Several things that need to be said:

futurebird · 2019-06-01 13:47:21

1. Compared to many game the community in OHOL is amazing. There are so many good people and immature and toxic people are relatively rare. I think that give us all higher standards for what we expect from the game and that's a good thing.

2. I'm excited to see what happens to the game next. Part of what makes this game interesting is that it changes. Change will always upset some people. It's upset me in the past. The game isn't just a single vision it means different things to different people and finding a balance isn't easy.

3. This game has a limited future I think that Jason is going to work on it for 8 more months (since he said it's a two-year project) thinking about the end of updates makes me really sad. I want to make the most of the remaining time. I hope most of you will feel the same. (I do hope it will last longer than that, but given the way some people attack our dev... eh... I don't even feel good about asking for more than the original two years, not unless we can radically shift the discourse here)

4. After I played this game for 10 hours I feel like I got my "money's worth" that I've played it for 100s of hours makes it one of the best $20 that I've spent. I don't think Jason owes me anything and I'm really happy that he *chooses* to keep working on this game and finding ways to make it better and interacting with the community on the forums. I imagine it's overwhelming but I think we've built something that's really unique as a community and through this game. I'm getting a little tired of people who clearly don't see games as expressive art that can *say* important things about the human condition and instead act like this forum is "customer service" rather than a space for collaboration and creativity.

Last edited by futurebird (2019-06-01 14:11:54)

lychee · 2019-06-01 14:19:06

Agreed!

Dodge · 2019-06-01 14:20:28

I dont think he will stop updating the game until he's satisfied with how it is, or unless it doesn't sell anymore

"I'm getting a little tired of people who clearly don't see games as expressive art that can *say* important things about the human condition and instead act like this forum is "customer service" rather than a space for collaboration and creativity."

Same

RodneyC86 · 2019-06-01 14:27:02

Dodge wrote:

I dont think he will stop updating the game until he's satisfied with how it is, or unless it doesn't sell anymore
"I'm getting a little tired of people who clearly don't see games as expressive art that can *say* important things about the human condition and instead act like this forum is "customer service" rather than a space for collaboration and creativity."
Same

Hear hear. Though now I play less now as I have found other pursuits, the game had me thinking about my own mortality more. So many games these days are just die-respawn-go kick ass to make others die-respawn. BORING

Spoonwood · 2019-06-01 15:07:00

Art is for other people, not the designer.

If you don't like some piece of work, or some aspect of that work, that someone tells you is art, you have a right to complain about it. Good artists have a responsiblity to their consumers just as people selling non-artistic products have such a responsibility.

RodneyC86 · 2019-06-01 15:12:05

Spoonwood wrote:

Art is for other people, not the designer.
If you don't like some piece of work, or some aspect of that work, that someone tells you is art, you have a right to complain about it. Good artists have a responsiblity to their consumers just as people selling non-artistic products have such a responsibility.

Wow, good artists expresses themselves through their work, consequences be damned. Responsibility is a killer of creativity.

lychee · 2019-06-01 15:21:38

Spoonwood wrote:

Art is for other people, not the designer.
If you don't like some piece of work, or some aspect of that work, that someone tells you is art, you have a right to complain about it. Good artists have a responsiblity to their consumers just as people selling non-artistic products have such a responsibility.

I think most artists would cringe at hearing this. xD

I think one point, Spoon, is that being an artist doesn't necessarily mean that you make money. In fact, a bulk majority of artists who became famous did so posthumously, and many were poor during their actual lives because their contemporaries/"customers" thought that they sucked. Appreciation for these artists literally came only after they died.

The other thing is that catering to the current field of customers/fads in the field isn't an absolute measure of "good-ness". I personally enjoy quite a bit of anime, and most people would tell you that the anime industry is beholden to pressures of adding lots of tropes, fanservice, and other gimick-y elements that producers know will sell. Even if the original screenwriter had no intention of having a beach/hotspring episode, producers will often force the team to add it because it sells.

So there's always a tug between making something that sells and making something that somebody considers artistic.

Last edited by lychee (2019-06-01 15:22:40)

Dodge · 2019-06-01 15:26:05

Spoonwood wrote:

Art is for other people, not the designer.
If you don't like some piece of work, or some aspect of that work, that someone tells you is art, you have a right to complain about it. Good artists have a responsiblity to their consumers just as people selling non-artistic products have such a responsibility.

