Pulitzer Prize winning author says GTA IV ain't art
In an article in the Wall Street Journal, Diaz points out the sugary coated love the game has been receiving -- GTA IV is better than "The Godfather," better than "The Sopranos," better than say, a novel! He admits to loving the game, but doesn't think it deserves to be compared to classic cinema, or a timeless television show about chubby mafia dons.
The piece is very well written, and if it wasn't we'd have to call Diaz on the carpet and demand he fork his award over. There's also a nice sidebar on the history of the different GTA games over the years. In fact, Diaz said the best thing you can compare GTA to is itself, "Before you start measuring a game to The Brothers Karamazov maybe you should measure it up to its earlier iterations. You might actually see something."
We agree on some levels that anyone comparing this to The Godfather needs to have some serious cinematic appreciation classes, but who's to say Nico's story isn't high art? We can think of a few classic novels we had to read in school that we'd love to skip in lieu of some carjacking. Do you think that 2007 Pulitzer winnner Cormac McCarthy spends much time gaming? Maybe he's more of a Wii dude.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
MarkHawk @ Jul 1st 2008 7:17AM
You cant define what art is... Plain and simple.
samfish @ Jul 1st 2008 9:05AM
No, but you can generally define what high art is, and GTA4 (or any other videogame to date) sure doesn't hit the mark.
And yes, MGS4 doesn't either.
I encourage everyone to actually READ the article (not just Joystiq's summary) before going off on it, as it's actually rather well written.
4MyFriends @ Jul 1st 2008 9:15AM
Like that will happen Samfish, and ironically I was just about to read it myself.
matt @ Jul 1st 2008 10:22AM
Samfish, you're right, but maybe the author of this post needs to read the article or at least change the title as Diaz clearly states that GTA is art. I disagree with you over MGS story, that is art in comparison with some of the greatest movies made.
PS- Godfather..SUCKED!!! Most overrated movie ever!!!
Boy With Balls on Chin @ Jul 1st 2008 12:08PM
@matt
-1
Godfather = Greatness
Maverick Saturn @ Jul 1st 2008 1:03PM
Matt, you're on your own there. Godfather was superb, and when it came out it was original. Why do you think it has spawned so many clones today?
LK @ Jul 1st 2008 2:38PM
matt,
I've never ever seen a post that faded out, but you deserve it for saying that.
Korova *of the highlands* @ Jul 1st 2008 7:07PM
The high/low distinction is political, not aesthetic. Its all about class, prejudice and other such unsavory things. And Junot does not make it. He distinguishes successful and great art, but those dont have to be political.
This is the best game review I have ever read. It should be required reading for all new game reviewers. If they can relate a new game not only to its old iterations, the state of the industry but to the culture at large, that would be completely awesome.
It would also stupefy fanboys. God, that will be the day.
Jody Anthony (gamertag and psn: JodyAnthony) @ Jul 1st 2008 7:22AM
"Pulitzer Prize winning author wants people to pay attention to him"
Shagittarius @ Jul 1st 2008 2:53PM
Hes just mad cause GTA4 made more $$$ than his pulitzer prize winning book.
AwesomeTown @ Jul 1st 2008 7:23AM
Now I love GTA (little overrated, but still awesome game), but if I was going to pick an example of gaming as art, GTA would not be it.
MarkHawk @ Jul 1st 2008 7:44AM
BioShock?
AwesomeTown @ Jul 1st 2008 7:55AM
Ha, yea, that's what I was thinking. GTA's story didn't have anything to wow me, and Bioshock's did.
But I do agree with MarkHawk above. Art is too subjective.
nick @ Jul 1st 2008 10:51AM
neither would he, probably. He's responding to the public/press reaction to the game which you have to admit is pretty pretentious.
DiscoGhost @ Jul 1st 2008 9:14AM
Agreed. GTA was a great game but for the gameplay more than the story...I'd definitally put Bioshock higher on the artistic value scale.
MrBlank @ Jul 1st 2008 9:34AM
Silent Hill 2 has to be the closest thing popular video games have come to high art.
animeman_59 @ Jul 1st 2008 10:06AM
Ico and Shadow of the Colossus. Two games that earn the title of art.
