Dean's Video game comments/perspective

[Dean]

Originally Posted by Nick Koan

Its not really supposed to be. And whether it is, or it isn't is incidental to the main point that it's supposed to be a game, which is supposed to be fun.

I was responding to what I perceived as the claims of the linked posts.

Originally Posted by Penny Arcade post

He is, in fact, a yokel - and he's operating under some pretty romantic notions of what constitutes an "instrument."

My point is that mashing buttons based on a sequence of video prompts is not the creation of music no matter how you look at it.

Could a "game" use the thumb sticks and buttons to turn the controllers into a virtual instrument that would allow the "gamer" to create original works or even copy existing works, sure, but that is not what these games are doing from what I can tell. That is what I meant by my previous post.

I know it is a game and supposed to be fun.

[AtomicLabMonkey]

Originally Posted by Penny Arcade

Actual instruments are not especially ergonomic, in general terms - they are not engineered for use. They need to account for crass physical laws to epitomize their function.

Someone's spent a few too many years in virtualand. Put the fucking controller down and step out into the light of the real world, dude.

Crass physical laws are ruining autocross!

[M3n2c3]

Originally Posted by AtomicLabMonkey

Someone's spent a few too many years in virtualand. Put the fucking controller down and step out into the light of the real world, dude.

Crass physical laws are ruining autocross!

No offense, but you may want to read a bit more (and raise over two million dollars in charity to children's hospitals) before you judge the man's grasp on reality: Child's Play charity

At any rate, I agree that playing Guitar Hero is not playing an instrument. Nobody's saying that it is (even the Penny Arcade article - if you think it is, please re-read it). The issue arises when you tell people that the games are silly because they should just do the real life equivalent. Sometimes, we don't want to play a real instrument, or risk personal injury to skate like a professional, or go play in the real NFL. Sometimes, we just want to play the game.

[AtomicLabMonkey]

His charity work (more power to him) has no bearing on his ridiculous statements about real musical instruments.

[M3n2c3]

Perhaps, although I did not really post the link in relation to the discussion on music, but rather your insinuation that he was a basement shut-in. Taking in to account his real-world achievements (running a successful business, organizing charity, having a family, etc.), I'd say that his expression of curiosity regarding the concept that a controller could emulate - or become - an instrument, and his subsequent study of the physical nature of instruments, are not the result of a supposed unhealthy exposure to video games. The line about, "crass physical laws," was a tongue-in-cheek exaggeration, but I guess you'd have to be more familiar with his style of writing to pick that from the limited context of the lines I posted.

Still, I don't really see his statements as being so ridiculous. His point was merely that musical instruments are generally designed not for ease of use, but rather with a singular purpose in mind: the creation of sound that is pleasing to the human ear. This usually leaves them difficult to handle and/or learn. He then goes on to note that the use of a musical instrument does not by default result in the creation of actual music.

It's an obvservation of the readily apparent that does not necessarily need to be pointed out, sure.

But it's true, and the fact that he plays video games has no bearing on that.

In the end, I think the point is that too many people place an excessive amount of value on things that they perceive to be, "real," "traditional," or "legitimate," without giving consideration to the skill that the alternative might require. It often comes down to a prejudiced, "old vs. new," perspective.

I could just as easily say that racing cars is a waste of time, and we should all run track instead.

With the right software, the lines between musical instruments and video game or computer instruments could definitely be blurred. The creation of actual music requires talent and effort no matter what, even if it is done on a computer. . . but if the computer itself is easier to use than traditional musical instrument, does that automatically decrease its value? I'd say not.

[Dean]

Just as every generation believes it invented sex, mind altering experiences, and timeless music, to presume that the modern gaming controller is somehow revolutionary in the world of music is just juvenile.

Musical instruments have an enormous range of shapes and sizes, and since the advent of the vacuum tube and transistor, the shapes have become almost unlimited.

The reality of the situation though is that humans have to play them and more importantly, other humans have to want to listen to their product for them to be successful.

Probably the most advanced instruments today look a hell of a lot like a PC or Macintosh and may or not be attached to something resembling a classic instrument like a piano, drum set, etc... Some just have a normal PC keyboard and make amazing sound.

A modern gaming controller has what, 2 2 axis thumb sticks and maybe a dozen buttons, BFD! Even a 1/2 decent "keyboard" has at least 4 or 5 octaves worth of pressure sensitive, rate sensitive, etc. keys that can produce a practically infinite range of sounds. Heck, people have used stringed instruments hooked to electronics to produce an insane array of results. How much more complicated yet humanly interactive is a 5 or 6 stringed instrument with basically infinite variability on each string.

