(or just one reason why video games will always be more popular than comics)
A few months back, I spent an inordinate amount of time ingesting an unhealthy diet of heavily caramelized brain popcorn. This included not only viewings of Avatar and the most recent iteration of Sherlock Holmes but also a video game for the PS3 produced by Naughty Dog called, Uncharted 2: Among Thieves (link to gameplay video)
Playing the game in particular served only to remind me that among the visual art forms which have focused at various points of their histories on the depiction of action and movement, comics must be accounted the poor cousin of both movies and games.
Uncharted 2 is a wisecracking, male version of Tomb Raider with a plot not significantly better than either of the Lara Croft movies (which, for the uninitiated, gave new meaning to the word “dumb”). This really isn’t a problem though since no one buys an action-adventure game for its elevated storyline. I feel pretty ambivalent about the extremely derivative plot of Avatar for much the same reason.
The second iteration of Uncharted is an exponential improvement over the first entry in the series and is among finest action games of the current generation of consoles. Apart from the usual fare of frontal assaults and defending fixed positions, there are sniper battles, a bit of stealth action, scripted chase scenes where you are deprived of your carefully acquired weapons and platforming sequences where apart from traditional obstacle avoidance you get a souped up version of the truck chase sequence in Raiders of the Lost Ark (a sequence which captured my imagination when I first watched it as a teenager but which has grown slightly musty with the years).
I can’t remember a single comic which has set my pulse racing to the same extent as Uncharted 2. Video games are aimed at reproducing the sweaty immediacy of real life conflict employing disorienting visual information and sounds and, as with the case of the Wii, more realistic muscle cues. All this in an effort to replicate the adrenaline rush so addictive to the young male demographic which used to be comic’s captive audience. The holy grail for video games is the recreation of a safe but exciting “reality” which engages as many of the senses as fiscally and technologically possible.
These roads are blocked to comics. There is very little which can be produced in comics as far as realistic action or movement are concerned which cannot be better captured on film or a video game. It’s a creative dead end as far as sequential art is concerned. Artists who use extensive photo reference may disagree but even here the focus is not so much on immersion but on a grounding of the story elements in a more easily recognizable world.
Action, movement and violence in comics is more effectively conveyed through stylistic exaggeration or a high degree of refinement. Comic artists working in genres focusing on action have naturally shied away from scenes of extended kineticism preferring sharp depictions of power and awe. Comic readers have learned to do without the faux reality of games and movies, choosing to dwell very consciously and purposefully in the artist’s and writer’s imagination and skills first and foremost; drifting away from the more congenial and addictive mixture of instinct, muscle memory and passive immersion.
When faced with pivotal scenes of action in comics, I’m more often than not less excited by the moment in question than the draftsmanship of the artist: the line or brush work; the manner in which the artist charts the flow of action within and between panels, freezing moments of brutality or horror in time. This is somewhat similar to the feeling one might get while gawking at a brilliant strip of traditional cel (or other hand drawn) animation and is something which has appealed to movie and game producers increasingly over the last few decades, with pivotal scenes captured in slow motion or freeze frames whether it is the bullet time of The Matrix or its offspring in the form of the Max Payne games (just to name two early examples).
In other words, this is yet another aspect of the depiction of action in comics which has been subsumed by films and games – the ability to dwell at length on the drama and composition of various captured moments of action now fully accessible to the general public in the form of high definition home video. The only difference may lie in the fact that comics invite us to consider at length their carefully chosen moments of dynamism. As with the more traditional art forms of literature and painting, comics deal most effectively with more quiet and complex visual realities. If there is a dissonance between action-oriented comics and their film adaptations it may lie in the neglect of this area of the narrative.
]
It is also in these areas that the medium which holds the greatest promise for the recreation of a certain “reality” falls furthest from the mean of acceptable storytelling. This is true whether we consider games from generations past or those from the current era which have been most lauded for their plots, characterization or moral quandaries (Bioshock, Fallout, Fable 2, Mass Effect 2 etc.). While this says more about the dictates of the market than the form itself, there can be little doubt that complex and interesting narratives are at best a distant reality as far as computer and console games are concerned; a fact which will have little or no impact on their upward trajectories in the public consciousness.