Art is about expression of the artist not changing the art to conform to what every single person think would be good.

So if someone makes a painting he cant enjoy it without having the opinion of someone else?

Sure you have the right to complain but it doesn't make what you say interesting or valuable, if you dont understand why something is in the game or if you think it's bad, try understanding a different perspective instead of trying to make everyone else conform to yours by constantly complaining.

And if you have an opinion on why you dont like it, then explain your reasoning instead of constantly saying the same thing and mentionning it in every single thread.

Spoonwood · 2019-06-01 15:35:50

RodneyC86 wrote:

Spoonwood wrote:
Art is for other people, not the designer.
If you don't like some piece of work, or some aspect of that work, that someone tells you is art, you have a right to complain about it. Good artists have a responsiblity to their consumers just as people selling non-artistic products have such a responsibility.
Wow, good artists expresses themselves through their work, consequences be damned. Responsibility is a killer of creativity.

Couldn't disagree more.

Whatever · 2019-06-01 15:39:24

jason made a short video about art games:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GauzftrI-I4

RodneyC86 · 2019-06-01 15:40:10

Spoonwood wrote:

RodneyC86 wrote:
Spoonwood wrote:
Art is for other people, not the designer.
If you don't like some piece of work, or some aspect of that work, that someone tells you is art, you have a right to complain about it. Good artists have a responsiblity to their consumers just as people selling non-artistic products have such a responsibility.
Wow, good artists expresses themselves through their work, consequences be damned. Responsibility is a killer of creativity.
Couldn't disagree more.

Why? Because art is only for consumption? In the strictest sense no, art is first and foremost an expression.

I could argue people who ‘responsibly’ produce art for their fans as celebrities, not true artists.

lychee · 2019-06-01 15:43:33

Whatever wrote:

jason made a short video about art games:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GauzftrI-I4

Thanks for the video!

Spoonwood · 2019-06-01 15:44:38

lychee wrote:

Spoonwood wrote:
Art is for other people, not the designer.
If you don't like some piece of work, or some aspect of that work, that someone tells you is art, you have a right to complain about it. Good artists have a responsiblity to their consumers just as people selling non-artistic products have such a responsibility.
I think most artists would cringe at hearing this. xD
I think one point, Spoon, is that being an artist doesn't necessarily mean that you make money. In fact, a bulk majority of artists who became famous did so posthumously, and many were poor during their actual lives because their contemporaries/"customers" thought that they sucked. Appreciation for these artists literally came only after they died.
The other thing is that catering to the current field of customers/fads in the field isn't an absolute measure of "good-ness". I personally enjoy quite a bit of anime, and most people would tell you that the anime industry is beholden to pressures of adding lots of tropes, fanservice, and other gimick-y elements that producers know will sell. Even if the original screenwriter had no intention of having a beach/hotspring episode, producers will often force the team to add it because it sells.
So there's always a tug between making something that sells and making something that somebody considers artistic.

Art is subjective. Everyone's preferences matter equally. Consequently, art that satisfies the most preferences is the best art.

Catering to people is consequently important. Sure, catering to fads is bad, but that's because fads fade over time. It's the lack of popularity of the art *in the end* that comes as the problem, not the popularity of the art in its fad period. Popularity is not itself a problem, it's just that long-lasting popularity is difficult.

I can sit here and tell you that John Cage was a better artist than Elvis Presley all day long, because I'd rather listen to John Cage or because of his perceived level of creativity being higher than the king's. However, in the end all people's preferences matter equally. And Elvis Presley was and still is more popular. So, Elvis Presley was the better artist. Again, everyone's preferences matter equally.

Spoonwood · 2019-06-01 15:53:28

RodneyC86 wrote:

Spoonwood wrote:
RodneyC86 wrote:
Wow, good artists expresses themselves through their work, consequences be damned. Responsibility is a killer of creativity.
Couldn't disagree more.
Why? Because art is only for consumption? In the strictest sense no, art is first and foremost an expression.

No, it's NOT foremost an expression. An expression doesn't have to have a recipient. It's NOT art until someone views, hears, or otherwise senses it and *judges* what got produced as art.

I don't agree that responsibility kills creativity, because the responsibilities of an artist include creativity, and art has to come as creative in some aspect (not necessarily many aspects as Andy Warhol sometimes showed). Thus, if responsibility killed creativity, artists wouldn't be able to produce art.

