tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8692381608294018617.post8607911695288088377..comments2023-11-05T07:27:43.837-05:00Comments on Narrative and Technology: Dear Esther as Art and GameAdamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8692381608294018617.post-69470941914329707472014-03-02T13:40:19.453-05:002014-03-02T13:40:19.453-05:00While your intro isn't terribly specific, your...While your intro isn't terribly specific, your framing of D.E. as evolutionary is interesting.<br /><br />Your second paragraph defines it as a game formally without really specifying what *you* consider important, formally, in a game.<br /><br />The third paragraph is interesting but maybe incomplete - it should probably be 2 or 3 times longer than it is. I mean that as a compliment - it's ripe for a revision - but it's a little hard to follow all of the details. I understand that you're arguing, with Ebert (but why do you side with him?) that art requires authorial control; I understand that you're arguing (also with him, but why) that games normally eschew authorial control. You're also arguing that formally DE is a video game while finding novel, game-like ways of conserving authorial control. I think this is what you're saying, and I like it - but I'd like to see it analyzed through delving into specific moments in the game. Your too general at this stage; for this to work as a revision, you need to get into an exploration of - for instance - how authorial control vs. interactivity works as we explore the caves.<br /><br />I think the turn toward Marcuse is too much for a short essay which already is trying to do a lot. What is the game refusing or rejecting? What "is" is it resisting, and what "ought" is it trying to imagine, if only negatively? <br /><br />Overall: This has the right ideas, but it's overly general - you need to deal with deeper details of the game for it to work as it shouldAdamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8692381608294018617.post-52595070648706847572014-02-28T11:56:04.253-05:002014-02-28T11:56:04.253-05:00Jake,
Your approach to the reviews of the reviewe...Jake,<br /><br />Your approach to the reviews of the reviewers’ is one that highlights many good points and utilizes their thoughts effectively. Your first paragraph touches on the similarities shared between Dear Esther and many other games. I agree that it has somewhat of a conventional approach as far as some of the controls are concerned. What I think would’ve helped this continuation of thought, but maybe in a different way, is by providing how it is art outside of the same concepts of a similar game. Touching on that would further solidify your argument as it being an art and a video game, while also aiding to the idea of it being not easy to classify this sort of game easily. So, basically what aspects of the game are artistic when not examining the generic controls? The second body paragraph I really enjoyed because it really gets to the heart of the entire concept of Dear Esther and viewing it objectively as art. Your transition into Marcuse’s writing is good, as it ties in nicely with Dear Esther as a part of art and the Great Refusal. The only thing that is troubling to me is by the end of this final paragraph I’m left wanting more. It’s like you had such a well-developed perspective but right before you really get going you stop. Some more elaboration on Marcuse and it tying into Dear Esther could’ve really solidified your ideas more.<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12873352910242641446noreply@blogger.com