We need an IndyMogul VideoGaming community

[luv4paintball]

We need an Indy Mogul Video Gaming community because, face it, we all know that if we aren't doing something film related then we're eating, sleeping, still going to school, or video gaming, or possibly a combination of all at the same time.

I say we all post our online User names for different gaming systems, and wut games, clans, etc that we have/are in.

PS3:
luv4paintball

Games;
Resistance FOM, Clan; Resistood
MotorStorm
GHIII
UT3

[CreepyClownpro]

I don't have times to play games anymore.

between school, film, friends, family and guitar i have know time for them.

the only thing i play now is like gta once every 2 month to relieve stress by shooting civilians... lol

I never really cared to much for video games, even when i could play them.

but thats just me.....

[WesScog]

We've got a Xbox Live and PS accounts thread somewhere around here.

[luv4paintball]

We've got a Xbox Live and PS accounts thread somewhere around here.
Oh, I didn't see one, not that i searched all to much, but thanks for lettin me know WesScog. I'll try to go and find that one.

[New Spark Films]

An Indy Mogul Video Gaming community is exactly what we DON'T need. Despite what you may think, not all filmmakers here are avid videogamers. We need less video game talk on these forums. This is a filmmaking community, not a videogaming one.

[CreepyClownpro]

An Indy Mogul Video Gaming community is exactly what we DON'T need. Despite what you may think, not all filmmakers here are avid videogamers. We need less video game talk on these forums. This is a filmmaking community, not a videogaming one.

preach:D

[Fisherking]

I only worry that some members derive too much inspiration from computer games. Computer games may be fun, but as a lesson in story-telling, they are to be avoided.

[NaziActionFigure]

An Indy Mogul Video Gaming community is exactly what we DON'T need. Despite what you may think, not all filmmakers here are avid videogamers. We need less video game talk on these forums. This is a filmmaking community, not a videogaming one.
Amen, brother.

[luv4paintball]

An Indy Mogul Video Gaming community is exactly what we DON'T need. Despite what you may think, not all filmmakers here are avid videogamers. We need less video game talk on these forums. This is a filmmaking community, not a videogaming one.
first off, this is the offtopic area, so it's fair game, secondly, i never said we were all avid video gamers, I figure that if your planning on clicking this topic, that you clearly see that it's already about video games, therefore, if you don't like it, don't click it.

[ciwi286]

I only worry that some members derive too much inspiration from computer games. Computer games may be fun, but as a lesson in story-telling, they are to be avoided.

True dat! I am quite a videogamer but as a general rule I just dont watch videos based on/parodied off of/including characters from video games. Also I'm sure once we get into it a couple of fanboy wars would start as a result. *Nintendo REPRESENT*

[felix78]

my life belongs to video games. but i've quit playing WoW, so i'm playing kinda everything now for computer. other then that i've got a Wii.

Steam: felix78 or Roller, not sure wich of them.

[Vaughn Whynot]

i think it would be good
and each user could do a game review of there choice

[Iris Van Entertainment]

I'm currently playing City of Villains/Heroes. I'm usually on every night after midnight (central). My global handle is @Merziallas. I mostly play as a villain on the Freedom server.

I am also following a game in production called Exanimus. It's a zombie apocalypse MMO that looks very intriguing.

See my sig for the thread I started on it and their website. And if you sign up on the forums there, you can put Deaden as your reference. I would very much appreciate it.

[NinternMike]

Anyone saying Video Games can't represent good storytelling, go play Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, and most importantly Mass Effect. Those games are scary in the story they tell.

It's just as much a form of storytelling as Filmmaking.

[FreshMentos]

Mass effect or Metal Gear solid are the only games that could make solid movies. I believe that a game with a great story could only make a mediocre film. Stories are never really developed too much in a game because you spend 95% of the time playing it.

And NinternMike, Jade Empire? I don't think so. That game's plot is so cliche. It's just a basic plot of revenge with a twist at the end.

[NinternMike]

who said anything about Film translation? I said storytelling.