***
Side note
I chanced upon a link (via The Comics Reporter) to Hayao Miyazaki’s Porco Rosso manga called “The Age of the Flying Boat”. Miyazaki’s most important manga-related work is Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind but he had this to say on the final page of this short story:
“If this were an animation, I might be able to convey the grandeur of this life-or-death battle. But this is a comic. I have no choice but to rely on your powers of imagination.”
While this is a bit outside the scope of your essay, I’d add that an additional reason why games do action and thrills so well is the possibility of death. In mainstream comics (and movies, for that matter), we know that the main characters will live and that victory is a foregone conclusion.
But in games, success is never guaranteed. Of course, you can always just keep re-loading after a every defeat until you win, but at any given moment it’s possible for the player to get killed.
And it’s a weird coincidence that you brought up video games today, because I was at the Penny Arcade Expo in Boston over the weekend. It was a much more enthusiastic (and diverse) crowd than what I saw at the Baltimore Comic-Con.
And since I just can’t shut up…
I think action comics can be just as exciting as movies or games when the reader is a young child with an (over)active imagination. Compared to movies or games, comics tend to invite (or even require) more participation by the reader in constructing an action sequence and its surrounding universe. And young children instinctively do this sort of thing every time they play in a fantasy world.
Teens and adults have a firmer view of reality (and lazier imaginations) and they expect more verisimilitude in their action entertainment. You’re absolutely right that comics can never compete with games and movies in that regard.
It’s interesting to think about this is comparison to music as well. Obviously, it’s not a narrative form exactly, but there’s an adrenalin rush listening to something like Vader that I’m not sure how you’d reproduce in comics form.
I wonder if it has to do with time? Books and comics allow you to control the timing of the events yourself, which rather undoes some of the potential for suspense/adrenaline rush….
Richard, your second point is particularly apt. I think Caro’s “favorite” book (Understanding Comics) has a tangential view on this subject, where the “imagination” and the active participation of the reader creates a more intimate experience. He says this in relation to “closure” if I remember correctly and it’s meant to be a point in comics favor.
Of course, audiences in general prefer more passive forms of entertainment. Who wants to think after a hard day’s work? So what were you doing at the Penny Arcade Expo? You know, I would have thought that a gaming expo (though not Penny Arcade in particular) would be more homogeneous than a comicon.
Noah: Someone must have written about the effect (re: time) you’re talking about but for some reason I haven’t read it yet…
It’s weird that McCloud would privilege imagination as closure in that way…because it seems pretty clear that plain old books beat comics in that regard. You have to do more imaginative work with books after all (fill in what characters look like, etc.)
It does seem like somebody would have had to talk about the time thing…though maybe not. It’s kind of something you’d only talk about if you were comparing two mediums, and people do that sort of thing professionally kind of less than you might necessarily expect.
Hey, don’t take my word for it, I could be misremembering the whole thing. I vaguely recall something about filling in the blanks in the mind’s eye when considering 2 separate but adjoining panels. I suppose the difference between prose and comics in this instance would be the lack of imagery in “plain old books”. But, yes, I take your point that “plain old books” should foster greater reader involvement in that sense than a comic. Maybe he was comparing comics to other visuals forms like film/TV.
Suat- an old friend of mine is a big fan of both video games and Penny Arcade, so he convinced me and a couple other friends to make the trip up to Boston for PAX East. I’m not actually a fan of the Penny Arcade web-comic, and “geek” humor in general tends to leave me cold. But overall, the convention was fun.
As for diversity, both the comic nerds and the gamer nerds were disproportionately white males. But there were a lot more girls and women at PAX than at Comic-Con. And whereas the few women at the Baltimore Comic-Con seemed to be bored wives and girlfriends who were just wandering about, the ladies at PAX seemed legitimately enthusiastic about the games (there were some fantastic costumes). It was also more racially diverse, as I saw many more Asians (both East Asian and South Asian) at PAX than at Comic-Con.
But I’ll grant that the big comic-cons (San Diego and New York) might be a whole other experience. I’ve never been to either.
