It feels almost radical to say but I enjoyed Mixtape. Apparently I'm "a certain type of guy" despite being a woman... and Black... who grew up in the 80s and 90s... on the opposite side of the country... was pretty poor... and raised almost exclusively on hip hop, soul, and R&B... I say all that to say that I had nothing in common with the characters in the game. However I realize that nostalgia for thee does not have to look like nostalgia for me in order for me to enjoy it. Sure it was a particular coming-of-age story of someone with a particular life, but aren't they all? Due to the wide variety of experiences people have in this world, it will always look different for everyone. That doesn't make someone else's story or song choices any less valuable. (Because I'm quite sure had MY personal song favorites from the 90s been put in a game, there would be similar uproar.) We can extrapolate meaning from other's life experiences, even if their life looks nothing like our own.
And the historical accuracy argument is laughable because, as you stated, magical realism exists. As a teen, did I leap and bound my way through the woods as though someone had dialed down Earth's gravitational pull? No. Or did I float through the town as the world faded to black and white? Also no. These were the character's memories and, I feel like people forget this but, memories aren't exactly accurate. They are mental recreations that are filtered and shaped and influenced by so many things. I've seen so many comments about how unrealistic the tongue mini game or shopping cart game was and it's like "well, yeah. That's how our memories can work." Some details get exaggerated, some minimized, and most is forgotten and we fill in the gaps.
Also last point because this is getting really long and I fully agree with you, but this is just my chance to say my piece lol... the "this is not the 90s" argument I often hear bothers me for the reasons you've mentioned. But also...yeah, this was the 90s. I grew up in the 90s: from elementary school to high school and despite so many people saying this was "nothing like the 90s," I was there. I remember cassettes and VCRs and making slushies and covering my walls in pictures from magazines. I wasn't involved in skater culture but I knew it existed. I often listened to old music because my mom did. I hung out in the woods and at convenience stores and in run down shacks. I rented VHS tapes and drinking was, indeed VERY important to parties. I was jealous of people who I thought stole my friend's attention from me. I even rolled down the street in shopping carts. You had to make your own fun in the 90s lol But I say all that to say, the 90s was a time when we had some shared experiences but also many that we didn't even know existed. Maybe other 90s kids lived differently but it doesn't invalidate that it happened. And I, personally, don't mind an amalgamation of years crammed together. Quite frankly in media this happens a LOT. However, since we didn't live through the era, we don't notice it. 1953 feels the same as 1957 to me. And how many would even notice all the subtle differences between 1432 and 1441?
I feel like I'm losing the plot here so I'll end with saying...I agree the discourse was misguided and mishandeld and became a "human centipede" of content. I was more understanding of the "it's not a game" criticism because it focused on particular mechanics. Although as someone who has been gaming since the 80s and has seen gaming evolve so much over the past 40 years I say to that... I don’t flipping care. "Game" vs "interactive story" vs whatever... just play or "experience" whatever you like.
TL:DR -- this was a great read with great insights. I hope others take away the message so that think pieces can truly lead us to thinking more deeply
This was such an interesting read! And I do mean interesting in its actual sense, not the 'I want to be nice about not liking it' way that native speakers apparently use it.
Reading some of the criticism of this game felt alienating: too often it came from the angle of hating narrative games wholesale, or denying that they are even games to begin with (because semantic nitpicking will apparently prove that something is bad).
I've seen both professional and user reviews approach it with an air of 'of course, we all hated Life is Strange, so get a load of THIS game.'
But the thing is, I like Life is Strange. In a sense I am the elusive (((that type of guy))) brought up in every other review. I'm also a '90s kid and it is ridiculously easy to make me feel things with nostalgic media.
I was prepared to love this game, but in the end I didn't. Yet every think piece or review out there seemed to be either "I expected to love it and I loved it" or "I expected to hate it and I hated it."
