancho]

hardcore game players have become bored with the cliches of their chosen pastmime and developers have responded by making their games more intracate and therefore more baffling to the novice

One thing I'm not sure about in his logic is this point. In my experience through the years, developers have always made high demands of gamesplayers across all genres from text adventures through to shmups on to 2d fighters.

I guess that the superficial intricacy comes from the leap to 3d.

[Sprite Machine]

It's no more frustrating than not being able to complete a crossword puzzle or one of those 1,000 piece jigsaw puzzles.

Yes it is; because if you can't find one word or one piece of a puzzle, you can still do the rest of it.

'Dead ends' in games will stop people playing. What we need are simple pick-up-and-play games that have no objective (or at least, very few). Open-ended games that you can just play with rather than play through.

[Monkichi 2.0]

That's incredibly patronising.

Plenty of the best movies require a level of attention from the viewer most people aren't going to invest.

It's not patronizing at all and no film requires as much effort as even the most basic game in order to see everything it has to offer. Some films require you to engage your brain and read between the lines, see the bigger picture, but that is totaly different from actual skill.

Comparing two similar experiences, say Independance Day and a generic shoot'em up with a similar theme to Independance day then it's quite obvious the game is going to require more effort from the viewer/player than the film, and that's integral to the review because you can't review a game you've given up on in the first hour. How can he review a game after not being able to get off the early stages? It's like watching the first 30 mins of a film and then writing a review on it.

The film experience is completely passive, the best films engaging your mind and making you think but never in order to progress the experience, more in a retrospective way. Games aren't like that, they rarely have a decent story which stimulates and the quality of the experience relies on the player putting in the effort.

[Caleb Newcastle]

Maybe it's not that they're too difficult but that they're too complicated...

Example: I spent a good 20minutes trying to explain how to do a hadoken to one of my female friends with little success.

Put her in front of Space Channel 5 and she waltzes right through to the part where Blank forces you to do the opposite of what's said (which is further than I ever got).

Go figure...

[pancho]

How can he review a game after not being able to get off the early stages? It's like watching the first 30 mins of a film and then writing a review on it.

Arguably, in this instance, he's reviewing his experience of Ico.

[Pob]

Is the article online? I had a quick look on the Times Online but couldn't find it.

[roadkill]

It's not patronizing at all and no film requires as much effort as even the most basic game in order to see everything it has to offer.

You're a hardcore games player.

If you were equivalently into films you'd know understanding some movies is utterly impossible without concentrating intensively on them for their full duration.

Using mainstream explain everything blockbusters as your benchmark is an utterly inappropriate point of comparison, especially if the game in question is something like Ico.

The advantage films have is they take a finite time to complete, and you know from the tin what that's going to be. With games you can just get stuck too early, and bored, especially if you aren't familiar with all the cliches in the genre.

[pancho]

Is the article online? I had a quick look on the Times Online but couldn't find it.

I don't think so. It was one of the lead features in the click supplement last week (24th)

[Spiral]

I'd be interested to know what he meant by first reel, but I have my suspicions. And if I'm right, I have to agree, it was a bit obscure, even for someone who has played games for most their life. He has a point about things that are now taken as conventions (being able to move hand over hand along a cliff for example) being something that a novice may never pick up on, but to be honest if they would read the manual I'd bet they would find most of the answers there. Alternatively, a system like Soul Reavers where the first time you have to perform an action a bit of text appears telling you exactly what to do, but whether that is enough for a novice I don't know and honestly couldn't tell you.

[Monkichi 2.0]

Arguably, in this instance, he's reviewing his experience of Ico.

No doubt, there's no question he wrote what he thought of the experience, my point is that he lacks experience in game reviewing and also may not appreciate the differences in the medium.

You're a hardcore games player.

If you were equivalently into films you'd know understanding some movies is utterly impossible without concentrating intensively on them for their full duration.

Using mainstream explain everything blockbusters as your benchmark is an utterly inappropriate point of comparison, especially if the game in question is something like Ico.

