8-bit Childhood
This is a post in direct response to loonyboi's arguments that the art exhibit, I am 8-bit is insulting to gamers.
Firstly, let me say that I greatly respect loonyboi’s opinions, but will harshly decline the notion that this is in any way disrespectful to gamers.
There comes a point in time during pop culture cycles when you look back on what’s come before with a wash of nostalgia that makes everything better than it was. Those commericals you loved, those cartoon shows you watched, those underoos or bedsheets or curtains were all much shinier and interesting in hindsight, and their appeal only grows with time. When they were removed it felt like you were “moving on,” but as time passed you fondly remembered the pleasure they brought you.
For example: I sold my NES and about 20 games for $50 a few months after I bought my Super NES. I wish I had never done so. I had plenty of interesting games for it, and just in a pure nostalgia mindset that system and those games meant more to me than the ability to play Super Mario Bros.
My point is that while those games and that NES may have not been perfect, the idea of getting back that piece of my childhood…that’s the key to I am 8–bit. It provides a feeling of nostalgia, of longing, and of art.
One of loonyboi’s primary arguments is not that this exhibit is insulting (strangely enough), but that it doesn’t include recent games (or any games actually running) nor does it include any “avant guarde” games. These games the mentions, of course, were all created -after- 16 bit and higher machines were created, so this is really a moot point.
I simply don’t understand how the lack of 16 or 32 bit games, in an exhibit called I am 8–bit is insulting in the slightest. That’s like looking for an (ugh) Thomas Boring Kincaid painting in a Monet exhibit: You need to raise your expectations based on the description of the event and pieces in it, not what’s missing.
For example, mini-vans don’t insult Ferrari drivers, and Ferrari drivers don’t get insulted because there isn’t a sliding side door on their car(s).
I think in the end that loonyboi simply didn’t recognize that this exhibit was simply an homage to the world of 8–bit gaming now left behind. That we’ve moved past it, and it’s now time for those old memories to be dusted off, for those old stand-bys to be seen in new light (check this out), and that you can still love those old characters any way you choose to. These guys chose artwork, but the same exhibit could be done with Music, Sculpture, or Literature pertaining to old heroes of past video game generations.
I think I am 8–bit isn’t perfect, but it’s video games getting respect in a new light while in new, interesting, and diverse territory. If this is seen as a step back, then I say we turn around.
See ya next week.
Love is the answer,
at least for most of the questions in my heart.
3 Comments:
To rebut your rebuttal:
The fact that there aren't any 16 or 32-bit games is beside the point. If the exhibit included Pong or Tempest or Defender it would still be an improvement.
Wallowing in 8-bit (and earlier) games as pop culture is fine, but let's not confuse this with bringing any sort of legitimacy for video games (whether needed or not) to a larger audience. If anything, it's a step backward, saying that we would rather look at pictures of a naked princess peach awaiting Mario than discuss video games -- regardless of their era - as art.
I dont care how good 3d graphics get. It can never surpase the simplistic beauty of 8 bit games, if you've ever tried to draw 16x16 pixel sprites or tiles youll understand the true art of it, its not as easy as it looks. I for one dont play newer games cause its all about fancy graphics and long boring storys. I want back those crappy good graphics and games without plots, but you played for hours and hours and ever got bored of, because its just plain fun.
Theweirdmusician has two points that are sort of tangled up together. Interestingly, they touch on some of the issues with respect to text adventures that I talked about today.
The first point he makes is that there is art in a 16x16 pixel sprite. Which I think I can agree is true. Whether or not it is "better" than modern 3d graphics is beside the point: that's comparing apples and shirts. a 16x16 sprite and a rendered 3d model are, fundamentally, both works of art in completely different media. One of them might be better for a specific purpose, but that doesn't mean one has more intrinsic worth than the other.
The other thing theweirdmusician says is that he played for hours for hours and he wants them back. Without trying to tell him what he's saying, I think he is in the grip of nostalgia here. There are many reasons why we might have played games more when we were teenagers or younger. One reason might be that the games were better. Equally likely hypothoses include the ideas that we didn't have to work for a living back then, or that our standards with respect to production values were much, much lower. It's hard to say, from this vantage point, which of those factors predominates.
My point in all of this is simply to say that nostalgia is an untrustworthy advisor. She lies.
Regards,
peterb of Tea Leaves
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home