We have posted the text and slides of our presentation at the Art History of Games symposium last Saturday in Atlanta.
Videogames are stuck. Despite of the ongoing technical evolution and the continuous calls for a new medium, videogames have stopped evolving. They have found their comfort zone. Videogames are happy. Happy being exactly what they are. Fun activities that nurture our inner child.
While our inner grown-up is starving!
We need a new medium that can help us cope with the complexity of our post-historic universe. The interactive, non-linear and generative capacity of computer technology offers such a medium. There is no need however to limit what we create with this technology to the format of games. The possibilities are endless.
There’s a lot of work to do.
Videogames have taken computer technology hostage. It is time to liberate the medium and start feeding our starving hearts and minds. We need to stop making games and look further, go farther, step into a new world. Create interactive entertainment for all instead of squeezing people into oppressive sets of rules and goals. We have the technology. We have the desire. So let’s get to work!
Nice manifesto. Make love, notgames
Now you talk like VNS Matrix. Where are they now?
yeah VNS Matrix!
http://lx.sysx.org/vnsmatrix.html
that takes me back.
Hello again Michaël Samyn. I posted a while back, do you remember me?
I thought you said you were going to move on and go forth with your own medium (of notgames or whatever). Why are you still ragging on traditional games?
Yes, people are satisfied with games. Here’s the thing though, you’re not making games. So why do they bother you?
If you want to make whatever you want to make, then go do it. If you want to make something that’s not games, why compare yourself to games? It’s like comparing apples to oranges.
You’re not thinking ahead by bringing up this grudge you have with games. If you want to make the next big thing, something that goes beyond “games,” then you have to think forward not behind.
It does a disservice to for it to be just “that thing that isn’t games.” You’ve gotta do better than that. Forget about games and do what you wanna do.
Stop bearing grudges and making threats against other people who never have threatened you. They’re not stopping you from doing anything. Games aren’t stopping you. The only thing that is stopping you is a lack of forward thinking. Bearing grudges has never got anyone anywhere.
@Falsion, this is not about me, or Tale of Tales. This is our analysis of the medium. And hopefully an inspirational one for people who are suffering from the same confusion as we are.
I don’t see an analysis. An analysis would include facts, actual statistics. All I see is opinion. Your opinion. You’ve written a manifesto that only shows how much of a grudge you still have against games. You haven’t moved on yet. If you wish to make something beyond games, then you need to let bygones by bygones and think ahead.
My, but you two can put together a pretty presentation. I don’t have anything to add to all of that except an acknowledged agreement and a hopeful sentiment for what the future may hold.
Michael and Auriea, you give me a cautious optimism for this whole videogames/notgames/interactive-new-medium-we-still-don’t-know-what-to-call thing. Bravo.
@Falsion: you are either blind or unwilling -or simply trolling or unsympathetic. I’m moving on right now: by saying goodbye to you.
@vonlenska: that’s exactly what we wanted to do, and what notgames means to us. It’s about optimism! Thank you.
That was fantastic! i wish everyone could read that, it really radicalized my thinking, I see the video game industry in a whole knew light and have a lot of confidence in the not-games!
I agree with Falsion to an extent. It seems like you just have a grudge against games and just hate them because you can’t understand why people like them.
Also, I don’t see how games are relevant to what you do. As you’ve stated multiple times, you don’t make games. (If anything, your works are interactive avant garde art pieces. It really is like comparing apples to oranges.)
You say that you are met with intolerance with gamers and the games industry. That makes total sense. Did it ever occur to you that maybe you’re targeting the wrong market?
Gamers like games. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t be gamers now would they?
It’s like trying to sell art show tickets to people in a football game. Or sell a car to someone who rides motorbikes. It’s not very effective and doesn’t get you very far.
You’re not going to change their tastes and get them to enjoy fine art, just as they won’t be able to get you to enjoy games.
