Guitar Zero

There's apparently a lot of criticism about Guitar Hero around..

I recently came across an article in the Psychology Today magazine website about Guitar Hero. And reading this article made me feel like.. ugh why do I waste my time?

The tone of this article was highly negative, basically saying that the dynamics of this game are absurd and wondering why anyone in their right mind would play. Like.. the game does not teach one how to play a guitar.. it doesn't have strings or an actual fretboard.. just buttons you press in sync with the music. Also, the article makes a good point by adding: "And there’s no room for genuine creativity, as there would be with a real instrument ... Since the sequence and timing are provided by the game software, you don’t really even need to know the songs. There’s no need to strategize ahead (as in chess); no need for big muscles (as in basketball), and no need to bluff past one’s opponent (as in poker). Few games demand less of the player; I suspect monkeys could be trained to play, and know for a fact that robots can cruise through Guitar Hero on Expert." And that's completely true, the only thing I can get out of the game really is better hand-eye coordination. So why do I continue to play?

Why does anyone play any game? Why do people play Grand Theft Auto, whose main objective is to cause crime. I feel that many people turn to these games for escapism. When I first started to play Guitar Hero, I knew that it wouldn't help me play an actual guitar, but I enjoyed playing the game and I still do. These games help me get a sense of rhythm, and expose me to more music that I wind up downloading. I feel like this article is attacking people who turn Guitar Hero into an obsession, and feel like they're actually playing an instrument, whereas they're just playing a game. The article also discussed how absurd it was to listen to these songs in front of a television where they can get the CD's and listen to them, so I feel like the writer of the article is more conservative and doesn't necessarily realize that our generation will listen to music through any medium, and the gamer generation would love to listen to this music by playing it. Maybe the writer feels like because he grew up listening to this music and is now seeing it tainted through video games, that he is unwilling to accept the new trend. Just an assumption..

The article concludes with this theory, which I'm on the fence with agreeing with: "Games like Guitar Hero set up one of the most potent illusions of temporal contingency I’ve ever seen: if the player presses the button at the right time, the computer plays back a recording of a particular note (or set of notes) played by a professional musician. The music itself is potent and rewarding – Keith Richards really knows how to bend a note -- but the real secret to the game is what happens is that fact if you miss the button, you don’t hear the note. The brain whirrs away, and notices the contingency. When I push the button, I hear Keith Richards; when I fail to push the button (or press the wrong button, or press it late), I don’t hear Keith Richards. Therefore, I am Keith Richards! It’s not simply that you hear the songs (which bring pleasure) but that the game skillfully induces the illusion that you yourself are generating the songs. You aren’t paying $60 to hear the songs; you’re paying $60 to trick your brain into thinking that you are making them. Your conscious mind may know better – and realize that it’s all just a ruse – but your unconscious mind is completely and happily fooled. Is that worth $60? If you want to feel like Keith Richards, the answer is surely yes."

So I don't know.. I think the writer was looking too much into the game. I don't play "Paint it Black" on Guitar Hero thinking "Oh my god! I'm Keith Richards! I'm sitting on my couch playing Guitar Hero on my plastic controller but really I'm a ROCKSTAR!" Na.. I play because it's a game that I enjoy playing: one that combines music with video games. But that's just me.