m |
m |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
</blockquote> | </blockquote> | ||
I think he's totally right about pathos, and it's also exactly how I feel about power fantasy in games. Every time we use it, we fail a test of honor. | I think he's totally right about pathos, and it's also exactly how I feel about power fantasy in games. Every time we use it, we fail a test of honor and miss a chance to explore new emotional territory. | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
Revision as of 04:35, 18 May 2007
Power fantasy is the thing we do best in games. We excel at giving the player a feeling of power over their surroundings, at letting them feel the satisfaction of starting out weak and becoming powerful[1], until they are the king of the world, the ruler the universe, they have vanquished evil, saved the girl, and finally gotten to that really high ledge by exploding a rocket at their feet.
However, I think power fantasy is pretty cheap, and we need to eschew it and find better, deeper, more meaningful ways to entertain and compel players.
The New Yorker[2] had a David Denby review of the film, Seabiscuit. As usual, Denby writes a pretty good review. But one sentence stuck with me:
When a director exploits our hard-wired responses to pathos, he fails, so to speak, a test of honor.
I think he's totally right about pathos, and it's also exactly how I feel about power fantasy in games. Every time we use it, we fail a test of honor and miss a chance to explore new emotional territory.
- ↑ Nicole Lazzaro writes about this stuff a lot. She uses the term Fiero in this context.
- ↑ I think it was the October, 2003 issue.