Jade Empire just kicked ass...and was a lot of fun story wise, even if the plot was cliche. The fact was, you actually got to be that cliche and kick everyones ass! I felt like i was in an old movie and that i was f'ing Bruce Lee.

[BoonMcNougat]

Pokemon had a damn good story.

[Fisherking]

Anyone saying Video Games can't represent good storytelling, go play Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, and most importantly Mass Effect. Those games are scary in the story they tell.

It's just as much a form of storytelling as Filmmaking.

I'm not saying computer games can't be an effective story-telling medium, merely that it is a young medium and that its early commercialisation may have retarded a lot of potential experimentation with the genre.

It's only been around twenty years since technology has been advanced enough to even bother introducing cursory stories (granted, I am excluding text adventures, but this is a simplified history). Hell, until only very recently has hiring actual writing staff become mainstream - prior to which, most games would have their development staff patch together a plot.

I'm not saying computer games cannot be an effective story-telling medium. Rather, at the moment, they are taking tentative steps towards their realisation as an acceptable artistic medium. Major problem being that, at the moment, it doesn't seem we quite know how to tell stories in this form. At the moment, it seems many developers are leaning heavily towards film for narrative devices. I believe that this is a poor use of the medium. If I may extend my pitiful two cents, I believe that the future of interactive story-telling is evident in something like Half-Life, wherein one interacts with the story, as opposed to Metal Gear Solid, in which one watches a story interspersed with playable sections.

Computer games have really only been around for about thirty-five years. Film didn't become a respectable medium in thirty-five years, nor have computer games. Put simply, people need to learn how to use the features of the medium to most effectively tell a tale. This is a long, tedious process. Encouragingly, it can only improve over time. I fear that the early commercialisation of computer games may retard them as a medium, but I would be happy to be proven wrong.

Remember, it took 2700 years to get from Homer's "The Odyssey" to Joyce's "Ulysses."

[WesScog]

I disagree completely, the 30's in film gave us Gone with the Wind, The Wizard of Oz, the Universal Monster Classics, M, The Testament of Dr. Masbuse, 42nd Street, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, The Rules of the Game, Cleopatra, Duck Soup, Alexander Nevsky, and 39 Steps.

And in just a few short years after the end of the 30's, you got Citizen Kane, almost universally regarded as one of the greatest, if not the greatest, film ever.

Also, I have played some REALLY creative games, I think games have definitely developed as a medium, and have pushed the limits of what art can and cannot be.

People are simply not recognizing the importance of them, because critics are ALWAYS dismissive of new mediums. ALWAYS.

Films that critics dismissed as silly nonsense 100 years ago are now treasured for their cultural importance. The same will happen with video games.

[Fisherking]

I disagree completely, the 30's in film gave us Gone with the Wind, The Wizard of Oz, the Universal Monster Classics, M, The Testament of Dr. Masbuse, 42nd Street, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, The Rules of the Game, Cleopatra, Duck Soup, Alexander Nevsky, and 39 Steps.

You got me. My comparison was a vast over-simplification, I'll concede. However, we cannot expect the development of computer games to echo film, as film is distinct from computer games in several puissant regards.

Most importantly, computer games are really the first interactive medium. You engage with film, portraiture and literature in only a passive, emotional and intellectual sense, whereas a computer game actively incorporates the actions and the input of a player in a profound sense. This brings a large number of complications that other mediums did not incur. It also introduces a technical consideration. Film was obviously restricted by a technical component, but not to an extent comparable with computer games. Film is displayed on a projector, which is essentially a light and two motors; computer games involve mammoth number-crunching by a CPU. The reason games prior to around twenty-five years ago didn't have plots was because processor power dictated a simplicity that precluded anything more complicated that a pixel moving back-and-forth shooting other pixels. That's not a plot - it's a situation.

We've seen some experimentation with things like dynamic branch-pathing and text-recognition, but much of these things are still in an early stage; consigned more to the fore-front of computer science. Consider that Facade was produced by as a post-doctoral research project, then we see clearly that the entry level for computer gaming is much higher. Put simply, to develop the tools to allow computer gaming to develop, one must invariably be doctoral-level. The degree to which the machinations of academia dictated the tools early filmmakers could use was minimal, whereas, for computer games, technical innovation comes almost entirely from academia.

