Haven't watched the episode, but that's a stupid statement. There are so many games that go beyond fun. Whether it's with emotional low-points like deaths, deep melancholic storylines, horror elements or just unenjoyable but still fascinating game mechanics.

I did not have fun playing Spec Ops: The Line, but I did enjoy it because it went beyond dumb fun. Playing the Walking Dead exhausts me and isn't fun at all, but I need to see how the characters keep surviving. I would say Planescape is not a fun game to play, but the story is so well written that it engrosses you. There are hundreds of more examples.

If you think games can't go beyond fun, play better games.

FYI, Extra Credits did two whole episodes on Spec Ops a month ago. They know. And they're generally pretty smart people.

I think he means games now, and I have not been engaged yet, I will say the last game that engaged me so much was Metal Gear Solid 4.

That video may have been relevant in the 70s or early 80s back when arcade games were the only sorts out there...

...Also, it makes many of its statements based upon the misconception that "fun" has to be "light hearted", only to turn around and argue against that very same premise which is the basis of all of their complaints... So they made an erroneous assumption, complained about the results of that discussion, and then went on to disprove that assumption while still making complaints that assumed that assumption was true...

Games can go beyond "fun", but it seems like so many of them are trying to do that these days that the idea of "fun" is kinda getting lost amongst epic controversial movie-budget "message"-y storylines, characters, scenery, etc. The indie scene seems to be "fun"-focused because they don't have the budgets for the stuff mentioned above, so they need to draw in customers in other ways, IE with "fun" factors.

Oh, I knew Extra Credits was going into more depth than that, I just think the title alone is a bit loaded. Games now? Two of my examples were released this year.

A good start than.

I'm sorry, but I don't get the point... at all. Games are supposed to be fun, aren't they? At least as far as I'm concerned, if a game isn't enjoyable on some level it isn't worth playing. Even the handpicked games he was using as examples for 'beyond fun' fit relatively poorly in his argument.

Extra Credits is usually better than this. :(

^This. I haven't had a chance to watch the whole thing yet, but there's a fundamental difference between a game and a movie, which is that a game is an active experience, whereas a movie is passive. A movie doesn't have to be "fun", because you're not doing anything, but you need to eke some enjoyment out of a game or it's not worthwhile, just like any other activity. And besides, even depressing movies and such are entertaining. The main misnomer here, in my opinion, is that of "light-hearted fun", as if it's impossible for a "serious work of art" to be fun. But fun doesn't have to be light-hearted. For example, I find Dark Souls really fun, but it's certainly not light-hearted. And even games that you wouldn't necessarily ascribe the description of "fun" to (Amnesia, for example) still are enjoyable, just like any other media. What's the point if you don't enjoy it? I'm a strong proponent of games as a legitimate media, but saying that you a serious game can't be fun is trying to make games what they aren't.

Amazing that the comments in penny arcade are not as objective you guys here in GOG.

Eh, not really. The people who take the time to comment on the Extra Credits site are presumably going to be mainly Extra Credits fans who agree with most of their points. We're all grumpy and cynical over here. x]

I do think when people are mentioning, say, City Builders they're bringing up an interesting point, which is that it's not necessarily fun to do all the tedious micromanagement, but it's satisfying to see your cool cityscape as the spoils of your work (although I don't think I can comprehend someone saying Civ4 isn't fun, but whatever). So perhaps instead of saying, "Fun is bad" or "In order for gaming to progress as an art form we have to make games that aren't fun", we should expand fun to personal achievement and say that "All games require some sort of personal achievement, whether this is the fun of fragging enemies, the satisfaction of completing a city, or the mind-teasing of a philosophical question". That's nicer, isn't it?

Sitting for two hours not doing anything had better be the most fun thing imaginable. Except it's usually not, which is why I don't watch movies.