#oneaday, Day 332: Fire The Canon… He’s Not Pulling His Weight

What are those games you have to play?

The answer, of course, is none at all, but there are plenty of people out there who believe that you can’t call yourself a “true gamer” (whatever that means) unless you’ve played this game or that game. And for sure, at one point that was true, simply because the volume of games being released was such that it was easy enough to keep up to speed on at least all the big releases, if not absolutely everything that was available.

Nowadays, though, gaming is such big business that it’s impossible to keep up with triple-A releases, let alone delve into the increasingly-awesome pool of independent and/or smaller titles out there.

Rather than this being a frustrating thing, though, this is a very positive sign. Speak to someone who’s a film snob and they will probably turn their nose up at the prospect of a Michael Bay film, yet there are plenty of people out there who go and watch various childhood-raping movies that ensure you can never look at Transformers in quite the same way ever again.

And it’s the same with gaming. There is no one set “canon” of games that you absolutely must play. I’ve come around to this idea, having had it first mooted by my good buddy and fine, upstanding gentleman Calin. There are games that are important to the history of gaming, sure. But they’re not things that everyone has to play. If everyone plays all of the stuff from history that is supposedly “important”, they’ll never get to anything from today. It’s a balancing act.

What I’ve been wondering is if it’s possible for someone who is a full-on gaming enthusiast to spend their time playing nothing but non-triple A titles. Surely there are enough indie and “cheap-fu” titles out there now to enable someone to have an enjoyable experience without having to spend $60 a time for the privilege? And yes, I’m using dollars to illustrate my point because I’m in the States. When in Rome and all that.

This approach isn’t for every gamer, just like watching only foreign and/or arthouse movies isn’t for everyone who purports to “like movies”. I love ASCII-based roguelike Angband, for example, and have sent any number of heroic @-signs to their death now, but I don’t expect everyone to find that sort of experience palatable. I can certainly play that game and find it enjoyable, however, and there are times when I’d pick playing that over something like, say, Halo. I’d certainly always pick it over Call of Duty.

But there are people who feel the opposite too. And it’s pretty cool that we’ve reached a stage where we can say that about the gaming industry. The only difficulty that comes with this territory is the fact that the gaming press is not able to cover everything that is out there, meaning some spectacular stuff can get completely overlooked, or sell poorly, or be unfairly judged.

This is where word of mouth comes in. You found something awesome you think friends might enjoy too? Tell them. Don’t keep it to yourself. I know that I’ve convinced at least a few people to play Recettear: An Item Shop’s Tale since I started banging on about it a few weeks back, and I’m sure there are others out there who might be interested in trying other things I’ve mentioned. Similarly, my obsession with Persona 3 and 4 can be entirely attributed to a blog post my friend Mark wrote extolling the virtues of Persona 3, a post which was enough to make me think “I have to play this game.”

We’re in an age of active involvement and active socialisation. The gaming press still certainly has a place—I should hope so, anyway, since I’m involved in it—but there’s just as much importance, if not more, on word-of-mouth recommendations and discussion.

Think about the last game you played. Was it something you played because reviews were good? Because people were talking about it? Or something you took a chance on and then felt like telling everyone how good/bad it was?

In my case, the last two games I played (Recettear and DEADLY PREMONITION) were the latter two. I took a chance on Recettear and adored it. And I couldn’t not play DEADLY PREMONITION after hearing some of my closest friends discussing it in appropriately reverent tones. I actually can’t remember the last time I bought a game purely on the strength of a review.

#oneaday, Day 210: Literacy

Well, tonight was the night we recorded the first episode of the all-new Squadron of Shame SquadCast. And we think you’re going to like it a lot.

There’s going to be a lot more community involvement in the whole thing, too. This is led by the Squawkbox, a communal blog where anyone with a WordPress account can contribute and join the discussion. But there’s nothing to stop people blogging about the things we talk about, either. In fact, it’d be awesome to see some lengthy written thoughts about the things we discuss.

So I thought I’d kick that off with some material related to a discussion we had on the show. Not to spoil anything, but it’s an interesting topic.

The question is that of being “literate” in a medium versus that of being “well-read”. On the podcast, we particularly focused on gaming, as you might expect. You’ll find the conclusions we came to on the podcast itself. See, I like to tease.

But it’s true for any medium, and not just books, either. My old friend Ed “Roth Dog” Padgett (follow him on Twitter just to stop him moaning, too, if you would) is most certainly well-read in the medium of movies, for example. He knows what makes a “good” or a “bad” movie. He knows about different directors, actors, genres, stylistic approaches, all manner of things I could never even begin to understand right now because I am merely literate in the medium of movies. I know what makes a decent structure of a movie, and I know what I enjoy. But I don’t watch movies that often, and as such there may be some things that I don’t appreciate in the same way that others do.

Take my recent reaction to the movie Predators. I thought Predators was a festering pile of horseshit, yet many people whom I’ve spoken to about it since claimed to rather enjoy it. Does this mean that I’m “wrong”? No; it simply means that my reaction is different to other people. In the case of a lot of those people, misty-eyed nostalgia over the original Predator films probably played a part. And in some cases, they quite possibly genuinely liked the generic, sprawling mess that was that movie. I have only ever seen Predator once and I’m not even convinced I’ve ever seen Predator 2. I think I have. But I can’t remember.

I’ll freely admit that I’m not particularly well-read when it comes to movies. I’ve never seen Citizen Kane, Clockwork Orange or Rocky Horror Picture Show. I haven’t seen the vast majority of Arnie’s output. I can name about three directors off the top of my head. I struggle to name a “favourite movie”. But I can at least appreciate a decent movie when I see one.

With books, it’s the most literal kind of, well, literacy. You can read. Or you can be well-read. If you can read, there may be stuff you enjoy. Perhaps you enjoy Mills and Boon romance novels, but only for the naughty bits. Perhaps you like the cheesiest kind of epic fantasy there is. Perhaps you like a diverse range of stuff.

In every medium, everyone has the opportunity to become “literate”, and to understand that medium on a level that is sufficient to make it accessible and enjoyable. But it takes a lot more work to become truly “well-read” and to understand what the “canonical” titles in that medium are. And in media as diverse as these, it’s entirely likely that everyone has their own opinions on what the “canon” might include.

So, anyone interested enough to comment, then: pick a medium that you feel particularly “well-read” in, and give us some examples of what you think might be “essentials”—the “canon” for that medium. I’m intrigued to hear some responses.