Are Game Genres Bad?
Sections
I was recently posed with a question regarding game genres. To sum it up, the individual made the argument that the way we currently classify games is reductionistic in a way that other art forms’ genres are not. Instead of classifying games according to their thematic value, it was argued that we classify them according exclusively to their mechanics (i.e. first person shooter, city builder, point and click). After some thought on the subject I have come to the conclusion that game genres are both no different from any other genre conventions and that mechanics are a means to thematic content
Two Part Genres
Generic naming conventions in all art forms are not as simple as placing the works into horror, action, or first person shooters. In reality, all forms of art follow the same two part naming system. We will examine three examples of genres in as many art-forms: horror novels, action first person shooters, and detective films. All of these genres begin with a thematic context (horror, action, detective) that explains how thematic elements will be conveyed to the audience. A horror piece uses different narrative tropes from an action piece, thereby conveying story differently. The second part of the genres (novel, first person shooter, film) explains what form of experience the audience will engage with. Each experiential method will also convey thematic elements differently. As such, the true method of naming genres is to first express the thematic method and then express the experiential method.
Unlike art-forms like film and novels, games cannot simply call themselves an action game. The possible experiential methods of gaming end up being far too broad for the audience to find any useful information from the term “game.” Because of this, the scope of the experiential part of the genre must be narrowed. The mechanics of a game are an explanation of the experience the audience will have with any piece. A first person shooter will always convey story fundamentally differently from an open-world RPG. As such, the mechanics of a game are vital to understanding the modes of expression in said game.
”Yet,” one might say, “we do not always express game genres in this two part format. Very often we only state that a game is a first person shooter or the like.” I will concede that this is true, however this does not actually counter the two stage genres. In most instances, someone will say that a game is simply it’s mechanics when the thematic content fits into those mechanic’s most typical genre. For instance, most often when one just says that a game is a first person shooter, that game ends up being an action first person shooter (like Call of Duty, Titanfall, Halo). The action first person shooter is the most common form of the genre, thereby it is assumed that that experience will fall into the common thematic classifier if no other theme is given. Hence the term horror first person shooter ends up being a more commonly used genre name due to the fact that it is a relatively uncommon pairing.
Experiential Conventions in Other Art-forms
While many art-forms are narrow enough to have their experiential method expressed with a single term (novel, film), there are art-forms other than gaming that necessitate multiple experiential classifiers. The most prominent of these is poetry. While one can simply express poetry genres as “sublime poetry” or “war poems,” they can also be expressed according to their stylistic conventions. For instance, a “sublime sonnet” or “free verse war poem” both give more definite experiential modifiers to their thematic content (sonnet, free verse). Games denote their mechanics for the same reason that poetry will sometimes denotes it’s poetic mechanics: by doing so the audience is better informed about what type of art they will be consuming. Thereby, the same generic conventions that are used in gaming are seen in other, more commonly accepted forms of art.
The Thematic Content of Mechanics
The experiential aspect of any genre includes not only the method of engagement but also, in that description, the general tools of thematic expression available to the work. As such, experiential labels do not only denote the physical form of the work but also some of it’s content. Calling something a film indicates that it has a variety of visual metaphors at it’s disposal that a work of prose does not. The label of film, thereby, indicates thematic constructs that are likely to be in that piece. The same applies to gaming’s experiential labels. An open world RPG will have different narrative tools at it’s disposal than a side-scrolling platformer, and so on for every other genre. To not label games according to their mechanics would remove a large amount of information from the consumer who is trying to understand the fundamental aspects of any work. An experiential label has as much potential to express thematic content as any specifically thematic label a work may have.
While it may seem that the current naming conventions of video games are reductionistic, in reality they are the same conventions that occur in every other genre of art. The concern behind the inquiry is certainly valid as games have, in the past, been so heavily focused on mechanics that they have neglected their thematic side. However, such a trend in the naming conventions of game genres is not evident at this point in time. Some may flippantly refer to games as only mechanics, but they are simply misusing a system that has worked to classify art for hundreds of years. Pay no mind to them as their mistake will not injure any of the art. Simply seek to use the two part genre system consciously so that none of us fall into that same trap.
Comments
Post a Comment