The guy needs to get over himself and realize he doesn't know WTF he is talking about.

[Nick Koan]

Yeah, after re-reading that PA stuff (of which I originally only glanced) it is a bit far gone.

Yes, I encourage people to push the definition of what an instrument is, but calling a controller with a small amount of variation an instrument is a little ridiculous. Following along with Dean's examples, when I was in college, there was this band called Motograter. Basically, two drummers and one guy that strapped himself into this complex system of metal, cables, motion sensors and synthesizers to create music. Great music and very awesome shows. It was kind of tribal/industrial experimental noise stuff. Eventually they grabbed a singer and a guitarist and went more towards industrial rock (which isn't exactly a negative in my book) but it doesn't match the awesomeness of the early shows.

My point was never that it was as good as the real thing, but a fun substitute for those that aren't going to go hardcore into it.

[tysonK]

Dean how do you feel about First Person Shooters? Or as the kids call them FPS's.

I tired of the music crap.

[Dean]

Originally Posted by tysonK

Dean how do you feel about First Person Shooters? Or as the kids call them FPS's.

I tired of the music crap.

Kids should get out of the house and shoot real guns at real hookers and aliens!

[NevadaSTi]

Originally Posted by Dean

Kids should get out of the house and shoot real guns at real hookers and aliens!

HERE HERE!

Oh wait. I play FPS's quite often. I love them. Can I shoot a real gun, yes. Am I as good at shooting a real gun as I am in a video game, no. Am I working on it, you bet! Some day I might be a better shot then the video games. Most FSP's don't take into account the laws of physics. Such as, but not limited to gravity and how it effects the bullet path(trajectory). Other considerations, wind. Battle Field 2 does have trajectory, but it is not very realistic.

But just like with any hobby, you have to practice, you have to invest time, you have to get the best equipment you can afford.

Back to the music topic, I can play a guitar, but not very well. Chris M. (Bruspeed) is an excellent guitar player. For me, I enjoyed the challange of trying to learn to play the guitar. But I had to realize after a while that I wasn't going to be a virtuoso with the guitar, let alone be somewhat talented. I wish I was, but the way my brain works it is never gonna happen. I don't have the dedication nor the time to put into guitars to make me even somewhat good.

So, I put time and effort into something I know I am good at. Shooting sports. I am not the best, but I sure have a grand old time in competition with some great shooters. One is a fellow member here and the other half of the SECCS Shooting team. Scotty is a great shot, and I have learned more from him then he has learned from me. I appreciate having the talent around to help guide me.

I still play video games in my spare time. Do I know when to stop and do something constructive, sure.

[M3n2c3]

Originally Posted by Dean

Just as every generation believes it invented sex, mind altering experiences, and timeless music, to presume that the modern gaming controller is somehow revolutionary in the world of music is just juvenile.

Musical instruments have an enormous range of shapes and sizes, and since the advent of the vacuum tube and transistor, the shapes have become almost unlimited.

The reality of the situation though is that humans have to play them and more importantly, other humans have to want to listen to their product for them to be successful.

Probably the most advanced instruments today look a hell of a lot like a PC or Macintosh and may or not be attached to something resembling a classic instrument like a piano, drum set, etc... Some just have a normal PC keyboard and make amazing sound.

A modern gaming controller has what, 2 2 axis thumb sticks and maybe a dozen buttons, BFD! Even a 1/2 decent "keyboard" has at least 4 or 5 octaves worth of pressure sensitive, rate sensitive, etc. keys that can produce a practically infinite range of sounds. Heck, people have used stringed instruments hooked to electronics to produce an insane array of results. How much more complicated yet humanly interactive is a 5 or 6 stringed instrument with basically infinite variability on each string.

The guy needs to get over himself and realize he doesn't know WTF he is talking about.

Now you're nit-picking. He approached the idea of using the peripherals with appropriate software or add-ons to possibly compose music as a curiosity, and now you're saying he's ignorant because. . . there aren't enough buttons?

A basic ocarina has five holes on it, and produces music. A trumpet has three valves.

Music composed with a controller-like device could easily be manipulated in post-production, negating the need for a million buttons. In fact, most computer-generated music goes through heavy post-production processing to gain the desired sound, and often comes out sounding as good as the real thing.