The advantage films have is they take a finite time to complete, and you know from the tin what that's going to be. With games you can just get stuck too early, and bored, especially if you aren't familiar with all the cliches in the genre.

That's my point. He is a "hardcore" film viewer with years of experience and knowledge which lets him put his film reviews into a far more comprehensive context than I ever could. At the same time he is no more qualified or his view any more authorative when it comes to game just because he is adept at reviewing a different media. What I lack in film knowledge he lacks in gaming knowledge, in fact my experience of film is far greater than his of gaming.

All we have is a well written piece from a man who is obviously adept at putting his thoughts to paper but who's thoughts, on this occasion, are not backed up by any relevant knowledge or experience. I could just as well ask my dad to write a review of a game and he too would give me his opinion, his views on his experience, but they would lack the ability to put these things in context.

[squirtle]

It's not patronizing at all and no film requires as much effort as even the most basic game in order to see everything it has to offer.

I think I saw everything Pong had to offer in about the first two minutes of play.

[squirtle]

No doubt, there's no question he wrote what he thought of the experience, my point is that he lacks experience in game reviewing and also may not appreciate the differences in the medium.

You're a hardcore games player.

If you were equivalently into films you'd know understanding some movies is utterly impossible without concentrating intensively on them for their full duration.

Using mainstream explain everything blockbusters as your benchmark is an utterly inappropriate point of comparison, especially if the game in question is something like Ico.

The advantage films have is they take a finite time to complete, and you know from the tin what that's going to be. With games you can just get stuck too early, and bored, especially if you aren't familiar with all the cliches in the genre.

That's my point. He is a "hardcore" film viewer with years of experience and knowledge which lets him put his film reviews into a far more comprehensive context than I ever could. At the same time he is no more qualified or his view any more authorative when it comes to game just because he is adept at reviewing a different media. What I lack in film knowledge he lacks in gaming knowledge, in fact my experience of film is far greater than his of gaming.

All we have is a well written piece from a man who is obviously adept at putting his thoughts to paper but who's thoughts, on this occasion, are not backed up by any relevant knowledge or experience. I could just as well ask my dad to write a review of a game and he too would give me his opinion, his views on his experience, but they would lack the ability to put these things in context.

Isn't that his point though? Isn't he arguing from a mainstream standpoint? All you're doing is confirming his point which is the reason why games are far from being mainstream.

[Badger]

Surely he's going to be far above the target demographic for computer games?

Try a film reviewer under 30, whose grown up with gaming...

That's how games will become mass market....my generation and the one above it, who are becoming parents etc, and who still find time to play games occasionally..

[Brats]

I completely agree with his conclusion. The other day I was playing Top Spin when my wife (who couldn't be more disinterested in computer games if she tried) asked if she could have a go after watching Wimbledon on telly.

Surprised but delighted, I set up a match between the two of us on women's singles. Expecting her to be a little bit crap, I said that's we'd ignore all of the buttons except the green button. So not only were there no risk shots, but no top spin, back spin or lobs either. Just nice and easy.

The following few sets were painful.

After a few games of me scoring constant aces, she finally got to grips with pushing the button at the right time. The task of then getting her to move around the court to intercept the shot back took another two sets and even then she'd rarely be able to get in position AND remember to hit the button at the right time.

I would like to point out at this time that my wife is very intelligent with a degree. She can drive a car better than me, she can handle cooking a roast for 12 people without a hint of panic, type at nearly 100 words a minute but computer games are just a no go.

It's getting around the interface. Getting used to the idea that using the controller affects your avatar seems very alien to some people. And here we are complaining that the GBA doesn't have enough buttons when non gamers are barely getting to grips with just one.

[Laine]

I find it really difficult to believe that people can't understand moving the stick in a certain direction makes the character move in that direction.

It'd take longer to get to grips with different button pushes, but surely move stick, Mario moves is perfectly simple?

[hub2]

Yes but most of us have been using joy sticks/pads for what 15-20 years? To a person who has never or rarely played a game before a PS2 pad with d-pad, two analogue sticks, 4 shoulder buttons, 4 face buttons, select and start isn't the easiest thing to master. We learned it the easy way, VCS One button stick -> NES two button pad -> MD 3 button pad -> SNES 6 button -> PS Dual shock/n64 pad.

