Cue KyotoMecca freaking out and appealing to mods about direct linking to a video in 5..4..3..2.., followed by additional derailment of the thread by Folder and boutrosinit slapping each other on the back over some "bird", inevitably leading to that ripping yarn about who touched who's what in the bathroom.
i wish they'd just post these in transcript form, but it's a good interview. ueda mentions that people talk about ico as some visually beautiful thing, when they'd really just intended to make a fun game. that should serve as a corrective to the sophomoric "games as art" crowd who've appropriated ico and completely misunderstand it.
i wish they'd just post these in transcript form, but it's a good interview. ueda mentions that people talk about ico as some visually beautiful thing, when they'd really just intended to make a fun game. that should serve as a corrective to the sophomoric "games as art" crowd who've appropriated ico and completely misunderstand it. but it probably won't.
i disagree that art of any quality "just happens." but that's not really what i was getting at.
i should elaborate: if you're going to understand ico as art, you have to understand it as a game. really its artistic aspects -- a beautifully designed environment and a npc who invites strong emotional conntection -- are only meaningful in relation to the core adventure game. its strength and originality as an adventure game are too often lost in hyperbole about its beauty and feeling.
yes, but do you ever get tired of being wrong? (look, we've all got our tongues out...)
if ico was an animated short or a picture book it'd be faintly charming but unexceptional. the castle is beautiful because it's convincingly whole and relatively free of videogame abstractions. we experience its beauty by walking through it (how important are footfall sound effects), not by looking at it. we feel for yorda because we've spent so much time dragging her around and coaxing her to jump and keeping the shadows off her. ico is a game. some people need to be reminded.
At the same time, if the gameplay was set in another aesthetic complete with exaggerated physical features and ultra technicolor wash and butt rock rampaging in the background, it would be a pretty poor game. Even if the art and music wasn't displeasing, just ordinary, the gameplay wouldn't elevate the title to anything beyond its trappings.
The art and atmosphere is what makes the game noteworthy, far more then the function of its gameplay.
Cue KyotoMecca freaking out and appealing to mods about direct linking to a video in 5..4..3..2.., followed by additional derailment of the thread by Folder and boutrosinit slapping each other on the back over some "bird", inevitably leading to that ripping yarn about who touched who's what in the bathroom.
Cue KyotoMecca freaking out and appealing to mods about direct linking to a video in 5..4..3..2.., followed by additional derailment of the thread by Folder and boutrosinit slapping each other on the back over some "bird", inevitably leading to that ripping yarn about who touched who's what in the bathroom.
my point isn't that the aesthetics are unimportant, but that they need to be considered as part of a game. you've lost hold of it as soon as you separate the two.
my point isn't that the aesthetics are unimportant, but that they need to be considered as part of a game. you've lost hold of it as soon as you separate the two.
I've never really thought of ICO as an artform, just a game that was pretty nice to play. It's not like it grabbed me by the testicles and shook me around or anything.