I don't even like Guitar Hero or Rock Band as video games, but I'm certainly willing to concede that with the right software, the peripherals could theoretically be used to manipulate sound and produce a genuinely original music composition. Will just anyone be able to pick them up and do so? Of course not. The instrument itself does not make the music - the player does.

[Dean]

Originally Posted by M3n2c3

Now you're nit-picking. He approached the idea of using the peripherals with appropriate software or add-ons to possibly compose music as a curiosity, and now you're saying he's ignorant because. . . there aren't enough buttons?

A basic ocarina has five holes on it, and produces music. A trumpet has three valves.

Music composed with a controller-like device could easily be manipulated in post-production, negating the need for a million buttons. In fact, most computer-generated music goes through heavy post-production processing to gain the desired sound, and often comes out sounding as good as the real thing.

I don't even like Guitar Hero or Rock Band as video games, but I'm certainly willing to concede that with the right software, the peripherals could theoretically be used to manipulate sound and produce a genuinely original music composition. Will just anyone be able to pick them up and do so? Of course not. The instrument itself does not make the music - the player does.

No, you are missing my point. His idea is not original or terribly useful.

There are far more sophisticated and usable devices already in use by musicians. Using a game controller is a huge step backwards which is why nobody bothers.

And there have been program that made sounds based on the position of a joystick, trackballs, etc. back in the 70s, so it is not an original idea either.

Let me know if he ever finds an audience for his revolutionary "instrument" and we can talk.

[M3n2c3]

I will definitely grant you that, but I think it's deserving of more consideration than a blanket statement provides. . . this would not necessarily be geared towards musicians (who already have tools at their disposal), and if the internet has shown us anything, it's that there's always an audience somewhere. Amplitude, for instance, is another musical, rhythm-based game on the PS2 (from the same developer as Guitar Hero, no less) that includes a mode that allows you to remix music tracks within the game interface and upload the results for others to listen to. Strange as it sounds, there was actually a sizeable community based around this simple feature. There are also many people who have spent hours on end using a controller and the basic shapes and tools in the Forza 2 decal editor to create incredibly detailed designs on their cars, so this is definitely something that simply comes down to the existence of a will and a way. . .

As far as usefulness goes, let me draw you an example - and the pun is intended, as my own talents do not lie in the realm of musical composition. . .

To preface, using a game controller to produce music, while possible, would most definitely be time consuming at the least. Any notes generated would need to be heavily manipulated if the user intended them to sound even remotely real - anything less would simply result in the most rudimentary-sounding synth.

Now, what tools do most people associate with visual art? If we're talking about drawings or paintings, the answer will be pencils, paint, brushes, etc. These allow varied applications of pressure, stroke, shade, and texture to create an image that the viewer can identify and connect with.

While I don't think so highly of my own talent as to claim that I created real art, I think it is the method by which I created the attached images that makes them appropriate to this topic. The fireball image was done with Bryce 3d and Photoshop, and just a two button PC mouse. I don't own a graphics tablet. The other was created using a mouse and Windows 3.1 Paintbrush. . . pretty much the CG equivalent of a fistful of crayons, but the best I could muster in 1995.

I've always been particularly attached to these images, because while they were almost unnecessarily difficult to complete (on the futility scale, drawing with a mouse probably rates somewhere between sculpting with a toothpick and trying to black in an entire posterboard with fine point markers), the end result was mostly to my satisfaction - a rare occasion when it came to my artistic endeavors. There were certainly better ways to achieve these, but this is simply the way I approached them. I know I'm not alone, either - I'm sure most folk here have seen the online video of the guy that draws an incredibly detailed car using Windows Paintbrush. Sometimes you just use what you have. With enough work, the first image could have been manipulated to resemble an actual piece of comic book art.

Do I think that the audio software being described will be made available for video game systems? I'm not sure - the cost would be prohibitive, and the work required to make it servicable would likely prevent it from ever happening. But if it is somehow made available, people will use it. Seriously. . . if all the Guitar Hero fans were given a chance to use the same peripheral to try and compose their own tracks? They'd be all over it.

Why draw with a mouse when you could use a pencil? Why use a game controller to play music when you could use a guitar? Why circle the earth in a hot air balloon when you could take a jet, or sail when you could ride a motorboat? I dunno. . . why not?

[Dean]

I'm sorry, his point is somehow that a game controller would somehow make a great musical instrument and that existing ones "are not engineered for use".

