If you remember my very first post (oh so long ago!), I happened to mention that I am a gamer. I enjoy being part of an unfolding story, and gaming allows for that particular kind of exploration. This aspect of gaming is something that movie critic Roger Ebert, an otherwise astute fellow, would have us believe precludes the very medium from being considered alongside the long-revered likes of painting, literature, film, and television. Precluded, thus, from being considered “art”.

Ebert states that he considers video games to be an inferior medium to film and literature - because, he asserts, games require players to make choices. For Ebert, this nullifies writerly control - the will of the author - which for him is a crucial compononent to what may, and may not, be considered art. I strongly disagree. To begin with, even with games that do provide a breadth of choice, these choices are inherently limited - by both format and story-line. Indeed, one is further guided by the developer’s vision via game mechanics, the particular manner in which plot unfolds, and even (in this modern gaming era) the intelligent, movie-like use of framing, panning, and any number of cinematic editing techniques.

Fable may provide us with some pertinent talking points. In this game, players chose to walk a ‘good’, ‘neutral’, or ‘evil’ path: a path determined by the player. However, in each of these instances the outcome is nevertheless decided upon already by the author(s) (read: narrative developer(s)) of said game. Yes there were three different endings, but they were created by the game-makers, not by the player. Another point that I think needs to be covered in response to Ebert’s claim, is that even with film, art, and literature, interpretation still comes down to the viewer; how they mentally and emotionally process the work before them is still their choice. Art, like any text, is a medium which derives meaning only by being “read”. Art, like gaming, is not static. For all the intention of a creator, ultimately, meaning is determined by the viewer’s unique perspective, biases, and interests.

And so it is with the current furor concerning content in Resident Evil 5. The game is based on the premise that the government has created a virus that turns regular people into crazed, violent, zombies (is there any other kind?). These zombies are African, and black. Images of a white man mowing down black zombies has horrified Western media - and for some clearly understandable reasons. However, in an editorial written by Hilary Goldstein (IGN.com), it is noted that the racism accusations that have been leveled at Capcom - the creators of RE5 - are based not on the intention of the game’s creators, but on the (mis)interpretations of Western media. In Japan, where the game was created, the Western cultural history which brought about these perceptions of racism was notably absent. Perceptions of the game, based on another whole set of cultural biases, was entirely different. Meaning, in other words, was derived through the unique filter of the people who engaged with the text; not by the intention of the auteur. Would a like film, containing equivalently flammable imagery, be received any differently? Would auteurship survive a travel abroad under similar circumstances? I doubt it.

In another article on the same site, Levi Buchanan argues that this game, RE5, and it’s attendant controversy, is a dialogue necessary for the medium of gaming. That this is a necessary conversation for gaming to have, in order to grow as an art form. To move from past perceptions of games being purely “for kids”, adult conversations (and adult concerns) must necessarily be addressed. In this way gaming provides a scaffold for younger generations to interface with hot topics - with relevant topics - in a way that film and literature may struggle to match.

While we are seeing (and will continue to see) such growing pains, this is a conversation - and a development - that needs to happen. With a mature discourse comes a maturing medium. Perhaps, one day, even a fuddy-duddy like Roger Ebert may see how far gaming has come.

Until next time, dear reader, I will remain,

With a geekish cast,
Morgan D.