Chris hecker Hates Nintendo

Status
Not open for further replies.
hohez

hohez

CAGiversary!
http://wii.ign.com/articles/771/771051p1.html

March 7, 2007 - During a session at GDC this morning titled 'Burning Mad - Game Publishers Rant,' time was taken about half way through to allow developers a chance to spew their own rants. One speaker, Chris Hecker, currently working on Spore at Maxis, took the opportunity to call out Nintendo for not taken games seriously.

"The Wii is a piece of shit!" Hecker began his talk, which was called "Fear of a Wii Planet." He blasted a few bars of Public Enemy to set the tone. Hecker said the Wii is nothing more than two GameCubes stuck together with duct tape, and that the console isn't powerful enough to provide the next-gen experience he has been waiting for.

Although he stated the system is "severely underpowered," Hecker noted that he wasn't simply referring to the Wii's graphical capabilities. He wants to spend a console's CPU making games more intelligent, and he has found the Wii doesn't have the power to process things like complicated AI.

Hecker also took Nintendo to task for not taking games seriously enough. "It's not clear to me that Nintendo gives a shit about games as an art form," he said. To illustrate his point, he searched for references to games as art on all three console manufacturers web sites. While he found numerous such references on both the official PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 sites, Wii.com had none at all. He then shared quotes from executives at Sony and Microsoft talking about games as a serious artistic medium, and then a quote from a Nintendo executive saying the company only wanted to make "fun" games.

Hecker ended his spirited rant with two demands for Nintendo: First, recognize and push games as serious art. And two, "make a console that doesn't suck ass."
Click to expand...

I think he's full of shit, and just has major issues with the company itself. Can't wait til he has to help on Spore the Wii version. :grouphug:
 
All other comments aside, he's most off base about the art angle. Of all the companies to level that argument at, Nintendo is near the bottom of the list.
 
HHHHHHHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA.

What a fucktard. He seriously sounds like he was acting like a living manifestation of a GameFAQs post.

I suppose he subscribes to the idea that "games as art" means "games with better graphics." That really must be it, because I'd hardly call your average PS3 game art.

Well, that's OK. The sales numbers are really the bottom line here, and Wii's got 'em. He can believe what he wants, I guess.
 
He's either really, really stupid, or this is just some bet he made with his friends about going on stage and bashing someone.
 
[quote name='mtxbass1']who? exactly.

Now, if this was Will Wright, or someone else IMPORTANT...wait. I still wouldn't give two shits.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, seriously.

I think he's just trying to get his 15 minutes of fame. I'd love to see his reaction in a year when they decide to bring Spore to the Wii.

Sure, the Wii isn't as capable... but I think he forgot to mention that it has a controller unlike any other and costs a lot less than the competing systems.

And Nintendo not serious about games? They've proven to be more serious than anything... if you can make grandpas and soccer moms play games, you know you've made a hell of a game.
 
I like how Sony and Microsoft are more serious about games simply because they refer to them as art somewhere on their website. When their real goal is to infiltrate the living room as an entertainment hub.

And I hate the fact that Nintendo is trying to make fun games. We need less fun games in the world. In fact, I think Sony needs to scrap Little Big World right now because it looks damn fun.
 
Let's all laugh at the fact that this guy wouldn't even be able to being say this shit if it wasn't for Nintendo. They've done a lot for video games. And also, Twilight Princess = art.
 
What's the point in pushing games as art? Is that really the gauge of videogame legitimacy? I don't get it. I go see the mona lisa and I say, "that's cool." I can read a comic book and get much more enjoyment over the same period of time. If games are more like comics, are they any less entertaining? This guy is sufering from an inferiority complex.

As someone very smart once said, "I don't know art, but I know what I like!"
 
He hates Nintendo and the Wii? That's NOT allowed.

Lets instead imagine he said that about Sony and the PS3 "He is so right" "QFT" "lets put him in SSBB" "He rulez"
 
Hecker spent many years working independently on a game based on the sport of rock climbing. In 2004, he took a job with Maxis, working with Will Wright on Spore. It is interesting to note that though Hecker is respected within the game industry, as of 2005 he still has not shipped a single game (this will likely change when Spore is released).

Yeah... nothing more than a pathetic attempt to gain attention.
 
[quote name='whoknows']He hates Nintendo and the Wii? That's NOT allowed.