I read that…
Why Videogames Are Better Than Comics
Posted by Noah Berlatsky on March 29th, 2010 at 11:20 AM
…teaser, thought, “here’s Noah up to his usual utterly hare-brained arguments!”, then saw the “Suat explains the reasons why” line.
The actual article has a title that is far more carefully calibrated. Not that it keeps me from finding stuff to disagree with, though.
——————-
Ng Suat Tong says:
Video games are aimed at reproducing the sweaty immediacy of real life conflict employing disorienting visual information and sounds and, as with the case of the Wii, more realistic muscle cues. All this in an effort to replicate the adrenaline rush so addictive to the young male demographic which used to be comic’s captive audience. The holy grail for video games is the recreation of a safe but exciting “reality” which engages as many of the senses as fiscally and technologically possible.
These roads are blocked to comics. There is very little which can be produced in comics as far as realistic action or movement are concerned which cannot be better captured on film or a video game. It’s a creative dead end as far as sequential art is concerned.
——————-
A video camera laid in front of a trampoline whence a sugared-up kid is bouncing up and down would “better capture” this “realistic action.” If, by “better” and “realistic,” one chooses the most dumbed-down interpretations of the terms.
And, vot is dis “action” being referred to, that comics are being lambasted for failing to capture their extraordinary nuances?
——————–
Apart from the usual fare of frontal assaults and defending fixed positions, there are sniper battles, a bit of stealth action, scripted chase scenes where you are deprived of your carefully acquired weapons and platforming sequences where apart from traditional obstacle avoidance you get a souped up version of the truck chase sequence in Raiders of the Lost Ark…
——————–
OK; it’s the most moronically, frantic running-jumping-shooting Jerry Bruckheimer fare we’re talking about..
Might as well say, re “Some thoughts on the limitations of action on the stage,” that Macbeth is a flop compared to Transformers II at “better capturing realistic action.”
What about action which is subtle (gestures, facial expressions, slight alterations in body language)? How about a choreography of movement involving a group of figures, where nuanced interaction can be clearly depicted in a comic, while in a film – or, god help us, video game – it zips right past, amid distractions such as choppy editing, shifting camera-angles?
———————
I can’t remember a single comic which has set my pulse racing to the same extent as Uncharted 2…
——————–
And the most exquisitely chilling and unnerving classic horror story never “set my pulse racing” the way the most dumbass “BOO!”-type shock in any schlocky horror flick can do; and D.H. Lawrence’s literary erotica can’t arouse at the lizard-brain level that gynecologically-explicit porn photos can accomplish.
So, that then means that prose is a “creative dead end” as far as evoking those emotional reactions?
——————–
Comic artists working in genres focusing on action have naturally shied away from scenes of extended kineticism preferring sharp depictions of power and awe…
——————–
“Naturally”? Or, because significant factors such as having to illustrate X-pages of plot within page-count or deadline limitations worked against indulging in such luxuries?
There is absolutely no reason inherent to the art form why comics artists could not have rendered such sequences.
Reading the seven-volume “Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind” manga by Hayao Miyazaki, I was astonished and delighted by the lengthy, spectacular battle sequence in one book. This is by far the greatest depiction of battle I’ve ever read in comics, I thought. The sweeping spectacle, complexity of action lucidly shown, thrilling moments of individual derring-do.
With all the truckloads of war comics that have been produced, many by talented creators, why was nothing like this – far as I know – ever accomplished before?
Not due to the failings of comics; simply because no other comics creator had over ten years and that many pages to tell a tale in which so much space could be granted to a single battle.
Hi Mike, the blog entry isn’t about why video games are *better* than comics. It just mentions one reason why they are more *popular* than comics. In the same way that Transformers 2 (crap that it is) was probably seen by more people than all the film versions of Macbeth, Hamlet or whichever D H Lawrence novel adaptation you might choose. Ditto a totally rubbishy game like Halo 3. Subtleties don’t cut it at the box office. Mainstream comics used to be aimed at a market which values those more superficial thrills. This kind of crap sustains a lot of the comics industry. Now they’ve got an alternative in the form of very technically accomplished video games.
Occasionally I catch my blood boiling when I am witness to people in our cousin industries (who owe as much to us…comics…as we do to the words and pictures). I mean who do these youngsters think they are…calling us childish, inferior…what have you.