I'm not trying to state that innovation can come only from expanded technology (Civilization, the greatest game ever made, is solid proof to the contrary), but, let's face it, it is a major factor. At the moment, developers have a very small number of tools with which they can work. The last game I can recollect that really tried to allow player's decisions to change the plot was Deus Ex, which, though commendable, really only consisted of a number of binary decisions which would slightly change dialog or encounters at a later stage. You start and end in the same place, every level is the same regardless of your actions. This is quite understandable, as programmers invariably do not which to create huge amounts of content that they player may very well never see. This would add an enormous amount of development time and is unlikely to add to the game's longevity in the market-place.

Another factor I hinted at, but perhaps didn't fully expand upon until recently, was the early adoption of computer games as a commercial property. It seems to me that this has retarded a lot of prospective experimentation with the medium. There is little investment in more 'unusual' games - something like like Gun or Fear being a safer economic bet. Film established the studio system; the computer game industry was eager to adopt that model, which it did almost immediately. If I may extend some personal politics: The studio model is great for making money but, as a means to innovation, it has a lot to answer for.

More simply: Computer games are comparable to film, but distinct in many ways. A comparison can be pushed only so far. They are a new and exciting medium. An interactive medium. It's going to take a while.

I earnestly believe that it will eventually have recognition as a respectable medium. Perhaps (I certainly hope) we will see people like Sid Meier, Will Wright and Ron Gilbert exalted as early pioneers.

It's difficult to ponder, as very few artistic mediums have had their development recorded in such detail as film or computer games. The history of film is interesting, to be certain, but the degree to which it is applicable to the development of other mediums is impossible to quantify.

Edit: I believe this may be the longest ever post on this forum. It's about video games as a viable medium. I win the nerd crown.

[WesScog]

Well I disagree, I don't see commercialization as a weakness, I see it as a strength, if a technology can be marketable, you're going to see money reinvested in the technology, which means faster innovation.

It's made games a ubiquitous art form, enjoyed by such a wide cross-section of the population, and branching in so many different directions.

I think that commercialization is a good thing. Someone might start out reading a popular novel, like Harry Potter, or a Stephen King Novel (Both of which I think can definitely stand on their own from a narrative perspective), but someone might start reading a more conventional narrative, and move into other genres, classical literature, poetry, ergodic literature, experimental stuff, old stuff, new stuff, good stuff, bad stuff.

'Commercial' pop literature can be a gateway to less conventional stuff, just like most of us didn't start out watching Eraserhead, or reading Gravity's Rainbow.

Same thing for games, you might start out with Halo, but you might end up playing a Surreal totally non-conventional game like Katamari or Darwinia.

And there are a lot of more commercial games, like Dues Ex that have a rather open-ended environment, and non-specific objectives, a storyline and activity that reflects what you think is important and what you want to do.

The GTA games are a great example, Rockstar is the master at creating these kind of open-ended games that appeal to a rather large commercial market, I remember Will Wright was giving a speech related to Spore, and why open-ended games are popular, and how people playing games love contributing to the game, they love customizing, and feeling like they are in control of something instead of just being along for the ride.

And he talked about how he loved that you really didn't have to complete any of the missions, and he showed off his character from San Andreas, a skinny guy with a pink Barbie watch, and how he loved just riding his Bicycle around in the game (that's why his character was so skinny), and doing Bicycle tricks, and he never killed anyone.

Or in Bioshock, the game is very open-ended, and you get to make open moral decisions that affect the outcome of the game, or heck, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. where it has this MASSIVE open-ended terrain, where you just explore, and do pretty much whatever you want, and once again, your moral decisions reflect the outcome of the game.

Of course many of these formats are similar to the "Choose Your Own Adventure" books, but they still represent a advancement over straight linear narrative formats.

There are plenty of video games that I don't think fit in very well with being compared to film, or being a reflection of film as a narrative device.

Lots of games are surreal puzzle games, or psychedelic eye candy, Meteros, Tetris, Res, Lumines, Bubble Bobble.

