|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
Maxson
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
|
 Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 7:52 am |
  |
|
| Intentionally Wrong wrote: |
Whatever. The subject is "moe's prevalence in games", and the implications thereof.
Art is successful when it is unconventional. An artist working from a formula or template should look for ways to break that template. If only part of a work is formulaic, then that part must not be what the artist considered important.
So, doujin games using the moe style are lopsided experiments in gameplay. Likewise their counterparts in the commercial sector! Smething asymmetrical like Disgaea is more like a short story, while something symmetrical like Cave Story is more like a novel. Notice that length isn't the determining factor: whether the asymmetrical game is made by one person or a hundred--whether it lasts fifteen minutes or fifty hours--it's distinct from the symmetrical experience. |
I'm taking your last paragraph to mean that moe is automatically formulaic. If that's not what you're writing, my mistake.
The prevalence of moe in games would only be a problem if it somehow restricted people from making non-moe games. I agree that moe in most games has become formulaic- at best, mere filler art/story to get the interesting parts of the game across; at worst, a cheap attempt to sell a lackluster game. But nothing prevents an artist from producing a game without moe, especially in the sprawling doujin scene. It may sell less, but great art never guaranteed riches.
Besides, is moe automatically filler? Can't it be a part of the symmetrical experience? Even if we adopt luvcraft's definition (I like it, but still have some issues with it), I can see a game making that a central concept. Something Princess Maker-like. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
 |
Maxson
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 7:57 pm |
|
|
| Intentionally Wrong wrote: |
| The more you democratize a given artform, the less you'll find exemplary work in that form. This seems counterintuitive, but it's been happening for literature over the last half of the 20th century. |
If this is true (and I have no reason to doubt it) I don't see a way of changing it. Since the tools for producing art- be it literature or video games- have become cheap, democratization was inevitable. The doujin market itself is an example of cheap tools producing a new market.
| Intentionally Wrong wrote: |
| The first issue is one of craftsmanship. The more time educators spend making the form accessible, the less time they have to pass on the lessons of mastery. The importance of this issue increases proportionally to the complexity of the craft, so this idea is very important for programmers. |
I'm not sure how passing on the lessons of mastery generally occurs in an artistic medium. I assume it happens through example- someone produces something great, others learn from it. If so, only something that breaks the trend of following the market will succeed here. I don't really see moe as a threat against innovation so much as a symptom of an insular otaku-driven market, which is the real problem.
If you also mean technical mastery, like programming skill, I think sponsorship was generally the means by which new ideas became well-known. The Japanese have just set up government sponsorship to encourage new ideas- maybe it'll help.
| Intentionally Wrong wrote: |
| The second issue is the interaction between art and design space. As Delany wrote, the quality of art is a function of its originality. The more artists you have working in a field, then, the faster they cover the available design space. I can hear the complaints now--"There's nothing truly new under the sun," and "there will always be revolutions in the way art is made." Still, the problem is intensified when you've got a higher density of artists working in the form: what's new becomes old much faster, the novel rapidly becomes formulaic, and the audience at large begins to look outside the artform for new entertainments. |
(I haven't read Delany, so I'm working off what you've said he said.) I agree up to the point of the audience leaving to seek something new- the main consumers of the doujin market are otaku, they don't want anything new. They still want a thrill, so they take the old ideas and rile them up- as you put it, they power up the innocence. This is basically fetishizing, which explains why so much of moe focuses on little girls- they're the easiest sacred cow to slaughter. As a result, the market will merely stagnate, its growth based entirely on the new otaku constantly produced by society. The market grows out instead of growing up (shades of superflat theory?).
If democratizing a form of art reduces the quality of the work, technology itself is to blame for the large numbers of moe schoolgirl/grunting space marine work we see clogging the video game industry today. That, mixed with an otaku/hardcore market that refuses to dry up and become unprofitable, produces modern gaming. The prevalence of moe is no different than the prevalence of WW2 shooters- the market doesn't want to grow up and doesn't need to, either. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Maxson
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 2:22 am |
|
|
| luvcraft wrote: |
| If by "loli" you mean "moe", then I think it's more just a natural progression of the graphic styles that communicate a sense of "fun". Mario in SMB3 is much cuter than Mario in SMB1, and Mario in Sunshine is even cuter still. Watching children play is significantly more whimsical and carefree and fun than watching Die Hard. Thus, since most games want to convey a sense of whimsy and fun, they star children or child-like characters. When a game wants to feel serious and dour (HL2, God of War, Contra), it stars serious characters and looks more like Die Hard. Bloodless combat or shooting pink bulllets at goofy monsters looks a lot more like childhood play than "violent acts"; with the sole exception of the parody video Pirate Baby's Cabana Battle Street Fight 2006, I've never seen any bloody decapitations or any other sort of gore in cute games. |
I don't think this definition of moe covers characters like Saber from Fate/Stay Night. Child-like play may indeed explain some aspects of moe, but it also highlights the differences between moe and loli. Like a Venn diagram, they're related but not identical.