Then I take a deep breath and say, fine. The underground is a nice place, people let you be. You resist corruption, you can be pure (and poor). Sure you are delusional like me, but as long as I am not harming anyone else, that’s fine.
The truth is if you look at the mediums free of comparisons and popularity…well you have related, but very different experiences, opportunity and intent. All valid. In comics you have opportunity to stop, interject, go back, reassess, ect…in film you are being taken for a ride. In games you are allotted some control. In books your visualization gives you clues. In illustration to are given a point of reference that leads to many thoughts. In comics you have some of all of these…but it depends on the story and techniques and comes with its own uniquely intimate experience. That is why branding crossover…stories cross over from medium to medium…because in different artist hands you find change in perception for the audience and in change in medium you find the same thing…a different perception, intellectually and emotionally.
I don’t understand the point of this comparison. Hot dogs will also be more popular than comics at recreating the sensation of eating a hot dog but that says nothing about hot dogs or comics.
Oh come on. It’s not that complicated. Hot dogs aren’t competing directly with comics for a particular demographics entertainment dollar. Video games are. If video games are better at producing the experiences that that demographic wants, that’s worth pointing out.
The timing in comics has been discussed, certainly. Alan Moore and Art Spiegelman like to talk about it when given the chance (are interviewed, etc.), but even poor maligned Scott McCloud discusses it.
I’m not sure that video games (or whatever) are better at creating suspense, either. If a comic is actually good (like a good book), it can be a page turner (i.e. you’re not willing to spend extra time enjoying the page aesthetically because you’re bound and determined to see “what happens next”), it can surprise you, etc. Sometimes, comics are not trying to do this, of course….and most “action comics” are pretty crappy…but I’m not sure we should be using crappy examples as that which determines what a medium is actually capable of.
I think Noah’s point that comics are a static medium (for all the attention paid to the illusion of time) is a very important one: there actually isn’t any temporality at all in a comic. There’s only the representation of temporality. Whereas time is a built-in immediate part of the video genres and music. I think Suat’s right that that allows for a passivity that is appealing to busy/lazy viewers.
I am having complete quote fail trying to find where Sam Delany talks about this, even though I read the passage last week. I really increasingly think there needs to be a Hooded Utilitarian drinking game where every time someone says something that Sam Delany already said we all have to take a drink.
—————–
Ng Suat Tong says:
Hi Mike, the blog entry isn’t about why video games are *better* than comics. It just mentions one reason why they are more *popular* than comics. In the same way that Transformers 2 (crap that it is) was probably seen by more people than all the film versions of Macbeth, Hamlet or whichever D H Lawrence novel adaptation you might choose…
—————-
I’ve no problem with that argument; it’s unfortunately understandable that anything which appeals on a base, primitive level, and saves people from having to “fill in the blanks” with their imagination as much as technically possible, will automatically tend to garner a far larger audience.
My griping was with arguments such as, “[comics are] a creative dead end as far as sequential art is concerned…[because they cannot capture] realistic action or movement [as well as] film or a video game.”
Yours truly then pointing out ways in which comics could – and have – dealt with qualities of action and movement better than those more popular examples.
Google “Eadweard Muybridge photographs” and his sequences of images will turn up. Undoubtedly comics, at least in some significant aspects; making vividly clear qualities and details of motion which film or a video game will zip right past.
I saw a well-known comics sequence fairly recently, yet this ol’brain can’t recall now whether it was by Kirby or Ditko. A row of panels focuses on the hand of a vanquished supervillain. It (as I recall) gestures, slumps in despair, clenches in rage. Would a motion-picture camera, real or virtual, aimed at a thespian’s/computer-generated character’s mitt, achieve the same effect? Nyet; in comics, each of the emotions is distinctly separated, and thus highlighted, as in a sequence of mini-panels in a Krigstein story where a character “goes through changes” emotionally.
Had you included a statement early in your piece to the effect of, “comics are destined to remain less popular than movies and videogames among adolescent boys and manboys because they can more vividly convey violent, frantic action,” then gone on to further expound on that hardly-deniable point, and left out the comics are a “creative dead end” arguments, it’d have saved a lot of wear and tear on my jabbing left index…