I'd like to think I did a decent job explaining why it didn't work for me, but that's for others to judge. That specific viewpoint, though, is what I am often missing in writing on games: "I expected to like this, but I didn't. Here's why." To me those are the most interesting takes as, at the very least, they are a safeguard against the bad-faith cynicism that seems to dictate the tone of "The Discourse" surrounding every new piece of media these days.
Another thing I like about your article specifically is the reminder to explain things and give examples. It seems simple, but I still have to actively remind myself not to make grand statements without backing them up when I write any sort of argumentative piece. Fortunately, I can still hear the echo of my thesis supervisor yelling at me, and that is an experience I would wish upon every writer.
A long comment, but I've read your entire article so I feel like I'm owed some space to ramble!
The issues you describe are not unique to this game or game writing in general, but characteristic of internet writing period. The essay is a fashion statement, the aim is not to make an argument or to express something, but to project a certain kind of image onto the author or, through affiliation, the audience. Essentially, it is yet another mechanism for status and image management.
It doesn't help that the median gamer skews younger than say, the median reader. Gaming criticism is often done by teens and those in their early 20s—those who likely don't have the experiential or intellectual basis necessary to say much of substance. They are also those that are most concerned about maintaining a certain image for their peers. For example, go to Backloggd or Glitchwave and read some of the reviews there. It is of a different character than say, a piece on Polygon, but you'll notice a similar sort of lack of substance (often, pretentious rambling).
Man, I'd hate to be on the receiving end of one of your essays, but it would surely make me a better writer.
I used to enjoy Aftermath a lot, but your line about them needing to publish to stay in business rings true. The Mixtape essay didn't stand out to me as the worst offender, but it raised eyebrows for sure.
To some of these pieces the game is aimed at dads in garages which is innocent enough. But the first piece claims that a certain type of guy - who the author resents - dominates media and uses that domination to push their bad agenda. Hmm….
That said, I knew my use might raise eyebrows and I’m not wedded to it, so I will edit it later today when I get the chance.
I liked a lot of this essay, but I really do take issue with "this thing that ostensibly takes place in 199x has no obligation to deliver anything actual from that era".
To be clear - I'm not asking for strict fidelity here. That's not possible, there's no Universal 1984 or Universal 2003 that we can generalize from, so I completely support designers Just Doing Your Own Thing with it to a degree. But if a game is going to claim a year as setting, doesn't it at least have some obligation not to deliver things that blatantly misrepresent it, both pro and con? To switch the framing slightly, what if I said that a game was about a poor character, then had him live in a very nice 4k square foot home in an expensive suburb of Washington DC, and when questioned on that said "who gives a shit?"
I just don't understand why the game couldn't have been set present day, and with the kids enjoying "retro" music. People still skateboard, teens are still awkward, from the summaries I've read there's no plot machinery that couldn't have been fixed with a 10 second "we left our phones at home to just be present in the moment" scene. Perhaps I'm missing something.
Again, good essay with some very incisive analysis that I enjoyed, but I simply disagree on that point.
Completely reasonable to think that the game would be better and more interesting had it tried to do an accurate portrayal of the 90s.
It’s just not an interesting thing for so many critics to dwell on. There are 4 or 5 more pieces I didn’t cover making the same point.
If someone is going to quote someone else making that point, instead of just agreeing with them I wish they’d say what about the 90s is often left out by popular culture representations and how fidelity might have made the game better.
My overwhelming sense reading all these pieces is that people weighed in because it was a hot topic, but didn’t have much to say.
Ah, I see. I misread you. I can respect that position. It is very bad to just say that it failed, but not why it fails, true.
For instance, I grew up in the 80s and so much of the media that apes that era simply ignores the threat of nuclear annihilation that hung over our collective heads in America. It was a huge issue, discussed all the time by my classmates and me, and it's been buried for shopping malls, loud clothes, and vaporwave aesthetics. It very much clashes with the Girls Just Wanna Have Fun media that survived and was ingested by the following generations.