To me, GTA is completely overrated. When GTA3 first came out, everbody seemed to want to play it for one reason. "We can kill cops, steal cars, and do whatever we want!" When I played it, it was crass, the graphics were sub-par, and the story was crap.
Same thing with Mortal Kombat. Everybody gushed over this fighting game for one reason. You can rip someone in half. Forget the fact that the fighting mechanics were horrible, and the characters were lame. As long as you got pixelated blood, it was cool.
Paul (PSN: heypaul) @ Jul 1st 2008 11:23AM
Why is everyone so focused on GTA's story as the part that should be evaluated as art? We judge different mediums by different artistic standards and video games should be no different. To take an extreme example, the quality of something like a color palette can be imperative for a visual art like film, yet completely meaningless for say, a poetic composition. Why are we focused on GTA's story (which admittedly, isn't that spectacular) when the developers have created such a uniquely satirical reflection of perhaps the world's most well-known city? I've always felt that we should judge the artistic quality of a game based on the world it creates - something games like GTA, Bioshock, and of course, Shadow of the Colossus and Ico all do incredibly well.
AwesomeTown @ Jul 1st 2008 11:39AM
@Paul
I definitely understand your point, especially about the satire, but I still don't think GTA IV touches either Shadow of the Colossus or Bioshock in total. Those worlds (and stories) were so much more engrossing and visually appealing than GTA IV, to me anyway. GTA IV just felt like an upgraded GTA III, and it didn't really "feel" like anything more than that.
Maverick Saturn @ Jul 1st 2008 1:09PM
Paul, we are concentrating on the plot, because the critique is an author, duh? Hes not a designer or a movie maker so we are concentrating on the field of which he specializes, plots, story outlines.
Nigeria @ Jul 1st 2008 7:25AM
"Maybe he's more of a Wii dude"
Lol, whut.
I haven't played that much GTA 4 but from the time I've spent with it the dialogue seemed equivalent to a B-movie. That's not a bad thing, for me anyway, but when compared to films like the Godfather it does come up a little short.
We're fed so poorly in terms of interesting story, believable characters, that whenever a decent story pops up we salivate over it like it's the world's greatest thing evar. Gamers, reviewers, can be really insular sometimes.
Though, personally, I wish GTA would abandon the whole melodrama thing, it's sort of embarrassing, especially when intercut with moments of outrageous stereotypes. They should take to the spirit of the original game. Remember kill frenzy's? With the game show host. I don't know, it just seemed more fun back on the Playstation.
playwhutyalike @ Jul 1st 2008 11:52AM
As far as believable characters goes I see Niko Belic as what he is portrayed as: a tough, quiet, observant person who will fuck you up and you wouldn't even see it coming.
Now, CJ in San Andreas, what a whiny little bitch. I couldn't understand his character at all. They should have had his brother as the lead character.
Rhandos @ Jul 1st 2008 7:32AM
The title is wrong, he explicitely says it's art:
Here: "OK, let me be clear: I love GTA IV and I have no doubt that it is art, but an equal to "The Sopranos" or "The Godfather"?"
He just doesn't think it's on par with the latter titles.
Stop twisting the article, Kelly.
blairseip @ Jul 1st 2008 8:49AM
I caught that, too. That's a pretty big oversight, Kevin.
DLow28 @ Jul 1st 2008 8:52AM
I've noticed bloggers on Joystiq doing this more often, it is getting out of hand.
andregalan @ Jul 1st 2008 9:15AM
Quite Simply, Joystiq and all Weblogs Inc writers are paid a base rate plus bonuses for such things as getting click-throughs to their articles, and driving up high numbers of comments. The Gawker network does the same thing and not without its share of controversy, either, although Kotaku is generally free from that policy impacting editorial decision.
From what I've noticed, Joystiq, and particularly the satellite sites like WoWinsider bait controversy, intentionally misquote or misrepresent things in order to drive the comment page into a fervor. There was a period in WoWinsider's lifetime, actually, where every single poorly-written (hey, they are the bush-leagues of blogging) article ended with "What do you think?" imploring the reader to go chat it up in the comments section.