This claim is asinine. While a game controller could be made to act as an instrument, there is no way it will ever compete with any number of other existing instruments that are actually engineered for the purpose.

[Double Phister]

Drumitar

[sperry]

Originally Posted by Dean

I'm sorry, his point is somehow that a game controller would somehow make a great musical instrument and that existing ones "are not engineered for use".

This claim is asinine. While a game controller could be made to act as an instrument, there is no way it will ever compete with any number of other existing instruments that are actually engineered for the purpose.

Are you shitting me? Where did PA say that?

Here's the quote again:

Originally Posted by Penny Arcade

I wrote about this a while ago when talking about the remix mode of Frequency, another Harmonix game, and how it made the PS2 controller a kind of instrument. That idea fascinated me. Actual instruments are not especially ergonomic, in general terms - they are not engineered for use. They need to account for crass physical laws to epitomize their function. Instruments are beautiful, let me be clear. But they are not, themselves, music.

Nowhere is there an argument made that "a game controller would somehow make a great musical instrument". His point was that old school musical instruments are bound by the laws of physics in their designs, i.e. you can't make a piano that uses hammers on strings to sound like a drum set, but due to technology (of which video game controllers are part of) we now have the ability to engineer new devices that could be more ergonomic methods of producing music. His point was the instrument itself doesn't define the music, the produced sound defines the music. i.e. Even if you're using a video game controller as your "instrument" it doesn't make something that is any more or less "real music" than a piano or guitar makes.

Remember, PA was arguing against the "yokel" that's making the claim that music made by a game is somehow not music because it's not from a "real" instrument. It's got *nothing* to do with whether or not your XBox controller is the "sousaphone for the 21st century".

I contend that the guys over a Penny Arcade don't actually think Guitar Hero is the equivalent of really playing a guitar. They just contend that Guitar Hero is to playing the guitar as Madden '08 is to playing in the NFL. It's a "dumbed down" version of a more complicated task that makes the fun of the real task more accessible. It still takes skill, but not as much or not quite the same skill to play. Like the Tony Hawk games: they're obviously not the same thing as really jumping a skateboard off the roof of a skyscraper, but they're still fun. Just because the game is based on a real activity doesn't detract from the game itself, and it doesn't mean the player is somehow convincing themselves that the game is a surrogate for the real thing. For example, I have Rock Band, and I have a guitar. Playing the Rock Band guitar is challenging and fun, but it's not like I no longer pick up the real guitar. It's just guitar karaoke for chrissake, they can both co-exist.

[Dean]

Originally Posted by sperry

Are you shitting me? Where did PA say that?

Here's the quote again:



Nowhere is there an argument made that "a game controller would somehow make a great musical instrument". His point was that old school musical instruments are bound by the laws of physics in their designs, i.e. you can't make a piano that uses hammers on strings to sound like a drum set, but due to technology (of which video game controllers are part of) we now have the ability to engineer new devices that could be more ergonomic methods of producing music. His point was the instrument itself doesn't define the music, the produced sound defines the music. i.e. Even if you're using a video game controller as your "instrument" it doesn't make something that is any more or less "real music" than a piano or guitar makes.

Remember, PA was arguing against the "yokel" that's making the claim that music made by a game is somehow not music because it's not from a "real" instrument. It's got *nothing* to do with whether or not your XBox controller is the "sousaphone for the 21st century".

I contend that the guys over a Penny Arcade don't actually think Guitar Hero is the equivalent of really playing a guitar. They just contend that Guitar Hero is to playing the guitar as Madden '08 is to playing in the NFL. It's a "dumbed down" version of a more complicated task that makes the fun of the real task more accessible. It still takes skill, but not as much or not quite the same skill to play. Like the Tony Hawk games: they're obviously not the same thing as really jumping a skateboard off the roof of a skyscraper, but they're still fun. Just because the game is based on a real activity doesn't detract from the game itself, and it doesn't mean the player is somehow convincing themselves that the game is a surrogate for the real thing. For example, I have Rock Band, and I have a guitar. Playing the Rock Band guitar is challenging and fun, but it's not like I no longer pick up the real guitar. It's just guitar karaoke for chrissake, they can both co-exist.

Mashing keys may be fun, but it is not making music. You can still play with the volume turned off. I would actually contend that you might do better by doing so, but that is not the point.