It feels almost radical to say but I enjoyed Mixtape. Apparently I'm "a certain type of guy" despite being a woman... and Black... who grew up in the 80s and 90s... on the opposite side of the country... was pretty poor... and raised almost exclusively on hip hop, soul, and R&B... I say all that to say that I had nothing in common with the characters in the game. However I realize that nostalgia for thee does not have to look like nostalgia for me in order for me to enjoy it. Sure it was a particular coming-of-age story of someone with a particular life, but aren't they all? Due to the wide variety of experiences people have in this world, it will always look different for everyone. That doesn't make someone else's story or song choices any less valuable. (Because I'm quite sure had MY personal song favorites from the 90s been put in a game, there would be similar uproar.) We can extrapolate meaning from other's life experiences, even if their life looks nothing like our own.
And the historical accuracy argument is laughable because, as you stated, magical realism exists. As a teen, did I leap and bound my way through the woods as though someone had dialed down Earth's gravitational pull? No. Or did I float through the town as the world faded to black and white? Also no. These were the character's memories and, I feel like people forget this but, memories aren't exactly accurate. They are mental recreations that are filtered and shaped and influenced by so many things. I've seen so many comments about how unrealistic the tongue mini game or shopping cart game was and it's like "well, yeah. That's how our memories can work." Some details get exaggerated, some minimized, and most is forgotten and we fill in the gaps.
Also last point because this is getting really long and I fully agree with you, but this is just my chance to say my piece lol... the "this is not the 90s" argument I often hear bothers me for the reasons you've mentioned. But also...yeah, this was the 90s. I grew up in the 90s: from elementary school to high school and despite so many people saying this was "nothing like the 90s," I was there. I remember cassettes and VCRs and making slushies and covering my walls in pictures from magazines. I wasn't involved in skater culture but I knew it existed. I often listened to old music because my mom did. I hung out in the woods and at convenience stores and in run down shacks. I rented VHS tapes and drinking was, indeed VERY important to parties. I was jealous of people who I thought stole my friend's attention from me. I even rolled down the street in shopping carts. You had to make your own fun in the 90s lol But I say all that to say, the 90s was a time when we had some shared experiences but also many that we didn't even know existed. Maybe other 90s kids lived differently but it doesn't invalidate that it happened. And I, personally, don't mind an amalgamation of years crammed together. Quite frankly in media this happens a LOT. However, since we didn't live through the era, we don't notice it. 1953 feels the same as 1957 to me. And how many would even notice all the subtle differences between 1432 and 1441?
I feel like I'm losing the plot here so I'll end with saying...I agree the discourse was misguided and mishandeld and became a "human centipede" of content. I was more understanding of the "it's not a game" criticism because it focused on particular mechanics. Although as someone who has been gaming since the 80s and has seen gaming evolve so much over the past 40 years I say to that... I don’t flipping care. "Game" vs "interactive story" vs whatever... just play or "experience" whatever you like.
TL:DR -- this was a great read with great insights. I hope others take away the message so that think pieces can truly lead us to thinking more deeply
Thanks for your thoughtful comment!
This was such an interesting read! And I do mean interesting in its actual sense, not the 'I want to be nice about not liking it' way that native speakers apparently use it.
Reading some of the criticism of this game felt alienating: too often it came from the angle of hating narrative games wholesale, or denying that they are even games to begin with (because semantic nitpicking will apparently prove that something is bad).
I've seen both professional and user reviews approach it with an air of 'of course, we all hated Life is Strange, so get a load of THIS game.'
But the thing is, I like Life is Strange. In a sense I am the elusive (((that type of guy))) brought up in every other review. I'm also a '90s kid and it is ridiculously easy to make me feel things with nostalgic media.
I was prepared to love this game, but in the end I didn't. Yet every think piece or review out there seemed to be either "I expected to love it and I loved it" or "I expected to hate it and I hated it."
I'd like to think I did a decent job explaining why it didn't work for me, but that's for others to judge. That specific viewpoint, though, is what I am often missing in writing on games: "I expected to like this, but I didn't. Here's why." To me those are the most interesting takes as, at the very least, they are a safeguard against the bad-faith cynicism that seems to dictate the tone of "The Discourse" surrounding every new piece of media these days.