RodneyC86 wrote:

I could argue people who ‘responsibly’ produce art for their fans as celebrities, not true artists.

I don't know your argument, but art only increases in value by satisfying more people since all preferences matter equally.

Spoonwood · 2019-06-01 15:58:10

Whatever wrote:

jason made a short video about art games:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GauzftrI-I4

I enjoyed this video also, but is it consistent with this post? https://onehouronelife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=6724

Anyways, thanks for sharing.

RodneyC86 · 2019-06-01 16:10:16

Spoonwood wrote:

RodneyC86 wrote:
Spoonwood wrote:
Couldn't disagree more.
Why? Because art is only for consumption? In the strictest sense no, art is first and foremost an expression.
No, it's NOT foremost an expression. An expression doesn't have to have a recipient. It's NOT art until someone views, hears, or otherwise senses it and *judges* what got produced as art.
I don't agree that responsibility kills creativity, because the responsibilities of an artist include creativity, and art has to come as creative in some aspect (not necessarily many aspects as Andy Warhol sometimes showed). Thus, if responsibility killed creativity, artists wouldn't be able to produce art.
RodneyC86 wrote:
I could argue people who ‘responsibly’ produce art for their fans as celebrities, not true artists.
I don't know your argument, but art only increases in value by satisfying more people since all preferences matter equally.

What? That makes no sense, you were referring to responsibility to customers or responsibility to creativity now? Weren’t you harping that artists should be responsible to their customers first? I think the true artists are responsible to creativity first, customers second.

You can be responsible to both yes, but from my experience watching content creators, many who jump from a humble beginning to a more ‘corporate level’ consumer type art ‘products’ feels caged in having to responsibly churn out their works on a timely basis. Most will resort to tropes, fads , memes. Some will eventually quit to go back to their roots to make their own art.

So yes I still think responsibility kills creativity and art.

And art is still an expression first per definition , a creative one.

This is going nowhere, I’m signing out.

futurebird · 2019-06-01 16:16:23

Spoonwood wrote:

I can sit here and tell you that John Cage was a better artist than Elvis Presley all day long, because I'd rather listen to John Cage or because of his perceived level of creativity being higher than the king's. However, in the end all people's preferences matter equally. And Elvis Presley was and still is more popular. So, Elvis Presley was the better artist. Again, everyone's preferences matter equally.

Elvis was a talented *performer* not a composer. It makes no sense to compare him to Cage who is an experimental composer. Elvis took the genius of blues and made it safe for mass (white) audience and he had a great voice and charisma.

Is what popular automatically "good" to a degree. Most pop art and music has something that works really well about it. Is what's popular "the best" ? In my view not always. In order to satisfy more people popular art often lacks depth and complexity. It has something that is technically good, like a good hook, or clean presentation. That takes skill and is worthy of praise and study.

But, what I'm looking for is art that takes me to a place I've never been before. I want depth and complexity. And I think your cultural cannon of artistic works is lacking if you just use popularity as the metric and nothing else.

Spoonwood · 2019-06-01 17:32:16

RodneyC86 wrote:

Spoonwood wrote:
RodneyC86 wrote:
Why? Because art is only for consumption? In the strictest sense no, art is first and foremost an expression.
No, it's NOT foremost an expression. An expression doesn't have to have a recipient. It's NOT art until someone views, hears, or otherwise senses it and *judges* what got produced as art.
I don't agree that responsibility kills creativity, because the responsibilities of an artist include creativity, and art has to come as creative in some aspect (not necessarily many aspects as Andy Warhol sometimes showed). Thus, if responsibility killed creativity, artists wouldn't be able to produce art.
RodneyC86 wrote:
I could argue people who ‘responsibly’ produce art for their fans as celebrities, not true artists.
I don't know your argument, but art only increases in value by satisfying more people since all preferences matter equally.
What? That makes no sense, you were referring to responsibility to customers or responsibility to creativity now? Weren’t you harping that artists should be responsible to their customers first? I think the true artists are responsible to creativity first, customers second.
You can be responsible to both yes, but from my experience watching content creators, many who jump from a humble beginning to a more ‘corporate level’ consumer type art ‘products’ feels caged in having to responsibly churn out their works on a timely basis. Most will resort to tropes, fads , memes. Some will eventually quit to go back to their roots to make their own art.
So yes I still think responsibility kills creativity and art.
And art is still an expression first per definition , a creative one.
This is going nowhere, I’m signing out.