The gist of his argument is that the old fogies are old and therefore don't realize the potential of modern ideas like game controllers.

The words I put in quotes are in your quote. To claim that modern instruments are not engineered for use is crazy. Until you make a brain interface, the range of motion and depth of options on current instruments is absolutely incredible. Some gaming device that relies on only minimal motion of your fingers that retails for <$100 can't compete no matter how well engineered.

A real guitar has how many frets times how many strings? Guitar Hero has what, 5 buttons and a strum bar? OOOoooooohhhh

I already did the keyboard analogy to a game controller.

The guy appears to think we are still playing harpsichords and beating on empty skulls. Many musicians today use far more CPU power than your average gaming system has to create their music and those are often tied to other incredible pieces of electronic wizardry with incredibly diverse and sensitive input and feedback systems.

Just because you might be able to use a gaming system to create music does not mean it is somehow remotely equivalent to the instruments and technology musicians actually use to do so in the real world. Just because there is a place on the internet where you can share/trade the creations you make on your gaming system does not mean it is the next big thing.

Oh, and Nick agreed with me at some point in this thread, so

[sperry]

Originally Posted by Dean

Mashing keys may be fun, but it is not making music. You can still play with the volume turned off. I would actually contend that you might do better by doing so, but that is not the point.

Where did anyone say that Guitar Hero is "making music"? Just like playing Madden isn't "playing football", playing Guitar Hero isn't playing the guitar. It's a game. It's fun. I'm not making an argument that it's somehow a replacement for making original music. Are you even reading what people are posting before replying?

Originally Posted by Dean

The gist of his argument is that the old fogies are old and therefore don't realize the potential of modern ideas like game controllers.

Nope. The gist is that people that put down music based on the instrument used to make it are yokels. Nowhere is someone's age being mentioned, nor is there any implication that the "yokel" is unaware of technology. In fact, they explicitly point out the person is aware of the game. Again, are you even reading what's been said?

Originally Posted by Dean

The words I put in quotes are in your quote. To claim that modern instruments are not engineered for use is crazy. Until you make a brain interface, the range of motion and depth of options on current instruments is absolutely incredible. Some gaming device that relies on only minimal motion of your fingers that retails for <$100 can't compete no matter how well engineered.

No one claimed modern instruments aren't engineered for use. The claim is that traditional instruments are limited by the fact they use their shape to physically create the music. It is impossible to make a tuba, that sounds like a tuba, but is only 6 inches in size. But a game controller interfacing with a computer can sound like a tuba without being limited by the laws of physics required to make that sound via air blown through a tube. There's no argument being made that the game controller is a better tuba than the original, just that the music generated by it is still in fact "real music" even if the instrument isn't a "real instrument".

Originally Posted by Dean

A real guitar has how many frets times how many strings? Guitar Hero has what, 5 buttons and a strum bar? OOOoooooohhhh

So what? Really, what does the design of a controller for a game have to do with the argument about traditional vs. non-traditional instruments? No one anywhere in this thread has made a statement that Guitar Hero is for making music. It's for the game playing equivalent of making music. You might as well ask where the cleats are on the controller for better traction on the football field. Guitar Hero, and its controllers are unrelated to the argument about instruments.

Originally Posted by Dean

I already did the keyboard analogy to a game controller.

Um, good for you?

Originally Posted by Dean

The guy appears to think we are still playing harpsichords and beating on empty skulls. Many musicians today use far more CPU power than your average gaming system has to create their music and those are often tied to other incredible pieces of electronic wizardry with incredibly diverse and sensitive input and feedback systems.

No he's not. If you were at all familiar with Penny Arcade, you'd realize that next to The Onion, it may be the most sarcastic site on the internet. Just because you can't recognize sarcasm does not change the intent of his statement. Plus, PA did not say that a video game system is good for making music!!!! No matter how much you wish that were the case, you're just putting words in their mouth. They did say that the instrument used for making music does not define the music, and that it's childish to assume that traditional instruments are somehow "better" than technology... but nowhere is there any implication that a video game controller is a "good" alternative instrument. I'm sure they're aware of the way computers are used in the music industry, hence their whole attack on people that believe technology based instruments make less worth music than traditional instruments.

Originally Posted by Dean

Just because you might be able to use a gaming system to create music does not mean it is somehow remotely equivalent to the instruments and technology musicians actually use to do so in the real world. Just because there is a place on the internet where you can share/trade the creations you make on your gaming system does not mean it is the next big thing.

