If you listened to our show last week, then you know that our “What is an RPG?” discussion somehow became pretty heated. Kaz, frustrated over a recent installment of Active Time Babble, suggested that perhaps it’s time to redefine our game classifications. In this installment of Forced Feedback, he and Justin debate whether or not we need new terminology to define our favorite experiences. What exactly does this moldy acronym mean anymore? Read on and see if you can figure it out.
Kaz: I’m bringing this back up from the show for a couple reasons. I was irritated listening to games journalists, a group that frequently complains that there isn’t an audience for serious game discussions, sidestep and give up on an important discussion. To say that we can use vague, ill-defined words and “get what we mean” from them is copping out.
All too often, gamers fall into the trap of not wanting to engage in difficult discussions because “games are for fun and what fun can be had of serious discussion.” I don’t think that discussing how to define a game precludes having fun with it. I like to think about how to better define genre-bending games like Bioshock. Trying to define the experience lets us develop a means to express the value of a game beyond the obvious “because it’s fun.”
Read the rest of this entry »
After a month in theaters, “Avatar” is still just as relevant ever. With over a $1 billion worldwide box office gross so far, James Cameron’s dream project may ultimately become the most financially successful film of all time (if you ignore inflation adjustment, of course). But will the movie have long-term effects for gamers? And will the 3D technology used here trickle down to your living room anytime soon? In this new column, Justin and Nick discuss the potential cultural impact of “Avatar” on our favorite pastime.