The editors aren't above getting in the fray to drive their numbers up, either. If a piece isn't getting enough controversy, and they want it to, they'll start unleashing ad hominem attacks at people who call them on their bullshit. This has happened to me.
To be clear, I've got nothing against Joystiq or any of its lesser moons, but they should stop trying to game the system and adhere to simple journalistic integrity, which, correct me if I'm wrong, is based on fairness, not baiting riotous feedback from the community.
No, the latter isn't journalism, its propagandizing. To further the point and godwin this thread, I believe a man by the name of Goebbels was quite good at doing what certain writers here are doing.
Dirt @ Jul 1st 2008 10:11AM
Just to prove it is all subjective.
The Godfather is a fantastic piece of art. Such a great movie on so many levels.
The Sopranos? Pure trash. If he thinks this is art, but not GTA4? Come on.. Seriously.
See? All subjective. This guy can stuff it.
WRE (PSN: WorstReviewEver; Gamertag: HaloKissesBoys; Wii Friend Code: 4204-4590-6106-3583) @ Jul 1st 2008 10:35AM
"...but they should stop trying to game the system and adhere to simple journalistic integrity, which, correct me if I'm wrong, is based on fairness, not baiting riotous feedback from the community."
Clearly you don't read the New York Times...
Unknown @ Jul 1st 2008 10:45AM
@andregalan and others: wrong. We aren't paid bonuses for traffic. If we were, then I'd title every article "NUDE ANGELINA JOLIE PHOTOS INSIDE!!!"
In the article, Diaz says GTA IV isn't a piece of high art, pretty plain and simple. Although he loves the game, it's not a masterpiece of human achievement. Did you read it?
Markez (MKWii 4339-2878-5120) @ Jul 1st 2008 12:58PM
@ Unknown
Did you read your headline?
Mr Khan @ Jul 2nd 2008 7:27PM
Clearly he thinks it has to be about ITALIAN-American gangsters to be considered art
He just doesn't like the Serbs
Korova *of the highlands* @ Jul 1st 2008 7:49AM
Juno is a very good writer. And very funny and raunchy! He is like David Sedaris.
I have to respect his opinion and agree that GTA does not rise to the level of aesthetic contribution that a cinematic or television masterpiece does.
But, I have read several best-selling novels that are make lesser contributions than GTA to my aesthetic life, so while the it may not be winning top honors, its certainly competitive.
MGS sounds like another competitive one. I'm so glad video games are expanding into high art regions
leland @ Jul 1st 2008 8:08AM
I agree. I think GTA is good but the story is not as great as everyone makes it out to be. It's basically the plot of a B-movie, and I don't think this guy would think that's "successful art" either.
Also, he never states in the article that "GTA is not art" - he just says it's not successful art.
"Successful art tears away the veil and allows you to see the world with lapidary clarity; successful art pulls you apart and puts you back together again, often against your will, and in the process reminds you in a visceral way of your limitations, your vulnerabilities, makes you in effect more human. Does GTA IV do that? Not for me it doesn't, and heck, I love this damn game."
If you RTFA it's not as crazy as this post sounds. He actually gives a lot more praise to GTA 3.
meltzer.justin @ Jul 1st 2008 7:53AM
Art imitates life, and I have never seen a better example of this maxim than in GTA IV. So if it isn't art then what the hell is it?
It took many years before film was considered art, and some of the best and most memorable films in existence were created when film first came onto the scene. Take DW Griffith's BIRTH OF A NATION or Eisenstein's BATTLESHIP POTEMKIN both classic films hailed for being extraordinary, but merely playing with the notion of being considered art. Today they are held in the highest regards.
The real question is why are we listening to these old guys who don't understand the video game culture that has evolved to what it is today. If film had it's revolution in the early 1900's then video games will have theirs in the near future. We just have to stay consistent in advancing it to the form of high art. Progress.
Korova *of the highlands* @ Jul 1st 2008 7:57AM
Juno Diaz is not old. He is the age of the average gamer.
