Either way, a very cool interactive experience. The only criticism I have is that they completely ignored mobile/tablet/non-Flash -- it's a Flash-based game, but if you visit the site on a non-Flash device you don't even get an alternate "Sorry, your device is not supported" message.
I brought it up because I'd have an easier time seeing a label run by an ex-goon engaging in this kind of marketing, as opposed to one like Atlantic.
"Here's the deal, folks. You do a commercial - you're off the artistic roll call, forever. End of story. Okay? You're another whore at the capitalist gang bang and if you do a commercial, there's a price on your head. Everything you say is suspect and every word that comes out of your mouth is now like a turd falling into my drink."
- Bill Hicks
I felt something playing this game. It has surprisingly good ambiance and seeing a bunch of pixel characters who have accepted their fate and were waiting for death, to me, gave it a level of emotional attachment I did not expect after I read the tag 'advergame'.
One thing you have to realize is that it's very hard to make games nowadays without some kind of income. If you are lucky, you only have to slum it for a few years and then you make a hit on the side. But more often, you have to do whatever it takes, unless you are willing to keep your day job.
I actually still agree with the Bill Hicks quote, but I feel there is some wiggle room when what is produced is actually a game, and in the end, does not fit the constraint of standard advertising.
IMO if more advertising were like this, the world would be a better place, and Bill Hicks would have been less angry.
And here I will quote Tool's Eulogy, which was about Bill Hicks, if you didn't know:
"He had a voice so strong and loud and I Swallowed his facade cuz I'm so Eager to identify with Someone above the ground, Someone who seemed to feel the same, Someone prepared to lead the way, with Someone who would die for me."
Just because a voice is loud and you agree with it, doesn't necessarily mean that it is entirely correct. I love the shit out of Bill Hicks and I still feel the world would be a better place if he had lived long enough to foster the change he felt he needed. But I still don't feel his quote applies to this game.
Regardless, I agree with your points. It's not always bad to sell something if you want to get the rest of your works heard. It's all a big game, and most people have to play to some degree to be able to do what they love.
Sure.. but then don't go mixing those two things up. There is work (entertainment or otherwise), and there is art. That some people cry unfair because they want their pie and eat it isn't really my concern.
I didn't argue that the game creator is somehow evil, I just actually feel my brain hurting from dumbness intruding when I read people talk about "artistical merit" in the context of this "game" (the gameplay mechanics are a bit limited to call it that, but that's a whole other can of worms). The response to that? "Yeah, but" and downmoderation. Oh well, oh lol. What else is new.
On another, the motivation and goal of the creation, at least to me, outweighs such considerations by order of magnitude. And on that level I don't consider that, or much anything really, "art" by any stretch of my imagination.
Which means yes, I would consider the exact same thing art or not art depending on by whom, why and how it was created and presented.
That may not be fair, but it's my firm opinion anyway. Yeah yeah, people gotta eat. I know that. (I do think that technically even that is a decision, but I'll accept that in this in context.) But what people do NOT "absolutely have to" is to consider themselves as artists, or to be considered by me as such. They'll have to settle with mediocre.
Eulogy was about L. Ron Hubbard.
It was stirring and idealistic when I was in my 20's.
However over the years my instinctive distrust of the world of commerce diminishes as I realise that humans live, swim and breath in commerce. It was here before art-with-a-capital-A and it will outlive it.
The other thing to remember is that art-with-a-capital-A was largely an invention of the Romantic movement. Artist-as-lone-hero and all that. It's not an eternal truth and in fact it creates a fictional view of the Artist that I distrust more over time.
Who is talking about commerce? It's about using emotion to lead people to make irrational choices. If you need rice and I farm rice, and I sell you some rice, that's commerce. It has however NOTHING to do with anything Bill Hicks ever ranted about. So don't flatter yourself I'd say, your insight isn't really one.
"The other thing to remember is that art-with-a-capital-A was largely an invention of the Romantic movement"
The idea that washing your hands is a great idea for doctors and in general is also fairly recent; so?
"in fact it creates a fictional view of the Artist"
No, it simply raised the bar. How can it be fictional if people existed and exist that fit the description? That's just wishful thinking on your part so you don't feel too bad for going back to sleep.
You also make the claim that all advertising is about trying to make people make irrational choices. But if I post a billboard that says "Come try our pancakes!", am I really trying to make you behave irrationally?
There is certainly plenty of "bad" advertising, and campaigns that artists would be better off not associating themselves with, but the blanket statement just doesn't fit.
Michelangelo. Shakespeare. Leonardo Da Vinci. David Lynch. William Wordsworth. Alfred, Lord Tennyson.
All of these people, and many more, made things that were essentially adverts - commissioned pieces designed to promote a particular institution.
doesn't constitute an argument either, does it. So there's not really anything there to argue against; just an assertion. Meanwhile, to me it's "fairly obvious" that this ain't art, and therefore "the fuck" is perfectly sufficient.
"Quoting a comedian is not really an argument."
Oh yeah, because a comedian is by definition funny, and not ever insightful.
Good thing people don't react in a butthurt, predictable fashion, or anything. Haha.
Kinda spiking the irony meter here. You asserted that there's no artistic value and, what, expected people to accept that as a valuable part of the conversation?
Commercial music? Artists who make a living selling their work? Commissioned pieces? Art doesn't have to be produced by the idle rich and the impoverished and starving. It's hard to define art precisely, but your definition seems to be at odds with the generally accepted one.
Are we to assume that Mr. Hicks never promoted his gigs, and performed them for free?
Everyone's selling something. Try talking to an actual professional artist and ask them if they're following their dreams and expanding boundaries or if they're mass-producing different variations of the same 2 paintings they've been able to sell consistently in between kissing asses at galleries.
Well duh. However, I see what you did there. Why the arbitrary qualification? Why does it have to be a professional artist, why not an albino one, or someone who only has 8 fingers, or an artist period? Oh right, because then your argument kinda falls on its face.
From this comment all you've really said is that you and Bill Hick (probably) wouldn't think this is art. Nobody here could argue with that. But it says nothing about what art is or who is an artist.
Bill Hicks was referring to talking about something you basically only have a monetary interest in.
http://chexquest.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
http://chexquest.wikia.com/wiki/Chex_Quest
> Chex Quest, made by Digital Café, is a total conversion of The Ultimate Doom. It was released in boxes of Chex Cereal in 1996, becoming the first game to be included in a cereal box. When it was released, it increased sales by over 200%. It then went on to win both the Golden Reggie Award for Promotional Achievement, and the Silver EFFIE Award for Advertising Effectiveness.