Most of the early games are VERY surreal, requiring great leaps of imagination to connect what they were supposed to represent with what they actually were, requiring arguably more viewer participation to emerge yourself into it.

The technology has opened up so many doors, and developed so far, and I don't see the commercialization as a limitation, there are constantly new technical things that can be done with a game, but games are created (and get a LOT of attention) all the time by individuals or small teams or partnerships, it requires almost nothing to create a game, except for basic programming knowledge, a little artistic skill, and an idea.

The modding community shows how capable fans are at making their own games. I've seen some really weird, and interesting mods out there.

I remember one Counter-Strike Mod I played where you had to dodge Hobo's and throw change at them, and wave your briefcase at them to get past.

How innovative is that? Turned a shooter into a survival game, only you're opponents are Hobo's? That's really weird, and creative to me.

But I have seen so many interesting things done in every section of gaming, seen amazing technical advances, seen amazing graphical ideas (I remember a shooter I played that looked like all of the textures were graphite pencil drawings, it was AMAZING, very surreal), really interesting story structures (everything from totally surreal, to every kind of narrative you can think of, to non-linear, etc.) I don't really understand what limitations that commercialization of games has really created.

Of course games are a totally new format, but just how film is a very young format, who like games relied on a convergence of just the right elements of art and technology to create a meta-art, that is a combination of all art forms, AND a representation of the pinnacles of technology, games are the same way.

Films came at the height of the Industrial era, mass-production was making machines like the Film Camera relatively affordable, and advances like affordable celluloid film making things easier to record. Just like how games are influenced by film, film was influenced by novel narratives, but it was more than that.

And although games are influenced by film narrative, I don't see this as a limitation, just a different branch, a most accessible branch, and thus a popular branch. There are more "poetic" games, more experimental and surreal games, just like there are less conventional films, you've got your Eraserheads, and Tetsuo's, and "A Movie's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Movie)", next to your Wizard of Oz's, Star Wars, and ET's.

Just how most novels are rather straightforward, and how most television is straightforward, and most films are straightforward, most games are too.

To make the technology continually drive forward, I think it was an excellent decision to make mostly narrative games, games that individuals can create today on almost no budget, are a Quantum leap over what was possible 20 years ago, and are comparable favorably to popular games of 10 years ago.

With technology constantly moving forward, not just in game, but in cinema, what a person can create on a relatively slim-to-nothing budget, is usually about 10 years behind what can be accomplished by larger teams and lots and lots of money.

I find that really astounding, and without commercialization, I think we would have seen much more stagnation, much less people into games, much less people inspired to create new kinds of games, much less people creating games at all.

[Fisherking]

Appealing to my love of Thomas Pynchon will get you everywhere (hell, I'm just amazed you remembered).

I think that commercialisation, at best, can be said to be a double-edged sword. It is very much the case that, absent an economic imperative, there is likely to be little investment in a field. As much as I'd like to delude myself that academia researches these subjects with a purely altruistic and research-driven intent, they are as much money-driven as the entertainment industry (Education Inc., anyone?). If a subject was not fecund, it would not be researched. Simply put, if there isn't a dollar at the end of the tunnel, no one would care to wade through it. Venture capitalism is not philanthropy, as much as those being ventured upon would like to believe. This is, of course, the reason that all the greatest scientists tend to be picked up by the military. Also, as mentioned, it opens up a field to a prospective talent pool larger than it would have otherwise.

Conversely, commercialisation tends to result in a proliferation of 'safe bets.' Much of the touted 'innovation' is solely graphical in nature as, if the consumer base has indicated anything, it's that they like their games pretty. Many information technology companies have abandoned their pure research wings entirely.

I'm somewhat weary of the argument that Harry Potter or A Series of Unfortunate Events (that's the new one, right? I'm pretty out of it) encourages broader reading. It 'encourages' broader reading in the same sense that any other child's book does. A work is deemed 'high' either via its emotional profundity (Crime and Punishment, For Whom the Bell Tolls), its large assumed body of knowledge (Gravity's Rainbow, Finnegans Wake) or some combination thereof. Neither of these would be emotionally or intellectually satisfying for a child (even if they had a sufficiently advanced vocabulary) - ergo, one must be 'trained,' if you will, on a go-ahead plot and direct language. It will grant them the comprehension to move on to other things. Sorry to use a cliché, but one must know the rules in order to break them. Though I must say, at the fear of being thought hopelessly pompous, that it frightened me to see so many educated adults consumed in these books.

