R3 'Game' theory?

[Master Jacques]

I don’t see what chess has got to do with gaming apart from it being a game. But don’t bother to explain, as Judith says, this is a thread about the game music programme on Radio 3 and not about games.

I think the thread's been useful, as the discussion on video games has perhaps informed debate about the programme - before that, I had a sense of a blindfold game of pin the tail on the donkey!

As for whether game design is art or not - if a Wagner opera aspires to the condition of Gesamtkunstwerk, exactly the same is true of the high-level artistic collaboration which goes into making such beautiful things as the Polish Witcher trilogy for PC. To compare that to sweaty humans kicking a ball around a field is not comparing like with like, is it?

I can only suggest you sign up to Steam and choose something to try out yourself. It is never too late!

[doversoul1]

Dovers - it could be argued that in reading a novel, you are merely (passively) watching the characters therein make a series of choices, often binary ones, prepared by the author (Anna Karenina - have an affair/not have an affair ) and watching the consequences play out. The only difference between this and a computer game is that you become one of the characters, and play a part in determining the outcome. This seems to me a perfectly defensible and worthwhile intellectual activity.

Chess, too, is choosing between a range of options determined by the rules of the game - huge, but finite, and worthy of some of the best brains on thre planet....

PS Dovers just realised I may be too late - but would love to hear your thoughts.....

Maybe we should continue the discussion about games somewhere else, since this is a thread about a particular programme on Radio 3.

[MrGongGong]

Maybe we should continue the discussion about games somewhere else, since this is a thread about a particular programme on Radio 3.

It was, then you started the stuff about dangerous addictions
If I was a game enthusiast I would be well p*ssed off in the same way that if I was an opera aficionado and every time someone mentioned La Traviata someone popped up with a load of stuff about the dangers of alcoholism. It's not that these things aren't important but that it seems, for some, that they go instantly for them without having any understanding of the subject in hand.


So, a programme on R3 about mobile form musics is very interesting and worth having IMV

[Richard Tarleton]

Maybe we should continue the discussion about games somewhere else, since this is a thread about a particular programme on Radio 3.

I'm not in a position to do so, knowing next to nothing about the subject, I was merely passing on info from an expert in the field which I thought might be helpful, and which forms a useful supplement to anyone who has listened to the programme (which I haven't) - as ever, as a host, trying to be helpful

It was, then you started the stuff about dangerous addictions
If I was a game enthusiast I would be well p*ssed off in the same way that if I was an opera aficionado and every time someone mentioned La Traviata someone popped up with a load of stuff about the dangers of alcoholism. It's not that these things aren't important but that it seems, for some, that they go instantly for them without having any understanding of the subject in hand.

So, a programme on R3 about mobile form musics is very interesting and worth having IMV

Indeed - I'm in total agreement with MrGG here.

[doversoul1]

Master Jacques
Thank you for the recommendation but I won’t take it up as I have a terrible tendency to become addicted to things.

Mr GG
I’m sorry but I have nothing to say to your last post.

Richard Tarleton
I meant the posts that discuses games in general. Your post #127 should certainly stay.

[MrGongGong]

Master Jacques
Thank you for the recommendation but I won’t take it up as I have a terrible tendency to become addicted to things.

Mr GG
I’m sorry but I have nothing to say to your last post.

No offence intended

[doversoul1]

Dovers - it could be argued that in reading a novel, you are merely (passively) watching the characters therein make a series of choices, often binary ones, prepared by the author (Anna Karenina - have an affair/not have an affair ) and watching the consequences play out. The only difference between this and a computer game is that you become one of the characters, and play a part in determining the outcome. This seems to me a perfectly defensible and worthwhile intellectual activity.

Chess, too, is choosing between a range of options determined by the rules of the game - huge, but finite, and worthy of some of the best brains on thre planet....

PS Dovers just realised I may be too late - but would love to hear your thoughts.....

Very briefly, if you are merely watching what the characters do, I don’t think you’d call it a work of literature. A work of literature inspires you to create your own path, so to speak, based on your experience and knowledge in order to understand or involve in the characters and their lives. Therefore there are as many ‘outcomes’ of the novel as the number of the readers. When you finished reading a work of literature, you find that you have gained a new perspective on life, world, etc...

Mr GG
Thank you.

[Judith Robbyns]

MrGongGong "So, a programme on R3 about mobile form musics is very interesting and worth having IMV"

I'm not sure whether the initial 'So' is supposed to indicate 'therefore' or is just the now ubiquitous 'So' that starts the average sentence nowadays. I don't feel it follows on logically from what you said before (that is, the point about addiction to gaming, on which I don't have a comment, since that point was about the pursuit of gaming, not about one aspect of one particular game - like La Traviata, alcoholism).

Since you find the programme interesting, perhaps you could explain more clearly to someone who has only listened to the first edition how it has now moved on from playing excerpts, necessarily in a 'linear' way, and praising the music and the games? Does it now investigate (for example), from a composer's point of view, how the music is composed to answer the demands of varying decisions made by a gamer? How does it work? Is there an episode which illustrates this most clearly?

