Video Game Criticism

Posted Tuesday June 20, 2006 by Nick Caldwell in |

Timothy Burke makes a case for more sophisticated reviewing of video and computer games, and, in doing so, says virtually every interesting thing I’ve ever wanted to say about Planescape: Torment, one of the most innovative and striking computer role-playing games ever devised.

As Timothy notes, games are hard to write about when the only readily available discourse is that of the mainstream film review, simply because film reviewing is heavily invested in a specific conception of narrative film-making. Witness Roger Ebert’s attempts to review films based on video games—I’m specifically thinking of his review of DOOM, where the beautifully shot ‘first-person shooter’ sequence—a lengthy segment of the film that emulates the experience of actually playing the game—is singled out:

Toward the end of the movie, there is a lengthy point-of-view shot looking forward over the barrel of a large weapon as it tracks the corridors of the research station. Monsters jump out from behind things and are blasted to death, in a sequence that abandons all attempts at character and dialogue and uncannily resembles a video game.

In other words, it’s the one moment when it stops being a conventional bug-hunt action movie, and instead becomes authentically experimental.

Your Comments

  1. John Gunders writes:

    Hooray, we’re back! Life really does trump blogs, as someone once said.

    Ebert’s confusion about Doom reflects the problem faced by anyone who tries to use a mainstream, realist-cinema rubric in understanding a genre flick, which is why (as much as I love him) I don’t take David Stratton’s advice about SF films.

    And it’s not just SF: I remember reading a review (in an academic journal) of Coppola’s Apocalypse Now in which the director was taken to task for his lack of verisimilitude!

    Posted: 26 06 2006 - 13:17 | Permanent link to this comment

  2. Nick Caldwell writes:

    Yay!

    Ebert is an odd case, though. He’s a published SF fanzine writer, after all (though it were many a year ago, if my sources are correct). So it’s not specifically a genre SF prejudice. But he is surely in the grip of narrative cinema. Or he simply can’t accept that a noisy, expensive action movie actually can be formally experimental in some way. Perhaps it’s the intentional fallacy—the filmmakers can’t possibly have intended to be experimental, so the film can’t be experimental.

    Posted: 26 06 2006 - 13:49 | Permanent link to this comment

Commenting is closed for this article.