It’s a simple fact of life, people have different tastes. The key to dealing with it is tolerance. You have to learn to coexist with that you cannot understand.
You’ve got something that deserves its own classification in its own right. Who else uses interactive technology to make bona fide fine art?
You guys are sitting on something completely new and exciting, and time and time again you keep comparing it to games, something completely unrelated to what you do. Even when you try not to, you still call them “notGAMES.” It just really does a disservice to what you make in my opinion.
Ok, in case you missed it, here it is again:
“Videogames are not games”.
We like games!
But we also like the interactive medium.
And we happen to think that the joys of videogames don’t come from the fact that they are games. So we try to encourage other developers to think beyond these constraints.
The only thing our work does not have in common with videogames is the game format. But there are very many things that we do share. We feel that the games format is holding videogames back. I believe that even all but the most hardcore of gamers will ultimately enjoy videogames better if they stop being games.
That doesn’t mean that games as such are not fun. Or that you can’t make or enjoy computer-based videogames.
We just don’t think videogames should be slaves of the games format.
I can say it ten more times in different ways. 😉
@Robert Geis I recognize that you are not unsympathetic to what we’re talking about so thank you for your comments. And please don’t take this the wrong way, I am not attacking you…
I know you guys are looking for an easy explanination, like us having a “grudge” but…
We don’t feel what we do is entirely unrelated to videogames or we wouldn’t keep talking about it in a videogames context. Other people talked about our videogames -as games- all along also. It is not only us who put our projects in this light. We’ve brought up something confusing. But, as you probably know, confusion can be good!
We came to what we do now through a LOVE of certain videogames. So much so that we became videogame designers ourselves. We never felt we had to accept everything, whatever is out there being made, in order to be a part of the videogame industry. Never expected everyone to accept everything we do either.
We fight for this other point of view to live in the same sphere with mainstream videogames for many reasons. And I definitely find it deeply unfortunate that some people who are into videogames are so hurt by the criticism from within.
If anything, videogames make us dream and these dreams are bigger to us than the traditional games mainstream videogames try to emulate. We want more, not less. We are not suggesting anything disappear, we just hope for more. And you will not get anything different out of the videogames industry unless you force it. It is made of money. Not at all concerned with art.
All fine and good. But we feel the time has come for creative people to do something about this. Lets popularize a notion of expansive interactive creativity. An alternative for people who may like mainstream videogames AND who like the type of thing we are proposing. It all runs on the same hardware. It is all distrubuted through the same channels. It. is. all. related.
It’s a simple fact of life, people have different tastes. The key to dealing with it is tolerance. You have to learn to coexist with that you cannot understand.
Indeed, this is what we have been saying all along actually. You insist that we are the ones who cannot understand. Accept also that you cannot and then perhaps all of us can move forward, together.
That’s fine if you want to do that, but then why all the vitriol? In one instance of that page, you compare people who enjoy these kinds of games to babies. You even go into Godwin’s law territory and make an analogy about terrorists and communists. That doesn’t sound like tolerance to me.
You can make games for people who enjoy creativity and enjoy something beyond traditional rule based games. That’s fine. In fact, a lot of people are trying to do that, not just you. The only difference is that they live and let live. They accept that people have different tastes. You don’t see them write emotionally charged tirades chastising the nonbelievers.
we did not compare people who enjoyed game to babies. now you are seeing what you want to see. and there is an analogy to be made when videogames look like cnn. come on. think about it a little deeper. we are not _just trying to piss people off. no, really. and do we really kill anything by pointing these things out? by making these juxtapositions? no, really? did we even say we are the only one’s? maybe we get invited to speak because we say it differently. being critical is not the same thing as being intolerant.
But you’re being critical of something that comes down to a matter of taste or opinion. And the thing about opinions is that they’re not right or wrong, they’re just what people believe. It’s pointless to be critical of something because it doesn’t suit your tastes or view of the world. That’s the very definition of intolerance. Why not live and let live rather than criticizing other people for enjoying things that you don’t enjoy?