[Spiral]

They understand the concept, it's the actual thought process of "I want to move, so I have to move the left stick with my thumb" that causes problems. A joypad is probably a very unusual interface for anyone not used to it, especially for right handed people since all the movement is done with the left hand.

[Brats]

If it were that easy, people would just get in a car and drive with no lessons needed. Turn wheel = turn car. Push foot = car goes faster.

Plus I don't think it's necessarily the action that is difficult, it's the reaction. When my wife hit the ball back, she'd just stare at the screen and watch me hit it back without reacting. Maybe it's because people are so used to using a TV screen for passive uses?

[Laine]

Yes but most of us have been using joy sticks/pads for what 15-20 years? To a person who has never or rarely played a game before a PS2 pad with d-pad, two analogue sticks, 4 shoulder buttons, 4 face buttons, select and start isn't the easiest thing to master. We learned it the easy way, VCS One button stick -> NES two button pad -> MD 3 button pad -> SNES 6 button -> PS Dual shock/n64 pad.

Yeah, I know.

But I went out and bought a Playstation having never touched anything like it before.

I was running around straight away. It seems perfectly sensible to me.

[squirtle]

Yeah, I know.

But I went out and bought a Playstation having never touched anything like it before.

I was running around straight away. It seems perfectly sensible to me.

But you're a freak. In a good way.

[metallicfrodo]

I took my playstation round to my parents this christmas as they had really got into Dancing Stage from when my sister had lived there and wanted the family to play it together. Anyway watching my aunt play it (in her late 40's never used computers but younger than my parents) was truely eye opening, she just couldn't at all get the concept of what the things going on on screen had to do with what she had to do off screen, totally couldn't make a connection. (this was with dance mats I should point out)

Although have you ever seen anyone use a mouse for the first time, it's the same thing some people just find it very hard to develop the idea that what they are doing physically affects what they do on screen.

Moving away from the screen environment I had a friend at school who just couldn't control a remote control car (we were about 16), there seemed to be something about her spacial awareness that didn't allow her to steer the car in the right direction if it was pointing any way but directly away from her.

[pancho]

I'm not sure his (the reviewer's) point was that he couldn't handle a joystick. He was arguing that progress in a game like Ico is built upon a foundation of games language that has been in-built in players over the years.

His analagy to the cryptic crossword wasn't just a throwaway line: cryptics have a language and unspoken rule base on which they are constructed. You want to complete the Times cryptic crossword and you'll have to understand the language and be aware of the rules. A newcomer will be lucky to get past the first answer cold.

His point was that a game like Ico, one held up as a "classic" (his word) by the gamesplaying critical fraternity, demands its player (at least in his experience) have a rudmentary undertsanding of the language of preogression on which games are built.

The article is fundamentally about the synergy between games and films (he cites the fact Sony had a booth at Cannes this year as a superficial case in point) so the point must be that whereas you needn't be well versed in the language of film screen-writing to appreciate a classic film- to appreciate a classic game you must have the appropriate skill set.

that's my reading of it at least.

[Chorlton]

" The problem for people like me is this: hardcore game players have become bored with the cliches of their chosen pastmime and developers have responded by making their games more intracate and therefore more baffling to the novice".

I think he has a point here. One of the things books,films and music has over games at the moment is that not only do they have different genre's but they also have different levels within genre's, that would appeal depending on whether your looking for a summer blockbuster or if you are looking for something more cerebral.

At this point gaming can't offer this level of depth. Partly this is due to cost,( do you think Requiem for a Dream would have got made if it cost the same as Spiderman 2), but i think its also to do with associating difficulty with age range,as simpler games generally have a very kiddy image, so would be unlikely to catch the eye of someone who only buys a game now and then.

What you end up with is games that try to do everything. They try to appeal to the summer blockbuster crowd, whilst at the same time trying to appease the hardcore gamers as well, with increased difficulty and length.