[MrGongGong]

MrGongGong "So, a programme on R3 about mobile form musics is very interesting and worth having IMV"

I'm not sure whether the initial 'So' is supposed to indicate 'therefore' or is just the now ubiquitous 'So' that starts the average sentence nowadays. I don't feel it follows on logically from what you said before (that is, the point about addiction to gaming, on which I don't have a comment, since that point was about the pursuit of gaming, not about one aspect of one particular game - like La Traviata, alcoholism).

Since you find the programme interesting, perhaps you could explain more clearly to someone who has only listened to the first edition how it has now moved on from playing excerpts, necessarily in a 'linear' way, and praising the music and the games? Does it now investigate (for example), from a composer's point of view, how the music is composed to answer the demands of varying decisions made by a gamer? How does it work? Is there an episode which illustrates this most clearly?

What on earth are you on about
SO = I would conclude

But there's a special thread for pedantic linguistics


I can't explain any more than what i've said mainly because i've only listened to parts of the first one. BUT found it interesting and will return later once i've finished writing the piece i'm on at the moment.

[oddoneout]

MrGongGong "So, a programme on R3 about mobile form musics is very interesting and worth having IMV"

I'm not sure whether the initial 'So' is supposed to indicate 'therefore' or is just the now ubiquitous 'So' that starts the average sentence nowadays. I don't feel it follows on logically from what you said before (that is, the point about addiction to gaming, on which I don't have a comment, since that point was about the pursuit of gaming, not about one aspect of one particular game - like La Traviata, alcoholism).

Since you find the programme interesting, perhaps you could explain more clearly to someone who has only listened to the first edition how it has now moved on from playing excerpts, necessarily in a 'linear' way, and praising the music and the games? Does it now investigate (for example), from a composer's point of view, how the music is composed to answer the demands of varying decisions made by a gamer? How does it work? Is there an episode which illustrates this most clearly?

Using those criteria I don't think the second episode did move on, and I doubt that any of the others will do so in the way you would prefer to hear. That doesn't necessarily have much bearing on the interest level of other listeners. As you implied in a reply to an earlier post some of us are happy with 'easy listening' and so won't be concerned by the lack of analysis; others may be interested to hear music that otherwise wouldn't be on their radar or is new to them. I fall into both those camps and thanks to the internet now know more than I did. Being a higgorant soul on the music theory front I am easily pleased...

[Judith Robbyns]

oddoneout: "As you implied in a reply to an earlier post some of us are happy with 'easy listening' and so won't be concerned by the lack of analysis; others may be interested to hear music that otherwise wouldn't be on their radar or is new to them"

My comment did not refer solely to the Sound of Gaming which, if the complexity of the music is a reality, would seem to have the potential to provide some explanation and analysis. It is also all the other programmes introduced recently which appear to be for the new/casual/easy listening or young audiences: Classical Fix, This Classical Life, The Listening Service, Sound of Dance, Inside Music, Night Tracks, Unclassified. Not to mention the old stalwarts Breakfast and Essential Classics (with its new Sunday episode) and In Tune.

I suppose it is pointless to enquire why, if you are ignorant of 'music theory', you have no interest in learning anything about it? It was always my impression that Radio Three was all about delving into subjects in some depth, and that its listeners were keen to do so. If not, I shall just return to my hole very disillusioned.

[oddoneout]

oddoneout: "As you implied in a reply to an earlier post some of us are happy with 'easy listening' and so won't be concerned by the lack of analysis; others may be interested to hear music that otherwise wouldn't be on their radar or is new to them"

My comment did not refer solely to the Sound of Gaming which, if the complexity of the music is a reality, would seem to have the potential to provide some explanation and analysis. It is also all the other programmes introduced recently which appear to be for the new/casual/easy listening or young audiences: Classical Fix, This Classical Life, The Listening Service, Sound of Dance, Inside Music, Night Tracks, Unclassified. Not to mention the old stalwarts Breakfast and Essential Classics (with its new Sunday episode) and In Tune.

I suppose it is pointless to enquire why, if you are ignorant of 'music theory', you have no interest in learning anything about it? It was always my impression that Radio Three was all about delving into subjects in some depth, and that its listeners were keen to do so. If not, I shall just return to my hole very disillusioned.

Apologies if this reply comes across as rather terse - my hands are not good today and typing is difficult.
I have been and will continue to be critical of the superficiality and missed opportunity of much of current R3 programming, but didn't want to get mired in more general discussion away from the specific topic.
Your assumption of no interest in learning about music theory is incorrect, and not I think the best one to draw from my admission of lack of knowledge. It must indeed be tiresome to have such as I daring to join in discussions and thereby lower the standard of debate.

[MrGongGong]

Apologies if this reply comes across as rather terse - my hands are not good today and typing is difficult.
I have been and will continue to be critical of the superficiality and missed opportunity of much of current R3 programming, but didn't want to get mired in more general discussion away from the specific topic.
Your assumption of no interest in learning about music theory is incorrect, and not I think the best one to draw from my admission of lack of knowledge. It must indeed be tiresome to have such as I daring to join in discussions and thereby lower the standard of debate.

Don't worry
I think she makes the predictable comment of talking about "complexity" as if THAT was what gave some musics "potential" for "analysis". Though, I don't think she is referring to Schenkerian analysis unless i'm mistaken....

[Rjw]

This is just plain silly. Sound of gaming today.