But you’re being critical of something that comes down to a matter of taste or opinion.
We are not attacking you, or any gamer personally, or individually. We are talking about the environment in which we work and the things that get made or do not. Not about your gaming habits. Do you think the multi-million dollar games industry is built simply on taste or opinion? Do you think the games you see in the store got there because of taste and opinion? do you really believe that?
Why not live and let live rather than criticizing other people for enjoying things that you don’t enjoy?
First of all, don’t make too many assumptions about what i don’t like or why I don’t enjoy something, that’s a whole other conversation and i think you’d be surprised.
Second, since you ask, I’ll tell you a story…
{ redacted because its not like the guy read it anyway, as evidenced by his next comment… (>.< ) wondering why i bother... moving right along... }
Indie games have existed since the late 90’s. I remember Derek Yu when he was just a kid and everyone communicated through IRC. The games he’s making now, or anyone else for that matter haven’t changed. They’re just shinier and have better websites to find them. But even with that, they’re still making the games they want to make, just as they were years ago. You on the other hand seem to be fighting an invisible enemy. The only one I see with this “us vs them” mentality is you.
And yes, the bullshit games industry will make all sorts of games and I’ll buy the games I enjoy playing. Does that make you mad?
Also yes, the only games that are made are war games now, that’s the only genre that exists. Nevermind titles like Killer7, Ico, Shadow of the Colussus, etc. Your games are the only alternative there are to FPS games. All hail the messiah that is Tales of Tales, our only salvation. Curse the nonbelievers!
Robert. You aren’t listening. It’s okay. I know what Derek Yu has done. But now there are so many more people doing these things. So many more. And now beside the shiny websites there is a real chance of a living for the creators of these games. More than the underground. Now there is a chance to shape things.
I never said we were the only alternative, if you read what i said. Robert, having another opinion, and saying it out loud, is not a bad thing. You want to make it out like we are one dimensional and one sided. It’s a pity. But maybe this conversation is done. You and whatever you like to play, do not make me mad, at all. Thanks for the chat.
Then why the tirade? You keep backtracking, it’s annoying.
I especially like how you bring up indie games when the indie games community was founded on the very thing you hate, retro games with such *gasp* barbaric things like lives or even things like high scores.
You don’t represent indie games. You’re fighting your own battle against an enemy that doesn’t exist. You could just make whatever you want and mind your own business, but instead you’d rather make a big scene about nothing.
What tirade?
Why do you say the indie games community was founded on everything I hate? If anything, it was also founded on everything I love. What, I can’t be a part of it? I had no part in making it? This IS my business. The indie game making community is more than just one thing.
And you… why do you feel so personally accosted by our dislike of “lives and high scores?” What difference does it make to you? Why are you here? Just curious.
Robert, we say what we say to support the people who feel like we do. We couldn’t care less about the others. That doesn’t mean we don’t want to see them dead. But we won’t murder them. We’ll just scream very loudly and make a spectacle out of ourselves. Because we think that’s amusing. And the more you resist us, the louder we will scream. Maybe you should practice what you preach and ignore us like you say we should ignore everything that bothers us.
ha, i would also like to note that we don’t have pissed off “Art fans” here arguing with us. I don’t think they do that. Art is dead, indeed. I guess they are used to hearing that statement by now and just ignore it also. Protest has lost all effect in the face of Art. The wheels keep on turning. I wouldn’t want game fans to get that de-sensitized. Stay passionate, Robert!
@ Robert
It’s all very beautiful but there is a very substantial difference between what was being done some years ago in that “independent” front – which I remember existing since the days of my first ZX Spectrum – and the frame of work in which studios such as Tale of Tales operate, well outside the constrictive indie game designation.