He won the Pulitzer because he is very good and attracted a whole new Hispanic audience into the cultural millieu.
He is probably younger than a lot of people who comment on Joystiq.
xGeneral DEATHx @ Jul 1st 2008 8:14AM
What kind of life do YOU lead? I'm not saying I wouldn't believe you jack marks for their cars everyday and drive down the road sprayin' an AK without too much consequence...but seriously, how does GTA accurately portray life?
meltzer.justin @ Jul 1st 2008 8:23AM
I wasn't necessarily talking about Junot, when referring to "old guys." That was more of a blanket statement for everyone who has these grand schemes against games being art. I just believe that if a story is told well it doesn't matter what medium it may be for it to be considered art.
Junot makes some excellent points in his article but i suppose it is more of a difference of opinion.
And as for my statement about "art imitating life," while i don't jack cars and knock off people, it is in some of the other aspects of the game that make it very close to real life. Some example would be the attention to detail in the physicality's of the city, the (more) realistic looking digital effects, and the amount of interactivity one can experience playing the game. That is what i felt gave the game a sense of realism.
xGeneral DEATHx @ Jul 1st 2008 8:28AM
Gotcha. Thanks for expounding on that...for some reason, my mind just can't get past the shoot-n-loot part of GTA, although I do appreciate Rockstar's attention to detail.
Korova *of the highlands* @ Jul 1st 2008 7:53AM
ok, the number of comments reduces from the main page to the post page.
There were 6 comments when i made a comment. I went back to the front page and refreshed. It showed that the story now has 8 comments. I opened the story in a new tab and it shows that there are only 6 comments!
And my comment is one of the dissapearing two!
JOYSTIQ - fix iT!
Booxatron @ Jul 1st 2008 1:40PM
Same exact thing happened to me on the Too Human post...something's up.
Maverick Saturn @ Jul 1st 2008 7:53AM
Anyone who picks up a Halo novel simply because it has the title Halo on it and calls it deep or whatnot is the sorta person that would say this game has great and superb plot. Gamers are pretty easy to please, plots don't need to be deep, they just need to be simple enough for the typical gamer to understand, to get straight to the point, an FPS gamer is hotheaded anyway, so what would they care about plot, as long as theres something to shoot, you could regurgitate the same 'aliens attacking us' and 'war against other countries' crap over and over and as long as the graphics change, they'd be none the wiser and still pick it up.
RPG and strategy fans have thier heads screwed on a bit more, they are looking for more of a plot, even if they are the ones shaping it.
Platformer, racing, sport and puzzle fans never really care about plots, as long as the gameplay is deep in itself, they would remain satisfied.
So really, unless you are making a strategy or rpg (not mmorpg) game, all you really need to worry about is gameplay. The gamers will hardly notice if you copied Halo, Half Life or COD and tweaked it a lil.
xGeneral DEATHx @ Jul 1st 2008 8:16AM
Yep, we're all just that ignorant. You got it. Thanks for the explanation.
Xoviet chiK @ Jul 1st 2008 8:44AM
Pigeonhole much?
Maverick Saturn @ Jul 1st 2008 8:48AM
In a sense, quite often we are, how many games actually change thier plot, yet we still buy thier sequels over and over despite knowing full well we'll be doing the same task over and over.
We buy a Call of duty, as usualy we are pit against the germans, not much of a plot seeing as the plot is just based upon something that already happened, call of duty 2 is pretty much the same thing, based on a real event, but yet, we buy the sequel, call of duty 3, AGAIN the same old routine based on true events, yet we go and buy, call of duty 4 makes changes, but still is just based on us going to war with someone else again, but yet WE STILL BUY IT.
You could call it ignorance, but I would say its more due to the fact that the plot is not important to the fans of Call of duty, its the gameplay they bought the game for. RPG games on the other hand need a purpose, you are a character, but no character in any rpg just goes on a voyage for the sake of it, even if its for an unoriginal purpose like saving the princess or some crap, there is still a core purpose.
However, games like FF7 and Diablo for examples manage to add that element of 'zang' to thier plots making them potentially great.
