|
|
|
|
|
by lgieron
4585 days ago
|
|
I think most people associate video games with games based solely around reflexes and (shooting, jumping) accuracy. When you think about it, these games are just more advanced variants of throwing rubber ball against the wall (or whatever prison inmates did in their cells to kill time before they got TV). They provide no way to enrich or better your life whatsoever (well, ok, better reflexes) and can be even thought of as detrimental - while playing these games you're not excercising your social skills, your intelligence and judgment, not to mention your body. TV or movies on the other hand, even the most stupid and superficial ones, put you (virtually) in a social context, where you can observe other people, think about their actions, think about how you would've reacted etc. Stories or characters in TV movies can be inspiring (meaning can influence your goals/actions in a positive way) or can be a cautionary tale. While it's theoretically possible for a game story to achieve the same, in practice the stories and the execution ("acting" by 3D models) are too weak for the positive effects to kick in. The models are probably a lot to blame there - since it's been shown that various facial expressions are one of main ways to estabilish empathetic communication, faces of in-game 3D model are just too fake to trigger the right neurons. |
|
Two clips you might find interesting: - Brian Wong of Kiip talking about how Counter Strike made him good at photoshop (I don't think this is a serious counter arguement to your point): http://youtu.be/BAx7Npsrin4?t=4m40s
- Gabe Newell (Valve) and JJ Abrams (Lost, Alias, Star Trek) talking about similarities/differences between narrative in video games and movies, and at the end announcing that they're working together on one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7mihllgiro