To me it seems very clear that Michaël and Auriea aren’t confronting videogames themselves; yet that inadequate and deeply-rooted preconception that real-time graphics, sounds, animation and interaction in a computer-generated environment are something exclusive to these games and, therefore, can’t be used for any other purpose than to build a ludic experience. Why should it be read as a statement of hatred against games? They’re simply enunciating their own countermeasures to this particular fallacy, building their own works in order to demonstrate how it is possible to use these tools for other purposes; why see this as the execution of videogames?
Being eloquent and passionate is just what you would expect from someone trying to teach some new perspectives. As for whatever opinions they might have regarding the current state of the videogame industry, I’m sure you’ll find many supporters even among those who don’t appreciate their work. And don’t forget that whenever you cite examples such as those of Ico or Killer 7 (an annoying commonplace these days, if you ask me), you’re also showing how minute the percentage of innovative game titles is within those moulds you seem so attached to.
I can’t speak for noone else but yeah, I ain’t feeling you here. Especially bringing up indie games. Man, I tell you what. You know why indie games have become so popular lately? It’s a backlash against all the crap we got out there that is nothing but cutscene after cutscene after dialogue sequence after dialogue sequence. I don’t take a genius to figure out people are tired of that crap.
Why do people love the NES so much? Why is it whenever someone posts a forum topic, people always say “the NES, man, that was a great system.” Because it didn’t have all this bullshit. It cut to the chase and let people play the game.
That’s why indie games are so focused on recreating the past, back when games were actually a pleasure for people to play, not a goddamn pain in the ass. Thats why the DS is the number 1 selling system.
Lets look at what you wanna do. I’ve seen some of your games. And I tell ya, I can’t tell the difference between what you wanna do and the “bullshit games industry” is doing now. Your games are nothing but interactive cutscenes. You think thats whats good for the industry? If that was good for the industry, people wouldn’t be rebelling against it making games inspired by the past. And now you wanna put even less gameplay in your games? Good grief, I mean no offense or something, but don’t act surprised when people find you guys a little loony.
Hehe. I’ll take that as a compliment, Mr Rossini. We’re actually more surprised when people take us seriously. 😉
I’m glad that things are not as simple as you think they are. If only for aesthetic reasons.
gameplay does not equal interactivity.
Exactly.
and we want to make LOTS of interactivity!
Lots. And more.
Let’s just move on, then, and quit these silly quarrels 😉
Again, great exhibition at the Art History symposium. Wish I could have been there myself.
Thank you. Yes, you would have been a nice addition to the event!
I don’t mind the silly quarrels. Because there’s another side to them. Behind the scenes, Notgames is growing! Mwuhahahaha! ;D
Hehe, you looked like a Bulgarian lumberjack with that moustache! Very stylish indeed! 😉
Your presentation was a breath of fresh air for me, because the first full day of the conference was so much about the formal qualities of games. We richly needed to be reminded that Duchamp was a century ago. I still think that art has expressive and social potential, so I won’t be joining everyone at its funeral, but before giving it the thumbs-up or down I think people do need to know what contemporary art is trying to do.
good point Christine.
all of these things we say
and the way we say them
are like one continuous conversation we are having with both Art and Games cultures.
as we feel stuck between both unable to blend them to our satisfaction and not able to let either go.
no conclusions. no matter how final and sure we seem to sound.
the delivery of the lecture had more to do with the performance than it did with the words.
but we wouldn’t be saying anything if we didn’t see that potential, you mention, too. And there is indeed a lot going on. now. today.
hey guys, how about calling it “artware?” sounds a lot catchier than notgame to me.
someone on the TIGSource forum came up with it, I thought it was pretty awesome.
Artware! 😀
I do like that word. Though I suspect Tale of Tales may balk at the inclusion of the word “art” there…
The term “notgames” is more about the design philosophy than the name of a genre, and while “artware” could be more appealing to marketers and consumers, “notgames” may be more useful as a guide to the development process itself. Perhaps we could have both.
We’ll see. Let’s be involved in that “development process” a bit more first and see what we come up with. When we see some results, it might suddenly become very easy to name this.