Lets instead imagine he said that about Sony and the PS3 "He is so right" "QFT" "lets put him in SSBB" "He rulez"[/quote]That sort of response is getting old too, by the way.
 
[quote name='whoknows']He hates Nintendo and the Wii? That's NOT allowed.

Lets instead imagine he said that about Sony and the PS3 "He is so right" "QFT" "lets put him in SSBB" "He rulez"[/QUOTE]

It's not that it isn't allowed, it's that he saying the Wii is a platform that cannot produce artistic material. Because Nintendo doesn't use the word "art" in their discussion of gaming and because it's not as beefy as the 360 or PS3, it's not art.

The major flaw in his argument is that if the Wii cannot produce art, you'd have to make the logical jump that no game produced for a system before the Wii is art since they were all underpowered. hat argument in and of itself is quite frankly, insane, as is he. I think we can all think of ten games easily that could be argued as artistic right then and there. Furthermore, I do think that the Wii has had an "artistic" game in Elebits already. T The Wii is just as capable of producing an artistic experience albeit different from the one's you'll see on the PS3 and 360.
 
[quote name='whoknows']He hates Nintendo and the Wii? That's NOT allowed.

Lets instead imagine he said that about Sony and the PS3 "He is so right" "QFT" "lets put him in SSBB" "He rulez"[/quote]

Way to win the thread. It's perfectly fine to hate Nintendo if you have a valid reason, but this guy doesn't even have a realistic idea of what he's talking about.
 
[quote name='David85']Doesn't matter, Wil Wright seems to like it.[/QUOTE]

Exactly. Hasn't Will Wright, this guy's boss, publicly stated many times that he loves the Wii (no pun intended)?
 
I thought game were supposed to be fun, you know, entertainment? Not that you can't be artistic in that endeavor, which Nintendo kinda leads the pack in that regard. He must never have seen Wind Waker.

Most of the time I feel like game labeled as "Art" are done so because they're 1/2 assed, really pretty pathetic games, that some people love and claim that others "don't get it" so that their opinion is more "important" than others'.

The closest I've had to having fun with a game labeled as "for art" was Electroplankton, and even that I would call more "toy" than "art."
 
It's impossible for a lower-sepc platform to make an artistic game. I mean, Okami and Shadow of the Colossus are nothing compared to Blazing Angels on the 360 and Gundam on the Ps3.

Also "Hecker spent many years working independently on a game based on the sport of rock climbing[...]as of 2005 he still has not shipped a single game" is a nice little cross-section of the real issue. This basically means:
"I'm working with Will Wright, someone who actually has a sense of creativity, thus I am an artist!"
 
fuck him.

I don't give to shits about games as art myself, it's a stupid goal IMO.

Games to me are nothing more than a silly, fun diversion to unwind after a long day at work.

If I want Art I'll go to a gallery, or pop in a DVD or CD, or pick up a great book.
 
My first urge was to yell GRAFIX WHORE! but nay I say to the urge. For the most part he argues as long as it looks good its good. Doesn't matter if it plays like shit. He has also dissed every game that has tried different forms of "art" so to speak such as Okami, Viewtiful Joe, and Zelda WW. A sad man attempting to spark controversy to gain attention much like a small child making a scene at a store. Ignore him and he will crawl back into his hole and shut his mouth. Views are baseless on the fact that every new system will be more powerful than its prior. He might as well say Super Mario World sucks because its 2D.

He says make a console that doesnt suck ass? ::looks at sales figures::


Children, This is why you should not do crack.
 
[quote name='Quintessence']I think that he had some traumatic exeperience as a child, like a NES killed his friend or something.

All he needs is a hug! :grouphug:[/QUOTE]

Nah, he must've bought a Master system and a SEGA CD instead of a SNES.
 
wow! that one scene of flipping a 2D world into 3D just inspired great interest in this game. I have'nt tried an rpg mario since....Super Mario RPG.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']fuck him.

I don't give to shits about games as art myself, it's a stupid goal IMO.

Games to me are nothing more than a silly, fun diversion to unwind after a long day at work.

If I want Art I'll go to a gallery, or pop in a DVD or CD, or pick up a great book.[/quote]

Ugh, I hate gamers like this.

"I dont need an emotionally driven gaming experience! I JUST WANT TO collect dots on the screen! WEE!!!!"