I'm not certain that this may be applied analogously to computer games.

I strongly agree that the trend towards openness is more-or-less a good thing. I'm encouraged to see a more free-form approach to gameplay, though I don't view linearity with the rancour of some. I prefer to think of linearity as a narrative decision (though I suppose, initially, it was a technological necessity). I'll have to disagree with you about Bioshock involving "open moral decisions," however - as Yahtzee expertly pointed out, it's basically a binary decision that dictates sunshiningoutofarse benevolence or puppyeating evil. I believe the quote was something akin to (paraphrasing) "they keep talking about choices but, in the end, it's just the same old choice."

Regardless of the specifics (about which we could surely back-and-forth ad infinitum), I think the comment about "choose your own adventure" is largely correct. I don't believe, however, that this will remain the case indefinitely. I'm fairly excited about that. Tangentially, have you ever heard of the Party (http://proceduralarts.com/pressreleases/pressrelease3.html)? I think they're still sourcing the money, but it sounds very interesting.

I've missed many over the more interesting games you've spoken of, as my thumb has been all-but-removed from the pulse of computer gaming. Some of them sound quite groovy (I like concept of the graphite-drawing); others, not so much. My inner-hippy has been extremely disappointed by the purported 'art' games, many being utter dross (Sturgeon's Law strikes again).

I'll similarly agree with you about the hostility of critics to new mediums. Much mirth ensues from Shakespeare being the Micheal Bay of his era (albeit far more ribald and vulgar), but few are aware of the disdain for Tchaikovsky, who dared use 'crass' folk music in his compositions. I would suggest that any form of expression is good, as it adds to the marketplace of ideas, which is, I believe, the greatest metric of the prosperity of a society.

But Halo still sucks.

[himynamesryan]

There is a Gaming Community coming ing April called Gaming Aftermath. Mark Andrews is The creator of it, It will have a bebo, Youtube, Website, Myspace and iTunes podcast.

[toppie34]

dont worry guys my only 2 names on any game that i chose is thejojo and toppie34

[CreepyClownpro]

LONGEST POST'S EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

kudos to both of you!

[NinternMike]

Pokemon had a damn good story.

Say what you want about Pokemon, but that story is pretty damn addictive. The games are designed geniusly. I'm 19 and still want to buy a DS just so i can play the new pokemon. I'll admit it :P

[Poppyl90]

any1 got Call of Duty 4,5 Rock Band(2) or Guitar Hero Metallica? ill play you.

GamerTag - Pepsigamer101

[Globeversal Pictures]

We need an Indy Mogul Video Gaming community because, face it, we all know that if we aren't doing something film related then we're eating, sleeping, still going to school, or video gaming, or possibly a combination of all at the same time.

I say we all post our online User names for different gaming systems, and wut games, clans, etc that we have/are in.

PS3:
luv4paintball

Games;
Resistance FOM, Clan; Resistood
MotorStorm
GHIII
UT3

I dont think we do because i don't really play video games
all day

[brandon.harw]

I'm currently playing through half life 2 and silent hill 1 and I recently beat silent hill 2 and 3 (I should have played 1 before 3 I know...)

[thedudestone]

If we do make a video gaming community can we try to focus on prominent indie game developers instead of the main stream stuff? It's not that I have anything against main stream; it's just that I have never found a gaming community that focuses on indie developers. The prominent or upcoming indie developers seem very divided and you have to hunt them down.

[Nonsensical studios]

Anyone have LBP? Quite easily one of the best Indie games I have ever played. It is probably my favorite game as well.

[michaelbak]

Anyone have LBP? Quite easily one of the best Indie games I have ever played. It is probably my favorite game as well.

I love LBP. Search "Flaming Brick" and play mah levels! Also don't you just hate H4H?