IT IS A MISTERY
December 4, 2008 12:30 AM Subscribe
Game: fruit mystery The end guy is hard.
This post was deleted for the following reason: Posted Previously -- vacapinta
No.
posted by ZaneJ. at 12:39 AM on December 4, 2008 [1 favorite]
posted by ZaneJ. at 12:39 AM on December 4, 2008 [1 favorite]
I miss quonsar.
posted by loquacious at 12:45 AM on December 4, 2008
posted by loquacious at 12:45 AM on December 4, 2008
So how are all you fine looking folks this evening?
posted by loquacious at 12:47 AM on December 4, 2008
posted by loquacious at 12:47 AM on December 4, 2008
So, an infinite number of mathematicians walk into a bar, and the first one orders a pint.
The second one says "I'll have half a pint" and the third says "Make mine a quarter of a pint" and the fourth says... well, you get the point.
The bartender says "You're all fucking crazy" and pulls two pints and steps out for a smoke.
posted by loquacious at 12:49 AM on December 4, 2008 [1 favorite]
The second one says "I'll have half a pint" and the third says "Make mine a quarter of a pint" and the fourth says... well, you get the point.
The bartender says "You're all fucking crazy" and pulls two pints and steps out for a smoke.
posted by loquacious at 12:49 AM on December 4, 2008 [1 favorite]
A swing and a miss but, in it's own annoying way, beautiful.
posted by From Bklyn at 12:55 AM on December 4, 2008
posted by From Bklyn at 12:55 AM on December 4, 2008
The charmingness of this for is that I'm pretty sure it was made by a kid.
Which makes me kind of glad that there wasn't some place for me to instantly post my moronic BASIC games and programs.
Or worse, Dr Sbaitso transcripts. I mean, who hasn't tried to make out with Dr. Sbaitso?
posted by loquacious at 1:00 AM on December 4, 2008
Which makes me kind of glad that there wasn't some place for me to instantly post my moronic BASIC games and programs.
Or worse, Dr Sbaitso transcripts. I mean, who hasn't tried to make out with Dr. Sbaitso?
posted by loquacious at 1:00 AM on December 4, 2008
loquascious, you are not getting the point of this sweet video...... but neither did I. Good one, you must be a physicist or so?
posted by jimahon at 1:07 AM on December 4, 2008
posted by jimahon at 1:07 AM on December 4, 2008
The charmingness of this for is that I'm pretty sure it was made by a kid.
aaand, reading the prior thread I stand correct and am frightfully glad I didn't casually use an epithet that rhymes with a certain science fiction phone booth.
loquascious, you are not getting the point of this sweet video...... but neither did I. Good one, you must be a physicist or so?
Ouch!
I'm honestly depressingly sober. Maybe this is my malfunction.
posted by loquacious at 1:16 AM on December 4, 2008
aaand, reading the prior thread I stand correct and am frightfully glad I didn't casually use an epithet that rhymes with a certain science fiction phone booth.
loquascious, you are not getting the point of this sweet video...... but neither did I. Good one, you must be a physicist or so?
Ouch!
I'm honestly depressingly sober. Maybe this is my malfunction.
posted by loquacious at 1:16 AM on December 4, 2008
I'm pretty sure this wasn't made by a kid. There's too much sophistication to the language and style, too much knowledge of the ideal form a bad game by a kid would be like (typos, spelling mistakes, colour cycling, mixed photographic and drawn styles, and so on).
The feel of this aesthetic reminds me of Kurt Schwitters, a proto multimedia and dadaist artist. The gathering of materials from different, mass-produced, sources (photographs, ms paint, google image search), the conformity of narrative to a non-sensical story, and the celebration of all these elements forced together show us the nature of the tools with which we paint today. The 1995 web-page is the naive designer unshackled from limitation of colour, non-moving imagery, and audience for the first time, and is a well-established cultural signifier.
The game itself takes us on an interesting journey and says things about our relationship not just to the game, but reality outside the game. The premise is like many other games, matching items with relevant parties, but makes no bones about the artifice of the matches. The text shown with every match is manic in tone, and irreleant in content. It tells you that you will learn, but all you can pick up are game mechanics, rather than a grasp of what diets different animals have. All the game can possibly teach are the obsessions and pre-conceptions of it's author, in this case, a purportedly hyperactive child (see also, America's Army: the best possible example of gaming as elimination of critical thought). The final outcome is not just always failure, but a sophisticated exposition of the rules and arguments of the game as bunk, and an admonishment of the player for even trying to work within these unwinnable rules. The final act is showing you the animals you killed-by-helping, adopting a cheap narrative technique to impose the authors' viewpoint on those who cannot argue with it; in this case, exposed as even more ridiculous by the fact it's crocoles and polar bears making their cases.
This game is a brilliant, vicious riff on pop internet culture. It looks like a merzgame but hides layers of meaning, schizophrenically works with and against the participant, and adopts the native aesthetic of the net: unbridled abandonment and free access for all, regardless of ability. Picasso tried to unlearn adult painting 100 years ago; this game is an unlearning of adult net participation.
posted by davemee at 2:32 AM on December 4, 2008
The feel of this aesthetic reminds me of Kurt Schwitters, a proto multimedia and dadaist artist. The gathering of materials from different, mass-produced, sources (photographs, ms paint, google image search), the conformity of narrative to a non-sensical story, and the celebration of all these elements forced together show us the nature of the tools with which we paint today. The 1995 web-page is the naive designer unshackled from limitation of colour, non-moving imagery, and audience for the first time, and is a well-established cultural signifier.
The game itself takes us on an interesting journey and says things about our relationship not just to the game, but reality outside the game. The premise is like many other games, matching items with relevant parties, but makes no bones about the artifice of the matches. The text shown with every match is manic in tone, and irreleant in content. It tells you that you will learn, but all you can pick up are game mechanics, rather than a grasp of what diets different animals have. All the game can possibly teach are the obsessions and pre-conceptions of it's author, in this case, a purportedly hyperactive child (see also, America's Army: the best possible example of gaming as elimination of critical thought). The final outcome is not just always failure, but a sophisticated exposition of the rules and arguments of the game as bunk, and an admonishment of the player for even trying to work within these unwinnable rules. The final act is showing you the animals you killed-by-helping, adopting a cheap narrative technique to impose the authors' viewpoint on those who cannot argue with it; in this case, exposed as even more ridiculous by the fact it's crocoles and polar bears making their cases.
This game is a brilliant, vicious riff on pop internet culture. It looks like a merzgame but hides layers of meaning, schizophrenically works with and against the participant, and adopts the native aesthetic of the net: unbridled abandonment and free access for all, regardless of ability. Picasso tried to unlearn adult painting 100 years ago; this game is an unlearning of adult net participation.
posted by davemee at 2:32 AM on December 4, 2008
« Older 100 years of the roundel | Shaping San Francisco Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by tkolar at 12:36 AM on December 4, 2008