GO buy an Atari, and dont talk on game forums.

Thats why Solitair was made.
 
While his position is maybe a bit extreme, its not terrible to just play arcade like games that emphasize challenge over story. Like Schmups, platformers, shooters.

Not everyone likes story driven games. Its not a crime.
 
[quote name='DarkNessBear']Ugh, I hate gamers like this.

"I dont need an emotionally driven gaming experience! I JUST WANT TO collect dots on the screen! WEE!!!!"

GO buy an Atari, and dont talk on game forums.

Thats why Solitair was made.[/QUOTE]


Oh, and emotionally driven gaming experience would be fantastic. I've simply yet to encounter one as the people that are world class in stories, dialogue etc. are making movies, writing books etc.

Thus the games people list as emotional driven are usually just lame, preteen dribble with story lines about as deep as your typical anime.

But I guess both are going after the same pre-teen/teen pimple ridden audience so it makes sense.
 
Hecker misses one very important point--

Games are, first and foremost, GAMES!

They're supposed to be fun and enjoyable. Nintendo understands that better than any company out there.

Art?

Who's he kidding? Since when has that been a priority?

Hecker must've sucked really bad in kindergarten at drawing and is spending his life making up for the fact that the other kids laughed at his drawings.

That's the only thing I can figure.
 
[quote name='VAD3R or Fro']I just feel like I was on a Gamespot forum or something after reading that.[/quote]
Yeah, no kidding. This part: "Hecker said the Wii is nothing more than two GameCubes stuck together with duct tape" comes off as extreme fanboyism.

The only thing he has accomplished with his little rant, is make himself look quite unintelligent.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Oh, and emotionally driven gaming experience would be fantastic. I've simply yet to encounter one as the people that are world class in stories, dialogue etc. are making movies, writing books etc.

Thus the games people list as emotional driven are usually just lame, preteen dribble with story lines about as deep as your typical anime.

But I guess both are going after the same pre-teen/teen pimple ridden audience so it makes sense.[/QUOTE]

Gaming is still an emerging art form. The first widespread films we're things like "Train Arriving at Bombay Station" and "Trip to the Moon". They're technical achievements for their time, but they don't really offer anything in terms of content. Try reading something like A Pilgrim's Progress which is still lauded as one of the most important literary works of the emerging Enlightenment across Europe but is simply horrible as a novel. Writing off gaming this way is idiodic and gives an incredibly biased comparison of why a book is art and why gaming isn't.

I don't think Hecker is wrong for what he's saying about gaming as art. I think he's wrong to dismiss every movement in gaming before as pulp though. I also think it's wrong for various members of CAG to be saying "HUR, GAMEZ R 4 PLAYIN'" and treating the medium as simply an avenue for passive entertainment. The Wii is a device that offers a much heavier reliance on interaction with the world by the player then creation of the world by the designer. If he can't see that as progressing art then he has a very narrow minded vision of what art "is" and "isn't".
 
Repeating myself from NWR:

Bit Generations Series
Rhythm Tengoku
Tingle RPG
Super Paper Mario
Paper Mario 1/2
Electroplankton
Earthbound
Zelda: The Wind Waker
Hotel Dusk: Room 215
Warioware Series
Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island

The above fully exempts Nintendo from ever being called a company that doesn't care about art and style in their video games. Hell, you could make a few more arguments - Starfox, Metroid Prime, Mario Paint.

Nintendo might not be pushing a powerhouse system, but if I'm going to listen to high schoolers bitch like little bitches, I'll walk into a high school and call them all some random slur. I'm sure that will net me just as much intellgentsia as this guy obviously is throwing around.

Like I said, power comments aside, I have to think that was the most offensive thing the guy said, and he's absolutely out of his gourd.
 
I lolz at this guy.

Lets Compare
Sonic the Hedgehog (PS3,360)
Sonic and the Secret Rings (Wii)

By that logic alone his argument fails.

Seriously this guy is a douche bag just because, I mean if you hate the Wii fine it is good to have haters sometimes, but when you sound like a 10 year old fat emo ps3 fag who posts on the Nintendo Wii forums on gamefaqs, your rep goes down 99.9%.
 
[quote name='furyk']Gaming is still an emerging art form. [/quote]

Maybe, but video games are going on 30 years (if Pong isn't that old already) so it takes a pretty lose definition of emerging in any case.