I’ve been wondering about your division between games and art.
To me limitations and rules are key ingredients of any art. Someone is “playing” the violin, people are playing roles in a drama etc. To me art is the purest form of play.
I understand what you’re going for with this “notgames”-concept and I really appreciate it. I also would definetly like to see more being made out of this medium. But I also like playing good mainstream-games, and thats why this manifesto offended me a bit. You wrote that this should not be an ideology and that’s a matter of taste, but then you clearly contradict yourself by talking in a harsh and derogative way about videogames and what they are about today. Let me quote:
“make your stinking games”
“rip out their guts of stupid rules”
“purpose of wasting time”
“nurture the inner child. Grown ups are starving”
This does imply that gamers are immature and wasting their time with stupid entertainment. Games are entertainment just like art or upcoming “notgames”, just with less complex or considered as “important” meanings, so playing notgames would be a waste of time either! Even this slogan “Make love, notgames” implies that games are something bad, like war, since is it derived from “make love, not war”, and if you dont know this slogan is used by anti-gamers who would like to ban all kind of mature software.
Maybe you did mean something else and this is a misunderstanding, but thats irrelevant cause all that matters is how people understand it, and as seen above I’m not the only one whe feels insulted in a way although I like the concept! You might say that you criticise games themselves and not the gamers, but when you call a certain activity immature and stupid, of course it concerns and describes the people who are doing it too, thats something you simply got to expect when writig something like this!
Since you wanna make this way of thinking popular and inspire or at least influence the “masses” or “game”-fans, you should express yourself less emotional and angry, and more diplomatic or at least settled and objective! Reading the essay about gameplay, narrative and meanings from Frictional Games you posted, I totally agreed to almost every point. He described it calm, precise and convincing. Reading your manifesto only made me mad.
PS:
The passage about the world and civilisation and stuff, thats not really related to the whole topic and is very cheesy. The idea that games or art can change the world or make it better is very naive in my opinion, and could deter people with an other world-view instead of convincing them of the main essence of the manifesto.
Yes, saskia, we would also put art and play on one side and games on the other. Since nerds and engineers have started tinkering with games, the difference between accounting and game design has shrunk. We very much would like to see the medium open up to all the different forms of play.
Xeno, as we mention in our presentation, we do not believe that it is the “gameness” of games that makes them so interesting. We believe it is all the other elements (simulation, generation, interaction, non-linearity, etc). We think that even most gamers will prefer video-“games” that focus on those elements and reduce or remove the rules/goals/rewards/etc.
The tedious rule systems of games force players to behave in stupid ways. They force them to waste their time. We believe that gamers put up with this because they love engaging with virtual worlds and interacting with narrative elements. All we want to do is take the stupid elements out of videogames, so we can all focus on more important things.
I deeply believe that one of the reasons why our current world is so messed up is that we lack a creative form that allows us to think about our complexity. The interactive medium can help us embrace complexity instead of rejecting it in favour of simplistic “good vs evil” attitudes. But obviously only when we reject games that celebrate such simplicity.
If you do not like rules, or things such as “dialog trees,” then why are you not in a field of study where you could improve them?
I’m a firm believer in “if you’re not part of the solution, then you’re part of the problem.”
I’ve been studying artificial intelligence my entire life. Hearing things like this seems like a slap to the face to me and all my research.
Do you think it is the fault of people such as myself that things are this way?
Computers are far from the point where they can program themselves. You need to tell them what to do, give them specific rules. They cannot think for themselves.
We’ve yet to create an AI that can pass the Turing test. Things like dialogue trees in video games aren’t because people are lazy. They’re because that’s the best possible solution that can be done with today’s technology.
We can’t simulate the health and individual nervous systems of characters on screen. They’re nothing but variables in the program. “Character’s life = some number.”
Everything that we do now is because that’s as far as technology goes. What gives you the right to criticize it, when it’s something beyond your comprehension?
