Innovation or Originality? What am I Talking About and In What Language?

"'It is really, really hard to come up with solid game concepts and great characters,' said John Baez, co-founder of The Behemoth, an independent video game developer based in California."

That quotation is from a CBC.ca (yes, I'm a journalism student) feature by Peja Bulotovic entitled "Indie games counter sequel-driven market" and published on Feb. 22. That quotation is, in fact, the lead of the article, so right away, you know it has significance. And it does, for all the wrong--but just a few of the right--reasons.

It's the assumptions I struggle with when reading it. That it's "really, really hard" to come up with video game stories and characters. That's what's so wrong about it. Of course, it's right, too--there is nothing quite as agonizing as not having the right idea. But at least it's speaking the right language. That's a start.

Some context: I don't profess to be a video game industry expert or have any great experience in the digital community. I'm just an amateur writer with who thinks game narrative is a little more interesting than most people give it credit for.

It used to be the only article you could find on a mainstream media site about game creation was written in the language I like to refer to as corporatese. Not always a bad language, like all it has its time and place, but a language rather hopelessly focused on the latest Halo sales figures.

Looking at this article from that past perspective, it's refreshing. Looking at it as a creative writing student, it makes me want to take my head and drive it into my desk.

Character in this article turns into gameplay and the concept of originality is caught out by that wonderful corporatese term, 'innovation'. Which is a pity, since what we're talking about is a fundamental aspect of the creative process and the article really isn't able to access the processes of these creators, possibly because it's a technology article when it really wants to be an arts article.

And that's when my head picks up a little bit off my desk and regains hope. Because we are essentially discussing the value of something new. That's why character is so important--because character is relatable and it's new. They're the same thing.

The quotations from Jason and Matthew Doucette are straight out of an arts report. Words like "creative control" and discussions of personal taste!

It's a way of thinking as much as a way of speaking. It's somewhat invigorating to think that two groups of people--the observers and the creators--might actually begin to think the same way.

They're not there yet, there are still assumptions present in this article, but it's worth a read just to feel conflicted about it.

When these two sides eventually figure each other out, both legitimacy and expression increase. People care about the creative process, or I wouldn't be procrastinating about an assignment for a 100-person class on it right now. And people care about the gaming industry. There's a lot of shared concern there, and if the two sides can understand each other--can understand that the game developer's quest for a new gameplay system and the writer's quest for a new world or character are essentially the same thing--then the industry will access a lot of ideas and experience that have gone before in other media, and the creators will access a new medium to express in and to analyze. That's worth it.

The agonizing along the way, the articles that start to get it but then slip away, are part of the process. All one can do is keep finding characters to talk to. That's all journalists and creators do.