Another thing I like about your article specifically is the reminder to explain things and give examples. It seems simple, but I still have to actively remind myself not to make grand statements without backing them up when I write any sort of argumentative piece. Fortunately, I can still hear the echo of my thesis supervisor yelling at me, and that is an experience I would wish upon every writer.
A long comment, but I've read your entire article so I feel like I'm owed some space to ramble!
If you read the whole thing you definitely earned a right of reply!
The issues you describe are not unique to this game or game writing in general, but characteristic of internet writing period. The essay is a fashion statement, the aim is not to make an argument or to express something, but to project a certain kind of image onto the author or, through affiliation, the audience. Essentially, it is yet another mechanism for status and image management.
It doesn't help that the median gamer skews younger than say, the median reader. Gaming criticism is often done by teens and those in their early 20s—those who likely don't have the experiential or intellectual basis necessary to say much of substance. They are also those that are most concerned about maintaining a certain image for their peers. For example, go to Backloggd or Glitchwave and read some of the reviews there. It is of a different character than say, a piece on Polygon, but you'll notice a similar sort of lack of substance (often, pretentious rambling).
Man, I'd hate to be on the receiving end of one of your essays, but it would surely make me a better writer.
I used to enjoy Aftermath a lot, but your line about them needing to publish to stay in business rings true. The Mixtape essay didn't stand out to me as the worst offender, but it raised eyebrows for sure.
Thank you for the highly entertaining read!
Heads up! I would refrain from using triple parenthesis in the way you deploy it here. It is prevalently used as a hate symbol online.
That is exactly why I used it.
To some of these pieces the game is aimed at dads in garages which is innocent enough. But the first piece claims that a certain type of guy - who the author resents - dominates media and uses that domination to push their bad agenda. Hmm….
That said, I knew my use might raise eyebrows and I’m not wedded to it, so I will edit it later today when I get the chance.
Edit: I edited it.
I liked a lot of this essay, but I really do take issue with "this thing that ostensibly takes place in 199x has no obligation to deliver anything actual from that era".
To be clear - I'm not asking for strict fidelity here. That's not possible, there's no Universal 1984 or Universal 2003 that we can generalize from, so I completely support designers Just Doing Your Own Thing with it to a degree. But if a game is going to claim a year as setting, doesn't it at least have some obligation not to deliver things that blatantly misrepresent it, both pro and con? To switch the framing slightly, what if I said that a game was about a poor character, then had him live in a very nice 4k square foot home in an expensive suburb of Washington DC, and when questioned on that said "who gives a shit?"
I just don't understand why the game couldn't have been set present day, and with the kids enjoying "retro" music. People still skateboard, teens are still awkward, from the summaries I've read there's no plot machinery that couldn't have been fixed with a 10 second "we left our phones at home to just be present in the moment" scene. Perhaps I'm missing something.
Again, good essay with some very incisive analysis that I enjoyed, but I simply disagree on that point.
Completely reasonable to think that the game would be better and more interesting had it tried to do an accurate portrayal of the 90s.
It’s just not an interesting thing for so many critics to dwell on. There are 4 or 5 more pieces I didn’t cover making the same point.
If someone is going to quote someone else making that point, instead of just agreeing with them I wish they’d say what about the 90s is often left out by popular culture representations and how fidelity might have made the game better.
My overwhelming sense reading all these pieces is that people weighed in because it was a hot topic, but didn’t have much to say.
Ah, I see. I misread you. I can respect that position. It is very bad to just say that it failed, but not why it fails, true.
For instance, I grew up in the 80s and so much of the media that apes that era simply ignores the threat of nuclear annihilation that hung over our collective heads in America. It was a huge issue, discussed all the time by my classmates and me, and it's been buried for shopping malls, loud clothes, and vaporwave aesthetics. It very much clashes with the Girls Just Wanna Have Fun media that survived and was ingested by the following generations.
I could read more game writing criticism from you
I figured I didn't need to read another word on Mixtape but your essay here has proven me wrong, well done.