Also, do you not realize that your games also have rules? For example, blowing out the candles in Fatale to advance through to the next part of game. You’re also in the same boat. It’s really naive for you to complain.
While you make a fuss about it, I’ll be here actually doing something about it. Call me when you need me, and don’t forget who made it possible for you whenever it happens.
And for the record, I don’t make games. Well, not specifically. My studies are devoted to the general advancement of computer AI and simulation. Also, it’s probably in my best interest to remain anonymous. I apologize.
I agree with you!
I just think there is no need of such a harsh language, wich unnecessarily deters people or easily leads to a misunderstanding. The rant-section reads like a battle cry, especially with the pictures of an angel killing a demon and the french revolution (if I am not mistaken).
Also certain gameplay mechanics are only stupid if you see them under this point of view, cause there serve their own purpose of entertaining apart of substance or art.
And I do think that there are games, mostly action-themed, where the gameplay mechanics are required to deliver the “meaning” in form of an actual feeling or immersion into the virtual world.
Looking at a shooter like Call of Duty, the whole gameplay only serves delivering the feeling of panic and adrenaline and how it would be trying to survive in a deadly environment or as a soldier with mission. All rules and goals are not only embedded in the fictional world, there are inevitable to transport that atmosphere. How the topic should be considered morally or politically has nothing to do with the analysation of the actual game design and is lastly a matter of taste or opinion.
The reason why there are so many of this kind of games, is that the action or combat-theme contains adventure, excitment and “easyness”, and therefore is the most entertaining to the masses, just like Hollywood-Blockbusters will always be more successful than Arthouse-cinema.
But I do agree with you that to enable to use other themes in the “games”-medium adequatly, one must be more free to focus or abandon certain elements of the medium wich are required to suit or express the themes optimally.
The thing is that to make such games or notgames successful, there need to be other expectations and evaluation criteria within the gamer-community. I agree with you on that point too.
But one must accept that the entertaining type of game or movie or whatever will always be dominant in the communities or the mass media, theres no way changing that. At least one can try to make this more popular by some kind of compromise and choose more accessible subject-matters or meanings and slave every element of the game to express it in the most optimal way, instead of choosing too obscure and avantgarde material. This is of course only under the viewpoint of popularisation.
Dear Mr “An anonymous reader”, I assume your use of the word “I” was ironical somehow?
And about the rules: there are rules in movie-making, too! Screenplays need to have a certain structure and the characters need to be portayed within the character arc. Abandon this may help focus or express certain things, but lessens the entertaining factor! Gameplay mechanics proved as engaging or funny do the same for videogames, they maintain the player to be entertained, wich is the requirement for developing an successful or noted game. Expressing something complex AND be successful can only be done within these parameters and by bending them as far as you can without breaking it.
When you do a game without any gameplay or a movie without any structure, you will have to accept a small audience by giving up the “entertainment rules”, no matter of the substancial quality it might has, its just the way it is.
Xeno, I’m always surprised by the innocence of the people I meet on the internet. It’s very charming. I agree: if people don’t see the humour in our performances, then our words could be very dangerous. That “angel” is the angel Michael from the Christian faith. My name is Michael. Do I think I am an angel? No. Do I think this is funny? Yes, I think it’s hilarious. Did I still mean what I said? Sure.
I agree that game mechanics are perfectly suited to tell stories about violence and conquest. I just don’t think that the world needs any more such stories.
While I realize that our own work is doomed to remain stuck in the art house, ultimately the idea is only to broaden the spectrum. Even if interactive media only reach the variety that cinema offers, I’ll be very pleased.
An anonymous reader: Good idea. Especially considering people are still having a fit over David Jaffe bashing indie games, specifically Braid and ones by Tales of Tales. That’s one way you don’t want to get attention to yourself.
umm…. also how was he being ironic?
you guys are right. but at the same time. it was meant to be a bit of a provokation. a performance, if you will. we were not attacking anyone in specific. but whole gigantic swaths of preconception. and a system that we feel is broken. so do not take it personally. we were not talking to you as an individual but calling to you nonetheless, those who want to do something else in addition to what is already there.
all i can say is that we will be gentler in the future.
