Muneeb Hafiz takes a critical look at the cross platform between cinema and video -games.
The long-standing and fiercely contested debate amongst film devotees and gamers has been reignited recently ? which is the more sophisticated medium? There is little doubt that film, Hollywood in particular, has traditionally regarded itself as head honcho of the image entertainment world. However, the progression of video gaming, not only as entertainment but also as an art form, is unequivocal. Utilising near perfect in-game graphics and narratives that are progressively complex yet interactive, surely video games are a worthy adversary of film? Not to mention the shameful number of clich?-ridden, feeble-minded multi sequels. Hollywood?s case as the dominant force in the entertainment world seems bleak at best.
That the video gaming industry has progressed significantly does not negatively correlate to the performance of film, in fact it would be imprudent to assume so. The groundbreaking effort of cinema as THE patriarch of entertainment cannot be neglected, and continues to effectively transform, adapt and appeal through the decades. That is not to suffer a self-appropriated amnesia with the Piranha 3DD?s and Wild Wild West?s of this world, but instead to acknowledge the feats cinema has achieved in its preeminence. Not simply economically, (with films such as Avatar earning a phenomenal $2.8 billion at the box office) but also artistically. The manner in which cinema can provide impetus for people to think in new ways about the world they live in is invaluable, and is arguably a feat yet to be actualised by video games.
?
Another criticism of gaming is their goal-orientated nature and it is here that cinema may have the edge. In gaming, every scene has a function, a desired and sometimes necessary outcome to your quest. There is rigidity, no matter how complex or intriguing. There is no room for ?Royale with cheese? chitchat like Tarantino?s Pulp Fiction, nor the power of imagination as in Nolan?s Inception. In the US, 2010 saw video games accrue $18.6 billion to the $10.6 billion earned by cinema. Clearly, whilst the economic competences of the gaming industry are indisputable there is work to be done with regards to the emotional connection created via the gaming experience. The endorsement and active participation of Hollywood actors can not overcome this deficit. However, their involvement underlines just how far gaming has come ? Hollywood hot shots Gary Oldman, Patrick Stewart and Samuel L. Jackson have all dabbled in the virtual world.
So who wins this battle? Who knows, I certainly don?t but what is prevalent is the growing significance of video games on the globe of visual entertainment. Few can still label the gaming industry as the snot-nosed punk it once was and the ?Nintendo generation? is less comprised of spotty, geeky teenagers. Video games have become more complex, demanding intellectual and emotional intelligence in a more absorbing way. Nevertheless, many argue the immersive quality of cinema remains unrivalled and is the dominant global force it has been for decades. It seems the two mediums exist symbiotically whilst remaining unique in their own way. The hyper-information, hyper-entertainment society we find ourselves in caters for both, and maybe the real issue is choice: sophistication and appeal lies is in the eye of the beholder.
Source: http://thecourieronline.co.uk/2012/11/medium-combat-film-vs-video-gaming/
Beach Volleyball Olympics 2012 Jessica Ennis Oscar Pistorius Aliya Mustafina Kirk Urso London 2012 Javelin roger federer
No comments:
Post a Comment