又沉迷进西部狂野的世界了，早上8点起来玩到现在。

posted by wap, platform: Samsung你读过多少题材是19世纪末和20世纪初的文学作品？GTA4是当下题材，他们的聊天内容可做的文章和你的认可度肯定要多和高不是吗

本帖最后由 grammyliu 于 2019-11-7 17:48 通过手机版编辑

大表哥2 机核的评价我还是比较认可的，这游戏可能不算好玩，但是它是当今时代的游戏工业奇迹，不可不玩。

纽约时报，怎么就“儿童文学”了呢？

Opinion

Red Dead Redemption 2 Is True Art

The season’s best blockbuster isn’t a TV show or movie. It’s a video game.

By Peter Suderman

Mr. Suderman is the managing editor at Reason.com.

Nov. 23, 2018

Red Dead Redemption 2 offers digital vistas reminiscent of classic American Westerns.Credit...Rockstar Games

After its October release, Red Dead Redemption 2 earned $725 million in just three days, giving it the highest-grossing opening weekend of any entertainment product — ever. If you’re wondering why you haven’t seen this at this box office, it’s because it’s not a movie. It’s a video game.

To put those numbers in context, this year’s biggest Marvel film, “Avengers: Infinity War,” grossed about $640 million worldwide in its opening weekend.

In popular entertainment, nothing is bigger than video games, and the holiday shopping season is when many of the year’s most anticipated releases hit stores.

Yet video games remain something of a second-class cultural medium, even as geek culture has otherwise ascended into the mainstream. Today’s elite tastemakers might be perfectly comfortable discussing the inner workings of the banking system in Westeros, but gaming is still stigmatized, at best as a guilty pleasure, and at worst as a psychologically destructive hobby for socially stunted young men. So the perception is that video games don’t really matter, because they have nothing — or at least nothing important — to say.

This is understandable, but wrong. Yes, many video games are violent and frivolous, and the most devoted players still tend to be young and male. But the best games reveal a mass cultural medium that has come fully into its own, artistically flourishing in ways that resemble the movie industry during its 20th-century peak and television over the past 20 years. From “The Searchers” to “The Godfather,” from “The Sopranos” to “The Americans,” what connects these eras, and their most outstanding works, is a shared ambition, a desire to be both grand and granular, telling individual stories against the backdrop of national and cultural identity, deconstructing their genres while advancing the form.

If ever a video game has risen to the level of those classics, it’s Red Dead Redemption 2. With an enormous production budget, seven years of development and a script running about 2,000 pages just for the main story, it might well be the most ambitious game ever made.

Like the classic westerns and gangster stories it draws from, it can be crude and violent. But it is also richly cinematic and even literary, serving up breathtaking digital vistas reminiscent of John Ford films along with a mix of deftly scripted stories about outlaws, immigrants, hustlers, con artists, lawmen and entrepreneurs, all trying to eke out an existence on the edges of civilization. It’s a game about power, violence, frontier justice and murky moral choices — a new American epic for the digital age.

As a technical achievement, it has no peers. Red Dead Redemption 2 teems with life. Towns have daily rhythms, tied to time and weather, that seem to go on without you. Wildlife roams the countryside, growing skittish if you move too close. Many video games allow players to interact with other characters only by attacking them; here, every character, even the least important digital extra, can be spoken to, and often conversed with at length.

Violence is anything but mindless. You play as the outlaw Arthur Morgan, a member of the Van der Linde gang, whose goal is to help restore the gang to glory after a significant defeat. There are plenty of shootouts, chases and heists. But you can usually choose to avoid them — and when you don’t, they almost always come with a cost: Sheriffs and bounty hunters chase you down, important game options disappear, whole towns become hostile territory, horses you’ve bonded with (making them faster or more responsive) die. Instead of indulging no-regrets fantasy violence, it is a literary experience that emphasizes — and simulates — tragedy and personal consequences.

There is a big narrative difference between games and novels and movies: Instead of consuming a story, in a game you become part of it, choosing how it will unfold — even, in some cases, changing how it ends.

Most choices, however, are smaller in scale, focused on the mechanics of interacting with the world. In both Red Dead Redemption 2 and Fallout 76 — an ambitious open-world game set in a post-apocalyptic West Virginia released this month — the emphasis is on staying alive: While playing, you must manage virtual campsites, and eat or drink to avoid in-game penalties. These activities can feel like chores, but they also nudge players into a more contemplative style of play, forcing them to slow down and explore their surroundings, scrounging for supplies instead of running toward the next objective. These games are existential journeys built on the rhythms of survival.

Fallout 76 is similarly obsessed with Americana — but with its end rather than its formation. You emerge from a fallout shelter and are given the task of following in the footsteps of its former Overseer. Along the way, you encounter the ruins of the nation after a nuclear holocaust, often in the form of written or recorded letters and diaries. Enter a dilapidated capitol and you might discover a series of notes about a legislative initiative. It’s a game set in a world in which West Virginia is an echo lost to war, an interactive history lesson for you to explore.

Because they take so long to play — 60 hours is typical, and 100 or more is not unheard-of — games can make for unhealthy attachments. Yet these games can also provide a way of confronting reality or, at the very least, an artificially rendered simulacrum of it that is heightened, shaped and structured by an authorial presence. The best of these works create an empathetic connection between viewer and character. In Red Dead Redemption 2, the fact that the player controls much of the action enhances the connection; you feel for Arthur Morgan, a bad man with a good heart, because his choices are, in fact, your own.

Gaming’s cultural reputation is born partly from the sense that playing is a way of avoiding responsibility, of escaping into virtual worlds where nothing matters. But Red Dead Redemption 2 is a game about both making choices and living with them, about taking responsibility for how you’ve lived.

It’s a game, in other words, that implicitly tells its players to grow up — and it’s as sure a sign as any that video games are starting to do just that.



Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram.

A version of this article appears in print on Nov. 25, 2018, Section SR, Page 8 of the New York edition with the headline: Much More Than a Silly Game. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe

[ 本帖最后由 grammyliu 于 2019-11-7 18:00 编辑 ]

posted by wap, platform: 小米
不知道该怎么形容，人物是假的，包括主角，包括帮派头目，他们一群人在这个世界里分分钟说着愚蠢的对白，一刻不停地发生虚假的，无意义的，没有真实立足点的矛盾冲突，极其“游戏”，十分“儿童”

小说不太读，我西部片看的不少，纽时文章不知道从游戏哪里看出的约翰福特，有点没水平

我明白了，
其实，怼我，
就是你玩tgfc论坛的游戏性所在。
话题本身讨论什么，并不重要。

能够为别人提供快乐，
我很开心。

为什么我一直在说游戏不应该做成互动电影。
因为，小说也好，电影也好，
它是有自己的框架逻辑的，
是自恰的，
节奏是完全控制在作者手里的，
作者引导你走完全部流程。

而游戏，
尤其是开放世界游戏，
他的节奏是不可控的，
既然是开放世界，
你又要用小说的方式去叙事，
那就变成一团乱麻。
最后，平平淡淡，四不像。

现在业界一直有一种倾向，
即，
不认真设计关卡，敌人，武器，玩法，
而用剧本对话电影过场来填补。
既不像在拍电影，
也不像在做游戏。
反正，做到50小时长度和一张蓝光盘，
就可以卖钱了。

这样的流程做出来的所谓对话剧情，
又有什么意义？
还值得我去品味分析？
真把自己当黑泽明、托尔斯泰了啊？

西部模拟器，希望可以做个黄石dlc，buster scrugg+七恶人风格，太对胃口了