As for bloody decapitations in cute games, there's Metal Slug, which sardonically plays the cute card. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Maxson
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:20 pm |
|
|
| BenoitRen wrote: |
| Quote: |
| I don't think this definition of moe covers characters like Saber from Fate/Stay Night. |
Since when was Saber considered moe? She's an adult. |
Moe isn't restricted to characters that look like little girls. Those get the most press, but moe covers a wide range of ages (and I don't mean "she just looks like a little girl" age). I'd say a large portion of galge focus on characters in the 14-17 range- both "official" age and appearance-age (like Tamaki from To Heart 2). If you mean strictly over-18 adults, there are fewer, but characters like Yomiko Readman from Read or Die are moe.
I readily admit moe tends to focus on youthful looks. But I think the internet English use of the word is becoming pejorative, and as such, focused on its nastiest possible meaning. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Maxson
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:41 am |
|
|
| Takashi wrote: |
| Maxson wrote: |
| If you mean strictly over-18 adults, there are fewer, but characters like Yomiko Readman from Read or Die are moe. |
Is "moe" or becomes "moe"? I don't feel like Yumiko is directly moe, but it fits on a particular theme and flavor of the bishoujo theme that favors moe-themed... fancruft? Simmilarly, Marmite characters aren't directly moe, but it's often approached that way. So, it's needed to separate characters that are born as moe and those that are made moe by the fans themselves.
Relating to age, for example, there is alot of "moe" sentitivity on a good amount of the DOA cast, especially in the XBV games. |
I don't think strict categories of "born as moe" and "made moe" can be made. It's more a matter of degree, and as klikbeep noted, everyone has different definitions. For example, I think the Marimite characters are "born as moe" (the animated versions anyway).
Any attempt at an all-encompassing definition will need many different factors, and that's just too much work for something that's basically what Ken Akamatsu said it was- a vague feeling, not a hard-and-fast rule.
I don't think moe is inherently based on sex, it's just really easy to sexualize. And since straight-up moe gets old fast (Intentionally Wrong's theory that democratized game production leads to quick boredom and a need for something stronger), adding sex becomes more and more common. It's like women's professional tennis.
| /!= wrote: |
| The obvious answer to that observation is to change the character's proportions, making your character squat rather than slim, short rather than tall. Either some sort of fantasy animal or children. |
That'd certainly explain the characters the 8-bit systems got. Mix in an obsessed and inclusive fanbase and the loli doujin game becomes reality. Though I don't know if one created the other or if the two just work well together. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Maxson
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:59 pm |
|
|
| Levi wrote: |
So then chibi is moe now?
(the nouns in that sentence are staggering me right now) |
More like chibi + moe = extra special fetish time |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Maxson
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 12:09 am |
|
|
| klikbeep wrote: |
Well. And now I'm whoring, but:
I did write this. I think that there's mo(r)é to be written.
You know, Religion is a funny word. I feel like it conjures up specific ideas about right and wrong. I don't really sense those in this . . . otakudom-thing. Religions usually have defined precepts.
Maybe Look, But Don't Touch ?
It sounds really trite, but it seems more like another view of Reality.
?
Or maybe a Delusion?
?
Or maybe a kind of filter layered over this reality?
?
Or maybe a security blanket?
?
Or maybe a Whore?
?
Maybe I need to learn a little more Japanese. |
Your article explains a whole lot. It is like a religion, but (to be snobbishly Western) only a part. The religions we're used to are actually made up of several things: a creator that doesn't ignore your presence, a threat of retribution for certain actions, and so on. You don't need all of those things to create a religious atmosphere, but people tend to think you do, which is why people love to say stuff like "Buddhism isn't a religion, it's a way of life".
Similarly, we have a group of people who have effectively created a neutral zone for stuff "normal" people don't like. It's a different world. Like a religious retreat (I've been to a few) without the hellfire and condemnation; like Psalm 23 without the Ten Commandments. A very passive-aggressive way of saying "I like strange things, what are you going to do about it?".
You spoke of a massive psychological accident creating otakudom in Japan- isn't this "accident" just the same source that spawns the freaks over here? Your article notes how the fandom over here loves to claim it's better than all the other fandom (the Geek Hierarchy really nails this point). Of course, all the "normal" people don't see a difference in the difference forms of freakishness. In Japan, the otaku have turned Akihabara into a common refuge.