Maverick Saturn @ Jul 1st 2008 9:11AM
Lol, heck, I love plot orientated games, but funny enough, Bioshock isn't my favourite game, Timesplitters is, it has a very simple plot if any, but its the gameplay and fun aspect that makes me enjoy it, so I too am in that ignorance box to be honest :) I didn't buy my FPS to listen to the plot, I bought it to have fun, and I'll keep buying TS games until the gameplay cannot be classed as fun anymore.
Which in itself is ironic because I am a writer plus I do lots of reading.
Vidikron (FU) @ Jul 1st 2008 10:19AM
"In a sense, quite often we are, how many games actually change thier plot, yet we still buy thier sequels over and over despite knowing full well we'll be doing the same task over and over."
You generalize WAY too much. Just because two FPS are based on war, even the same war, doesn't mean they play out the same. That's not true at all. And even they were the same, I fail to see how that makes anyone ignorant. I mean, people generally do things they like over and over... even it's close to the same each time.
Maverick Saturn @ Jul 1st 2008 12:43PM
I didn't say they play out exactly the same, but its still based on a plot that already exists, except the character of which you play is usually the fictional part of it. So all in all, theres nothing original about the plot, the person writing the script didn't think about the war from the top of thier head, they based it upon something real and tweaked it to fit gameplay.
Its not generalizing, its just observation, a game like Bioshock is based upon an existing book isn't it? If it is, then it too isn't exactly original, original compared to other games, but not original in terms of plot seeing as the plot has been done and created before. But then it could also be classed as original depending on how connected it is to the book, if it is an official game version of the book, then it IS original plot wise as well, but if it is just a rip off from a similar book, then its not.
And yeah you're right, doing things you like over and over doesn't make you ignorant, I do that for games I enjoy, but saying a game's plot is epic when the plot itself was taken from something else is ignorant, also naive, thats like listening to a song today and thinking its new when in fact its just a remix of a famous song in the past with an added beat or something. It doesn't mean you're stupid, it just means you are unaware.
onetrueping @ Jul 1st 2008 6:05PM
For a "writer," you sure make a lot of spelling mistakes and run-on sentences. Also, before accusing games of having largely derivative plots, you might want to look at the genres of books. A mystery? Oh great, another couple people dead, and you find out who did it at the end. A Western? Showdown in the old West. How original. Oh gee, a historical novel. That can't bring anything new, can it?
"What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun." It's not the bare bones of the plot that matters, buddy, but what you do with the details. Keep that in mind.
onetrueping @ Jul 1st 2008 6:13PM
For a "writer," you sure make a lot of spelling mistakes and run-on sentences. Also, before accusing games of having largely derivative plots, you might want to look at the genres of books. A mystery? Oh great, another couple people dead, and you find out who did it at the end. A Western? Showdown in the old West. How original. Oh gee, a historical novel. That can't bring anything new, can it?
"What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun." It's not the bare bones of the plot that matters, buddy, but what you do with the details. Keep that in mind.
Maverick Saturn @ Jul 1st 2008 7:16PM
First of all, I'm making those mistakes because I'm in an informal setting, even an expert (which I am not) knows when to be formal and when not to be. When writing, I actually concentrate on what I am putting down so that the audience can create an atmosphere of what I write in thier heads, it needs to be error free. When I'm on Joystiq, it doesn't matter, nobody cares about spelling, so why stress myself about it, its like looking in the dictionary for smart words to add to your coursework etc, even though you know out with your mates you're not going to use them.
Second of all, the kind of plots you mentioned don't get awards, nor do they get read, except by people who do not care about originality.
Gaming is different, like I said, games can be a constant repeat plot wise and gamers will buy as long as the gameplay is different. Books however cannot depend on gameplay, if the concept itself is not original, then the presentation has to be, if the goal is not original, the journey to get to the goal has to be. Otherwise your book will fail, simple as that.
Its easy to put what I write into a category, that much I agree, but what I write is in no way similar to anything you've read before, and many writers aim for this as well, if they want to win awards that is, or even get thier book read for that matter.