Actually, I fucking well would like you to list the reasons you think my analogy is stupid
The phrase "comic books" as used to describe the medium derives from its original use as collected booklets of existing newspaper strips that, yes, were comical in nature (the first of which was in fact called Famous Funnies). Over time the medium was used to introduce original content in a bevy of genres but by then the nomenclature had already stuck.
Zero of those facts apply to the nomenclature of "video games". Games using graphics and games using text evolved in parallel. The phrase "video games" was coined, specifically, for the purpose of describing the way the medium transmitted visual information to the player.
That's not to say there's not a huge amount of overlap between the two things -- indeed, the entire point-and-click adventure genre is a direct descendant. I'll come back to that in a minute.
I've read enough Rock Paper Shotgun comments whining about how the Twine pieces they sometimes post pieces about aren't "real games" to last a fucking lifetime, so forgive me if I have a kneejerk reaction to arguments like this.
Cute quotation marks, but please do feel free to find any actual quotes where I refer to anything, ever, as not being a real game.
If you want, I CAN find you posts where someone jumped my shit for precisely the opposite reason -- being, to his mind, TOO inclusive for daring to suggest that "casual gamers" are gamers too -- but I think you'll be hard-pressed to find me dismissing things as "not a real game".
The terms "video games" and "computer games" may have been used for different (but analogous) things in the past, but right now in the Year of Our Fucking Lord Two Thousand Thirteen they are virtually interchangeable synonyms, and when you exclude a certain kind of thing from one category it pretty damn well looks like you're excluding it from the other.
That's a lot of outraged words that seem to be saying you misunderstood what I was saying and are very angry about it.
I'm not precisely sure how you could possibly think that I was excluding IF from the category of computer games by excluding it from the category of video games, given that my exact words were "They're certainly computer games."
Look dude, I can feel for your case here. I can be a total pedant about shit too (and I know I was being a hypocrite when I called you on it)! And I understand your need to make language as exact as you can make it. I get bummed out by ambiguous turns of phrase; I get frustrated trying to parse poorly written comments on the internet.
Oh, piss right off.
You're talking like I turned the "Are video games art?" question into a semantic debate.
Precisely what the FUCK do you think it IS?
It is nothing BUT a semantic debate. Take away the semantics and there's no discussion.
Which I'm perfectly all right with. I think it's a frankly stupid discussion, and will come back to that in a moment. But if you're faced with the question of whether video games are art, you've got two choices: dismiss the entire discussion as a waste of time, or acknowledge that you're having a semantic debate.
The only difference between this and the typical route these discussions take is that, while most people tend to focus on the definition of "art", I've gone for the definition of "video game". There is a reason for this.
The question of "What is art?" is an inherently elitist question. It's asked by people who wish to act as gatekeepers and declare things they don't like to be Not Art.
The question of "What is a video game?", on the other hand, is categorical. It's quantitative, not qualitative.
Put another way: you can argue all day about whether Warhol's soup cans, Pollock's splatters, Lichtenstein's swipes, or Piss Christ are art -- but you can't fucking well argue about whether they're video games. They're not. Period.
Now, obviously the distinction between IF and video games is not quite so clearly-cut -- if it were, you probably wouldn't be throwing a hissy fit because someone dared to suggest that some people might think that there is one. They came about around the same time and run on the same hardware, and, if that weren't enough, there are games that quite obviously draw from both traditions. I think any discussion of games as art would do well to use The Walking Dead as an example, and it's in fact a pretty primitive example of what video games AND IF have to offer -- and it also happens to be fucking excellent.
There are reasonable points to be made on both sides! Hell, I think I just made your argument for you a whole lot better than anyone else in the thread has. This isn't a matter of easy is-it-or-isn't-it categorization -- which is exactly my point.
But when you dig in your heels on this subject, knowingly or not you are joining ranks with some of the worst bottom-feeders on the internet, the kind of jerks who can't even let go of their entitlement enough to recognize the existence of types of games that aren't the ones they like. By drawing this line in the sand, you are not making language any better, you are making the world a little bit worse.
Here's another fun treasure hunt for you: find an example of me "digging in my heels on this subject" or "drawing a line in the sand".
Hell, for that matter find me any post where I've actually STATED that text adventures aren't video games, instead of merely raising the point that there MIGHT be a distinction.
Sounds to me like you're pissed off at a bunch of dudes from some other conversation entirely and are blaming me for "knowingly or not" reminding you of them.
Look, dude. You're the one bringing the idea that I'm making some kind of value judgement to this. I said, outright, "It's certainly valid to discuss their artistic and literary merits." Indeed, I think the sort of person who would ask "Are video games art?" would find it MUCH EASIER to recognize the artistic merits of IF than of games with graphics.
I really don't know how I could have been any plainer in framing the question as a categorical one rather than a value judgement. Saying something may not count as a video game is not at all the same thing as saying it's bad or inferior. I wouldn't call Mario Paint a video game either, but I think it's pretty neat.
tl;dr what the fuck are you even talking about, and are you actually responding to my post at all or are you venting your frustration at some other guy who isn't actually here?
