Photo

After years of debate about the artistic merit of video games, the question of the medium’s artistic worth looks to have finally been decided. I say this in reference to the critical reaction surrounding BioShock Infinite, the first-person shooter from Irrational Games and one of this year’s most popular titles.



Game Theory A discussion of the year in video games, with Chris Suellentrop, Stephen Totilo and others.

After its release in March, critics declared the game a definitive work of art, a rare example of ingenuity, innovation and complexity in mainstream gaming. It wasn’t just the Metacritic score of 94 ; it was the words of the critics themselves, a string of passionate and evocative declarations that here, finally, was the work for which the entire industry had been waiting. It was called a game of “artistry”; a “lavish and cerebral” experience that “dignifies the medium” and “advances the art form”; the game that “video games were made for”; a “masterpiece” in every respect.

Didn’t Roger Ebert once say that video games could never be art? It’s too bad he isn’t around to play BioShock Infinite (a thought expressed ever so elegantly by the game designer Cliff Bleszinski on Twitter).

Still, for all of BioShock Infinite’s merits, it’s hard to believe that it was The Perfect Game. If the industry ever managed to produce a perfect piece of art, it would be an impressive feat indeed. No other art form can boast a similar achievement, and not even the greatest art can achieve such overwhelming critical consensus. So how is it that few critics initially had anything bad to say about BioShock Infinite? Is there nothing the game could have done better, nothing it struggled to achieve, nothing it executed poorly?



Consensus in game criticism seems to be reached far too easily. While games and gaming culture are certainly being more rigorously discussed by specialist and general-interest outlets, there appears to be a lack of diversity in our critical voices and a scarcity of established, strong personalities to act as arbiters of varied public tastes and opinions.

BioShock Infinite wasn’t alone. A lot of this year’s most popular games seem to receive almost unanimous critical approval — The Last of Us, Battlefield 4 and Grand Theft Auto V, to name a few. Serious criticism examines and interprets art in a way that, intentionally or not, serves to better it. A negative assessment does not imply a work has no merit. When done well, it can help artists learn from mistakes and teach audiences how to think critically. More questions must be asked about how well games achieve their purpose and how well they speak to the audience.

BioShock Infinite aimed to be a game that engaged its audience by posing questions about human nature. We know this because we were told as much. But how well did it express those ideas? How many people who played BioShock Infinite came away enlightened about religion, racism or American exceptionalism?

Critics were so struck by the notion that a mainstream game dared to tackle issues so distinctly outside the sphere of what most mainstream games typically deal with that they neglected to observe just how well the game dealt with those issues. Could there have been more clarity, more purpose? Did the game mislead in any way? Did the character Elizabeth’s enthusiasm for lock-picking ever feel disingenuous? Did anything about the option to feed Shantytown’s hungry residents somehow invalidate the option to loot their possessions immediately after?

Critics believed Ken Levine, the game’s creator, when he said that BioShock Infinite would bring players “to very uncomfortable and dangerous places.” They believed it because they apparently wanted it to be true. But good criticism is as much about passion as it is about fair and reasoned judgment. All game critics are passionate about great games that push the boundaries of the medium and engage audiences in thought-provoking ways. But just because a game like BioShock Infinite is trying to do something worthwhile does not cancel out the responsibility of critics to honestly and intelligently analyze and interpret it. Simply recognizing that a video game is a work of art does not mean the job is finished; like all art, games deserve close scrutiny and consideration. BioShock Infinite is art, but is it good art?

If we are to discuss video games as art, we need to talk about them as more than the sum of their parts. Creators want to be challenged; they want to know where they went wrong and what they can do better. So let’s help them do just that.

Laura Parker is a freelance writer. She has also written for The New Yorker, The Guardian and Slate. Follow her on Twitter: @lauraannaparker.