Again, who said a gaming system is being used as an instrument!? You're arguing against something you made up. PA didn't suggest an XBox is a good instrument... I didn't say it... the blather from the other folks in this thread that I bothered to glance at didn't seem to imply that. As far as I can tell, this whole thread was created by you to argue with yourself, since you don't bother to read what people are saying.

[Dean]

I did not read the entire thread, only the post originally referenced on PA.

He clearly thinks these controllers and gaming systems would be good for creating music and that there will be some broad demand for the output.

I wrote about this a while ago when talking about the remix mode of Frequency, another Harmonix game, and how it made the PS2 controller a kind of instrument. That idea fascinated me.

These guitars are only toys because they are limited, at this particular moment, to playing other people's songs. This is a software problem, and not representative of some lasting defect with the device.

When Harmonix delivers a composition suite with the next Rock Band (or the next), and people start creating and uploading their own albums...

He goes on to claim.

Between the five keys, combinations of those keys, and the "hammer on, pull off" mechanic, you're talking about a ri-goddamn-diculous number of states.

Compared to just about any real instrument, this is a ridiculously small number of states as I have previously enumerated. I am not going to post the quote where he claims instrument aren't engineered again.

To make a Tuba sound, you haven't needed a tuba for ages... The game controller hasn't changed the way people think about instrument shapes, the synthesizer did in 1876, or 1970 (depending on your definitions) and sequencers and MIDI controllers and the modern computer have taken it well beyond!!! Hell, pipe organs make some amazing sounds not limited by the piano shaped keyboard they use. The guy is just ignorant to think that his generation is magically going to free us from the confines of "crass physical laws". It's already been done centuries ago.

And to end with he thinks he is bloody George Washinton or one of the George Bushs with his closing

We're witnessing the democratization of music.

He clearly has never heard of the '60s.... I don't care how sarcastic this site is in general, I can only judge the post I read and he clearly knows not of what he speaks.

[100_Percent_Juice]

I think that the main point in the guys post is that instruments as we know them today are made to produce a certain sound, not to fit well on a human body. A game controller is first and foremost designed to fit comfortable into human hands. Then to provide function. I doubt when the first guitars were being made someone said "hey I want to make a piece of wood fit snug against my body...and then lets try to get some sound out of this piece!" Most instruments require that your body be situated in an awkward position to play the instrument. Look at the violin, it makes you pinch a piece of would between your head and shoulder and outstretch your arm like your having a seizure. Comfortable? Ergonomic? no.

Also I don't think he was claiming that the controller would destroy all other instruments in the future. I think he was merely saying that it has potential to be something greater than its perceived to be today.

I agree that playing rockband is not the equivalent of playing or making music. Just like I agree that playing Dance Dance Revolution doesn't make you a dancer. A game controller is just a tool like any other instrument. It probably will be used to make music in the future, I mean damn its only been around since the 70's where as string instruments have been traced all the way back to the Egyptians. Its just a baby Dean. A baby in search of a home.

[sperry]

Originally Posted by Dean

I did not read the entire thread, only the post originally referenced on PA.

He clearly thinks these controllers and gaming systems would be good for creating music and that there will be some broad demand for the output.





He goes on to claim.Compared to just about any real instrument, this is a ridiculously small number of states as I have previously enumerated. I am not going to post the quote where he claims instrument aren't engineered again.

To make a Tuba sound, you haven't needed a tuba for ages... The game controller hasn't changed the way people think about instrument shapes, the synthesizer did in 1876, or 1970 (depending on your definitions) and sequencers and MIDI controllers and the modern computer have taken it well beyond!!! Hell, pipe organs make some amazing sounds not limited by the piano shaped keyboard they use. The guy is just ignorant to think that his generation is magically going to free us from the confines of "crass physical laws". It's already been done centuries ago.

And to end with he thinks he is bloody George Washinton or one of the George Bushs with his closingHe clearly has never heard of the '60s.... I don't care how sarcastic this site is in general, I can only judge the post I read and he clearly knows not of what he speaks.