But I do agree games can be art.

I just don't necessarily want them to be, or at least don't want every game to be art. I like just playing to relax.

Plus, it's a bit tough to do real art in an interactive medium. Art is an artist creating something to make people who "get it" feel a specific thing. That's a bit tougher to do in games unless you make games that are very linear etc.

Of course their is abstract "art" that is left up to the viewer to interpret (shoot me please) so I guess games could fit that lable more easily.

I think a lot of people are making the mistake of calling games with good art design "art." Just because something like Yoshi's Island looks great doesn't make it "art". It doesn't move a person emotionally or have any point. It's just a fucking great platformer with nice, creative graphics. It's not a Monet or a Shakespearian Sonnet.
 
I think the less than stellar plots can be forgiven since many games produce an atmosphere that no movie could come close to matching.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']
I think a lot of people are making the mistake of calling games with good art design "art." Just because something like Yoshi's Island looks great doesn't make it "art". It doesn't move a person emotionally or have any point. It's just a fucking great platformer with nice, creative graphics. It's not a Monet or a Shakespearian Sonnet.[/QUOTE]

Fine. But at that point you're comparing a completely different art medium, and at that point, it's apples to oranges.

I don't think civilization will ever be moved by video games the way a beautiful poem, painting, or sculpture has done.

But that's not the point. The point that I was making was that there is room for style inside games.

Non-Nintendo examples include Parappa the Rappa, Okami, Loco Roco, Metal Gear Solid Digital Comic, Katamari Damacy, etc. It exists.

It is not influential, but it certainly takes more time to make something artistically stylistic - even in the gaming arena. Anyone can slap together some sprites and/or polygon masses and give you a set time to reach point B from point A. That's why there's so many copycat games out there.

And at the same time we can find some games in those genres that stand out purely on artistic merit.
 
It's about time somebody explains to the public that graphics aren't the only thing the Wii is lacking behind in this generation, but also the ability for complex AI and other related processor issues.
 
Style yes. Art no.

That's my point. Games will never be "art" in the traditional sense, for just the reasons you give. It is apples and oranges and people would be well served to stop claiming games can be art.

Can they be stlyish, unque, visually appealing. Certainly. And tons of games already have been and I agree we'll see plenty of these on the Wii. Probably more on than on the PS3 and the 360 where developers are more apt to continue striving for photo realism rather than unique, stylish games.

It's a sementics issue, so I won't belabor it any more. But there's is a huge gap between something that is stylish and something that is art in my opinion.
 
[quote name='TimPV3']It's about time somebody explains to the public that graphics aren't the only thing the Wii is lacking behind in this generation, but also the ability for complex AI and other related processor issues.[/QUOTE]

Right, right. Because we've seen real complex AI in games, eh?

Someone has got to show me these games where, apparently, the AI is so awesome. Cuz I have never, ever seen one in my entire life.

dmaul: Fair enough.
 
[quote name='TimPV3']It's about time somebody explains to the public that graphics aren't the only thing the Wii is lacking behind in this generation, but also the ability for complex AI and other related processor issues.[/QUOTE]


I think it's far too soon to make such claims.

On the PS3 and 360 a lot of the power is used for graphics, taking away what they can use for AI.

On the Wii the games won't look as good, and I think most aren't expecting top notch graphics, so developers could just not tax the graphics (say hold them at GC level) and use more power for AI and come up with great AI.

Personally I don't care as I'm not a fan of realistic games like sports and FPS that need great A.I.

I mainly like games like platformers, Japanese RPGs, puzzle games etc. were AI really doesn't matter much if at all.
 
[quote name='Strell']Repeating myself from NWR:

Bit Generations Series
Rhythm Tengoku
Tingle RPG
Super Paper Mario
Paper Mario 1/2
Electroplankton
Earthbound
Zelda: The Wind Waker
Hotel Dusk: Room 215
Warioware Series
Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island

The above fully exempts Nintendo from ever being called a company that doesn't care about art and style in their video games. Hell, you could make a few more arguments - Starfox, Metroid Prime, Mario Paint.

Nintendo might not be pushing a powerhouse system, but if I'm going to listen to high schoolers bitch like little bitches, I'll walk into a high school and call them all some random slur. I'm sure that will net me just as much intellgentsia as this guy obviously is throwing around.

