First of all, thank you Marurun for moving this out of the Metroid thread. I felt bad about hi-jacking it like I did, it was just that it was hard to continue the discussion in PM's because I was addressing multiple people at that point, and possibly anyone who had been lurking in the thread.
Alright, @RemyC, I completely agree with you on what you're saying about not wanting cutscenes and dialogue, or having video games rely so heavily on cinematics to provide a more robust artistic experience. I've actually already delved into this subject on these boards before here:
http://www.racketboy.com/forum/viewtopi ... a&start=20 You guys are both mentioning what is essentially that games are unique because of the fact that the experience is interactive. I agree full-heartedly. That's why I bring up games like Black & White and Shadow of the Colossus; the former is a (rather crude) simulation of the power and inherit responsibility of being a God. Do you remain weaker at the benefit of your loyal denizens, or do you become stronger at their expense? Communism or Objectivism? It not only allows the player to experience those philosophies at work, but it allows you to experiment with them in real-time - something the Communist Manifesto and Atlas Shrugged cannot do. Instead of attempting to convince the audience of a stagnant ideology in a linear fashion, it allows the audience to reach their own conclusions. Shadow of the Colossus progresses in a linear fashion, but you still have enough interactivity to decide to A.) just stand there or B.) murder a Colossus. When the game flips a bitch on you and says, "WHAT THE FUCK HAVE YOU DONE!?!?" it carries more weight than other mediums because YOU, the AUDIENCE have actually physically DONE something (well, virtually done something)!
And @Marurun, I see what you're trying to say about abstract art and symbolism, but I really feel like it's hard to give credit to Nintendo for supplying a robust piece of art when deeper meaning is not even implied. Is it art, oh HELL yes it is! Is it really something to point to and say, "Now THAT made me think! That SAID something to me!", no I wouldn't say it is. After reading Roger Ebert rant on about how video games can't be art because they rely to heavily on cinema to be as such, I'd wish more developers would actually try and prove him wrong! And while in many cases I prefer playing Eastern-made games (Sega, Nintendo, SquareSoft, Capcom, Namco, SNK, Konami, et cetera), I feel that it is a handful of Western-made games that have more fully utilized the potential of video games as art; the "open" archetype of gameplay (as opposed to the "narrative" archetype of gameplay) all but originated in the West (with a few exceptions, of course). The idea of here's a playing field, you can make your decisions; but they have CONSEQUENCE allows for very moving experiences. No medium can deliver the human experience more fully than a virtual simulation of the human experience. You asked why video games shouldn't be passive? Because then they are practically cinema.
I'm NOT saying that Nintendo doesn't make fantastic games, that move people from time to time in very abstract ways. It's just that I'd like for them to just once deliver a moving experience in a way which shows distinct INTENT to do so on their part. Until now, you can't convince me that Nintendo really intended for Pikmin to make me think about how unfair Economic Darwinism can be as the weak are exploited by the strong and have me fully convinced it wasn't just me fooling myself into believing that.