Go ahead and continue to inject your opinion in between the lines of what other people say. Or try again and point out exactly where PA claims that a game controller is a good musical instrument. I see where they say the idea of using a game for music creation is fascinating. I see where they say the controllers are limited, and where they say better software could make them more useable, and where the number of input states is high enough to make it possible for music generation (after all, 5 buttons is 24 more states than a trumpet's 3 valves, nevermind that the guitar controller actually has 13 buttons, two analog levers, and a motion sensor). And I see where they talk about using a simplified instrument and the internet to make it easier for music to be created and published by the average joe rather than requiring either years of training on a traditional instrument, or tens of thousands of dollars in technical gizmos that you keep touting as the "right" way to make music with computers, and rendering groups like RIAA and record labels unnecessary, thus the "democratization of music".

But nowhere do I see a claim that video games should or will supplant old fashioned or more advanced technology in the creation of music. Or a claim that they are somehow better or more ideal than existing methods. All I see is a claim that they could be used as such.

Clearly you have a problem w/ video games (I mean, look at this useless, unnecessary, disaster of a thread you created to spew your opinions on the subject). You think games somehow supplant their non-virtual counterparts in the minds of those that play them. You're wrong. Just as email hasn't supplanted using the phone, video games do not supplant the activity they emulate. They're fun in their own right, and in some ways they can even enhance the real activity. You don't seem to get that, and in your pomposity you project your own opinions over what's actually being said by others and continue to argue when no one is actually being contrary to what you're saying. No one is disagreeing with your claim that a video game controller isn't the ideal for next generation musical instruments... but you'd rather argue about it anyway by twisting someone else's words, and if that doesn't work you'll argue about what they meant instead, when clearly the claim you insist is being made, isn't being made at all.

And by the way, the guys that write PA are closer to your age than these theoretical kids you contend are being fattened by video games. If you ever bothered to follow the comic strip, you'd know they understand exactly the problems that video games create in society, and they do a terrific job at mocking the people that take gaming way too seriously, as well as the people like yourself that are too far removed from the subject to have an informed opinion about it.

[Dean]

Originally Posted by sperry

Clearly you have a problem w/ video games (I mean, look at this useless, unnecessary, disaster of a thread you created to spew your opinions on the subject).

Now who is injecting opinion? I believe I have even mentioned previously in this thread that I enjoy both video games and fun from time to time.

I created this thread to not pollute another and based on the fact that we are on page 2 it clearly has created discussion. At least some of it from you. Nobody is forcing you to post in it.

I didn't post the PA reference, I only responded to it. I do not know the author and yes, I formed opinions and drew conclusions based on his statements. Clearly you did not form the same opinions or draw the same conclusions. Now that is "democratization"...

I did inject my own bias on this individual's age. I withdraw that with the realization that ignorance crosses all age groups, including my own. Perhaps his entire post was sarcastic, but I do not think that was the intent of the person who posted the original link to it.

[M3n2c3]

Originally Posted by sperry

the blather from the other folks in this thread that I bothered to glance at

Thanks. . .?

Originally Posted by Dean

Perhaps his entire post was sarcastic, but I do not think that was the intent of the person who posted the original link to it.

Actually, you might want to re-read my post. Here, I'll quote it for you:

Originally Posted by M3n2c3

On Guitar Hero and Rock Band, this very topic came up on Friday's Penny Arcade text:

The argument is a good one. Even if I enjoyed football, I would not likely go out to play it. I prefer my limbs and spine intact, thank you. An appropriate substitute would be a video game, especially since the alternative - merely watching football - leaves one essentially inactive, requiring little input.

The same could be said for instruments. Perhaps I like music but do not care to learn an instrument, or know how to play an instrument other than guitar. In either case, I will not be learning how to play guitar, but my love for music can be enough to prompt me to play Guitar Hero, and enjoy the excitement of interacting with the audio.

There is sometimes a financial aspect to consider as well. If one is interested in motorsports, but is too young to compete, or finds the cost of preparing a car and getting it out to RFR to be too restrictive, an XB360 and a copy of Forza 2 can provide a satisfactory surrogate.

All that was really said is that the controller could provide an entertaining alternative to playing an instrument. This was never about a game controller replacing real instruments. . . it was just about video games. The worst he's guilty of claiming is that real instruments are difficult to learn due to their purely functional design, and that you don't necessarily have to endure that just to have some fun with music.

[Nick Koan]

Originally Posted by Dean

Oh, and Nick agreed with me at some point in this thread, so

That doesn't prove nothing!

(and I only agreed in the instance of controllers being musical instruments, which was never part of anyones arguments).

[M3n2c3]

On the subject of PA, wednesday's post and comic were pretty good. More Child's Play charity notes, too, with some neat items being auctioned by Bungie and Valve.