Like I said, power comments aside, I have to think that was the most offensive thing the guy said, and he's absolutely out of his gourd.[/QUOTE]

It's one thing for a forum dork to say things along the lines of "the Wii is a piece of shit" and plea to Nintendo to make a system that doesn't "suck ass." I can't fathom how someone in the industry thinks that they should use a public forum to express such poorly-worded and ultimately childish opinions.

At any rate, I was going to ask you for examples earlier, so bully for this list. If anything, it really shows you that the main problem with "games as art" as a concept is that it's such a vague concept that anyone could feasibly argue that any game is "art." Of course, more people might agree if I said "fl0w is art" than if I said "Saints Row is art," but why would they agree with that distinction?

When is a game art, and when is a game a game? That's a question I don't know the answer to, and the only thing I can offer up some combination of story, graphics, and unique/uncommon gameplay. That's still just as vague as the understanding we had prior to typing that sentence, but I think there's an interesting discussion to be had about games as art.

When I see your list, I would only single out Bit Generations, Electroplankton, and Mario Paint are "art," and that last one's pretty tenuous to argue (it's more or less "Kid Pix" for the SNES).

Why do we commonly agree that Shadow of the Colossus and Okami are art? Are they (I haven't played Okami, so I don't know). I'm reluctant to call Wind Waker art, as it didn't offer up anything new for a 3D Zelda, save for a massive overhaul of the graphics style. But, does that disqualify Jet Set Radio from the "art list"?

I don't know. I could care less about what some game industry prat says when he's just throwing a temper tanrum about the Wii (and I say that as a person who thinks that most Wii owners need to get off their phony high horses about the system's superiority). There are ways to criticize the Wii, and this was a perfect example of how not to go about it. So, instead, let's all put our bad words (even me) away, turn your hyper-defensive "my system's dad can beat up your system's dad" talk, and try to find out the answer to a deceptively complex question:

What makes a game "art?"
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Logical extension of Myke's post: what makes "art" art?[/QUOTE]

I think it's more or less social convention. That's why the painted canvas on my wall, or the numbered photograph of the French Quarter at dawn on my wall could be "art." Likewise, the velvet painting on Malcolm X that was in my friend's living room when I visited him the other day? Probably not art.

But what gives more credence to the "social convention" aspect is that you can totally disagree with me, think a pillow with Kenny Rogers' face on it (in the same room as Malcolm) is "art" too, and be completely right.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']
It's a sementics issue, so I won't belabor it any more. But there's is a huge gap between something that is stylish and something that is art in my opinion.[/QUOTE]
"Sementics" aside (that some porn thing?), what you're talking about is a broad definition of art, something that is many levels of generality removed from the discursive subtleties of semantics.

[quote name='dmaul1114']Style yes. Art no. . . .Games will never be "art" in the traditional sense... It is apples and oranges and people would be well served to stop claiming games can be art.[/QUOTE]
That is ridiculous, and you've done nothing to support it other than provide your own opinion. Art is very much a social, dynamic concept. At the core of art is a creative attempt to meld sensation and rationale and explore or inspire an experience. Art can both stimulate an experience and become the experience itself.

Limitations placed on the media through which art is expressed or classifications brought about to determine "What Is Art?" are fancy means of dictating value systems and class politics. For instance, rap and hip-hop have been devalued in the music community because of their associations with a certain class, just as jazz and county/western were devalued decades ago. The same is true of the work of tribal artisans or cartooning--one was once scoffed at as the work of "savages," and therefore impossible of becoming capital-A Art, and the other was considered line drawings for children. Over time we have discovered the art in these forms and the dangers of discarding any form or medium as incapable of art.

Pixels are as much a palette as oils. It will be difficult for a video game to become art in the current manner of video game production, as most games are created by a committee and thus lack the intense creative focus needed to elevate elaborate craft into a shared experience between artist and audience. However, I would agree that some games (including a few by Nintendo) have exhibited the kind of craft and creative vision needed to achieve art. In the future, I'm sure that more tools will become available to allow fewer people to produce bigger, grander games, and these tools will enable the focus and energy needed for art.

30 years from now we may look back on some of the games mentioned in this thread as being seminal works of art. Who knows. But one thing I am absolutely positive of is that stating that something cannot be art is an empty judgment of value, a statement that can never be true given the nature of art.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
bread's done
Back
Top