As for what the massive psychological accident is, I'm just gonna say "society" because I'll be damned if there's one source for creating lonely outcasts. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Maxson
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 6:50 pm |
|
|
| Intentionally Wrong wrote: |
From what I've seen of furries and other vaguely fanatical subcultures, the more diverse and layered the terminology is, the more pronounced the exclusivity of that niche becomes. Jargon is at once a celebration of the community, a deterrent to curious or critical outsiders, and a litmus test for newcomers. Leet-speak's a prime example: its incomprehensibility made it attractive to fledgling online communities. Understanding leet's pretty intuitive, though, so leet incorporated ever-greater levels of irony and complexity to seperate teh 1337 from teh n00bs. Or something.
The subculture surrounding moe is noteworthy because it coincides with much of the gaming public in Japan. I want to know how this intersection effects Japanese game developers, and what that should mean for games made in America. |
Is this any different from taking an FPS and turning it into a Halo-clone because the market wants that? Maybe a better example would be making a tough special ops guy be the main character (since the moe equivalent would be a schoolgirl with pink hair, or maybe glasses). Would it really affect the game industry beyond creating a default asthetic and dampening "symmetrical" games? |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Maxson
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 10:47 am |
|
|
| Intentionally Wrong wrote: |
| Well, right. Artistic superiority is the result of a work standing apart from the field. In that sense, it runs counter to the business instinct of going with what's been proven--the Halo clones, the GTA clones. This is just another example of that instinct, and that's why it's important for me to see it documented: I like knowing where ordinary is. Asking why the ordinary should be what it is--that's just me being curious. |
I figure it's based on the demographic that makes up the market- here, socially unaccepted people. Social outcasts want to be needed, but society doesn't need them- so they create what they don't naturally get. If moe is a sense of protecting and warmly watching over someone, that means the target of moe wants (and needs) to be protected and warmly watched over- the outcast as player has a substitute.
Over time, the most basic form of this "pure love"- a highschool sweetheart, or a damsel in distress- became boring. So gamemakers made the old new again with things that range from preferences (much like blond/brunette/redhead, you can get glasses/pigtails/etc.) to fetishes (loli/maid/so forth). Naturally, "standard" moe is still available for the newly outcast, who generally grow tired of it and enter fetish land.
In America, the outcasts turned to power trips instead- D&D is one example. Gaming focused on power and victory. When this grew old, the story was retold with better graphics and gameplay. Instead of creating many different scenarios, American gamemakers try to make the original scenario perfect- a realtime 3D multiple-light-sourced power trip. Some mixing in does occur- Doom-horror and WW2-nobility, usually- which helps keep the same story interesting.
That got kinda long. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Maxson
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2007 10:50 pm |
|
|
Aw thanks guys.
| klikbeep wrote: |
| Intentionally Wrong wrote: |
| No, no. I mean, are there videogame concepts that could be successful that somehow don't make use of the wish-fulfillment underlying structure? |
Ah. Actually, I don't think it's possible. Since all games are judged based on how much "fun" they are, they shut off huge ranges of possible expression. Games are the only - - and I'm being charitable here - - art form that caters specifically to audience demands.
I suppose you do have times when stuff slips through the cracks, but the current system certainly doesn't encourage it. The audience meets production squarely in the middle, and you can calculate what game will sell to what person almost to the man. Kind of neat for accounting purposes. |
Would a more varied audience make non-wish-fulfillment games viable? The variety of books and movies available must be based on some theory of profitability- smaller profits for smaller markets, no doubt, but still profitable. We know there is a market for non-wish-fulfillment games- some of the people in this thread seem interested- but it's probably not profitable right now.
I think one way to create a varied gaming market would be to expand the basic gaming market- more people would introduce more varied demands. This would be a counterbalance to the "democratized game production" theory. A larger market could make non-standard production viable, but a larger market also goes through new ideas extremely quickly. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
Maxson
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:19 am |
|
|
Would you consider any previous times in gaming history as ones where highbrow games were encouraged? I'm wondering if two times in particular- the height of text-adventure games (some of the old Infocom ones, like Suspended, were interesting) and the height of EGA/VGA adventure games (when Sierra/Lucasarts made lots of them)- would fit your description. Both of these times featured serious graphical roadblocks, and both times arguably died out because these roadblocks were lifted.
And we should thank JamesE for providing a great example of how Americans split up while Japanese don't (on the surface, anyway). |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