How is it art if it's just an expression? Words that never get heard by anyone else, don't convey meaning, do they?

Spoonwood · 2019-06-01 17:49:19

futurebird wrote:

Spoonwood wrote:

I can sit here and tell you that John Cage was a better artist than Elvis Presley all day long, because I'd rather listen to John Cage or because of his perceived level of creativity being higher than the king's. However, in the end all people's preferences matter equally. And Elvis Presley was and still is more popular. So, Elvis Presley was the better artist. Again, everyone's preferences matter equally.
Elvis was a talented *performer* not a composer. It makes no sense to compare him to Cage who is an experimental composer. Elvis took the genius of blues and made it safe for mass (white) audience and he had a great voice and charisma.

Wait... did Elvis or did Elvis not write his own songs? Because I'm under the impression that he did write his own songs, and thus he was a composer AND performer as John Cage was also.

futurebird wrote:

Is what popular automatically "good" to a degree. Most pop art and music has something that works really well about it. Is what's popular "the best" ? In my view not always. In order to satisfy more people popular art often lacks depth and complexity. It has something that is technically good, like a good hook, or clean presentation. That takes skill and is worthy of praise and study.

I just don't agree. I've been someone who marched in a drum and bulge corps paying for it and sleeping on gym floors and a charter bus for a summer when I was much younger. The snare and tenor and probably also bass drummers in the Santa Clara Vanguard (SCV), for example, probably have more skill and physical proficiency than Tre Cool of Green Day (and Tre Cool's hands are fast, but I doubt his rudimental skill is top notch) in that those guys in SCV I think could learn and do Tre Cool's in much less time than Tre Cool could learn and do their parts, even when Tre Cool was young. But, Tre Cool has music that appeals to a bigger audience, so even though Tre Cool's technical proficiency *probably* wasn't ever up to the level of the best players in Drum Corps International (which isn't always SCV), Tre Cool is the better artist.

I also don't see why complexity would be better necessarily than simplicity. Nor depth over things that have a clearer meaning up front. It may seem strange to say that depth is not all that, so I'll try to refer to an example. The aphorisms of Nietzsche in say Thus Spake Zarathustra I would think have more depth than the writing of Strunk and White with respect to style (or maybe pick a good children's book... maybe Alice in Wonderland). But, I don't think that makes Nietzsche's book better. Strunk and White I think have the better book for more purposes... it appeals to more people and has more uses than Thus Spake Zarathustra, even though Nietszche's writing probably is deeper by quite a bit.

Amon · 2019-06-01 17:50:10

I'd say I did got my money's worth from this game, It's quite a brilliant little game and I'd lvoe to see it grow to better heights. Right now, there's hurdles.
But such is life.

WalrusesConquer · 2019-06-01 17:50:21

Dodge wrote:

I dont think he will stop updating the game until he's satisfied with how it is, or unless it doesn't sell anymore
"I'm getting a little tired of people who clearly don't see games as expressive art that can *say* important things about the human condition and instead act like this forum is "customer service" rather than a space for collaboration and creativity."
Same

Agreed! I really hope we see where this game goes preferably with less toxicity

One Hour One Life Forums

#1 2019-06-01 13:47:21

Several things that need to be said:

#2 2019-06-01 14:19:06

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#3 2019-06-01 14:20:28

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#4 2019-06-01 14:27:02

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#5 2019-06-01 15:07:00

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#6 2019-06-01 15:12:05

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#7 2019-06-01 15:21:38

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#8 2019-06-01 15:26:05

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#9 2019-06-01 15:35:50

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#10 2019-06-01 15:39:24

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#11 2019-06-01 15:40:10

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#12 2019-06-01 15:43:33

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#13 2019-06-01 15:44:38

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#14 2019-06-01 15:53:28

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#15 2019-06-01 15:58:10

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#16 2019-06-01 16:10:16

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#17 2019-06-01 16:16:23

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#18 2019-06-01 17:32:16

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#19 2019-06-01 17:49:19

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#20 2019-06-01 17:50:10

Re: Several things that need to be said:

#21 2019-06-01 17:50:21

Re: Several things that need to be said:

Board footer