And let me say, as a general observation. There were very few people who, when we presented it live, had a problem with what we were saying, as such. There was discussion. We all looked each other in the eye, we talked. Things were made clear. I think the text reads one way, but the presentation experienced was another thing. They will put up the video and then you can see we weren’t looking for a fight. To provoke, yes. To utterly piss off, come to the Internet, be textually mirco-analyzed by anyone who drops by, and argue about things endlessly in a blog thread, no.
So, lets move it along. Things are happening! Things are being MADE!
Few remarks:
1. I think that the people who are your potential “no-games” target are those who are receptive enough to appreciate them. Meaning that they are OK with books, arts etc. but most of them dislike computer as a playing ground (becuase most of their experience in this area, so far, was bad). On the other hand, the people whom you can easily attract for a while are from the gamers community, just becuase you share the medium with them. But most of them will become disappointed and you will lose them, after all. Therefore concentrating your effort on fighting the existing gaming industry seems pointless and hopeless if you do not find some way of encouraging the first mentioned group of people.
2. It is unlikely in the world of idea to see your opponents admitting that you were right and they were wrong. The real success you can hope for, especially during your lifespan, is when your opponents, still opposing you, start using your point of view and methods, trying to turn them against you. You are unlikely to see great game-industry companies praising your efforts but if you are lucky enough one day you will see them trying to imitate what you do. Perhaps your greatest victory will come when one of these companies starts doing “no-games” better than yours.
3. I must admit that I, personally, have some problem with Michael “posing” for an archangel and so on. I mean, taken separately it is funny and ironic, but then I recall another one of you guys running between trees, clad in white and acting in such a way that some people take her for Jesus, and then I know I can expect yet next meeting with the author if I decide to buy “Fatale”…, to say nothing about the very concept of Twin Gods which makes it unlikely for me to visit the Endless Forest. I can blame my repressed childhood in a communist country but somehow I feel that even for the Western common standards of self-promotion you play this trumpet too often. Which is a pity, because I am afraid some people may simply, instinctively read it as some narcisstic self-adoration. I do not really think this is your case (at least I hope so) but still it may badly affect the reception of your work. And since I am impatiently waiting for your “8” being published I simply cannot let any obstacle stop your progress. :))
Thank you for your advice, K.
In the mean time, try and have some fun. 😉
At your service, Michael. You are very kind (unlike me, I am afraid).
As for the fun – no way. There is no comfort for me unless I get “8” to play with. I got this making world a better place mission, you know: giving good advices and telling people what’s wrong with them. Simply no time for joy. Being a smartass is not a half-time job.
You’ll be glad to know that we will soon start prototyping a new game based on “8”!
And I’d like to point out that the Twin Gods are separate entities in The Endless Forest. We are not them. We simply worship them together with the other deer. And sometimes, we assume the role of high priests, during the ABIOGENESIS festival, which we do entirely in service of the forest population. Much like the Archangel does God’s dirty work in service of mankind.
Modesty is boring.
Thanks for the good news!
Well, in fact I never actually thought that Auriea *is* GiW, or that you *are* the archangel (what dirty work in service of mankind you do I dare not ask :). However, if you say that the Twin Gods being twin has nothing to do with their high priests being “twin”, then I would say that the appearances are against you, and Dr. Freud probably also would have his doubts. (On religious ground, I wonder whether putting oneself into position of a high priest to some deity is actually more or less blasphemous than putting oneself into position of this deity. Perhaps even thinking about it puts one in danger?
Tooth-brushing is boring as well, as many other customs employed by the sadly conventional part of human population. I guess that even taking free ride on archangels may become boring, at some point.
i am history student sent me the concept the value of history to my email box.