Videogames are associated with the visual arts, certainly, but are perhaps closest to architecture in reality. While a videogame may or may not include actual visual feedback, the essence of a videogame is built on kinetic feedback, a necessity of our own to function. The understanding of how we interact with architecture, and for that matter, how expect the world to interact, is based entirely on the concept of structures. The concept of reality brought into videogames is, while a daring endeavor, rather problematic.
In the past, the purpose of attempting to computationally approach photorealism was entirely based on the concept that the world, in some representative fashion, is the apex of information, and thus being able to realistically simulate the world would bring about unparalleled advancements. To a certain extent the concept became true, as the physics engines developed for videogames have been used in science and research, and certainly have a valuable functional depth. But here’s the rub: videogames approaching photorealism also meant they started to have to live up to expectations of reality. Simulating common visual qualities however, is extraordinarily difficult due to our own familiarity with similar associational objects. Weapons would perhaps be the most readily available association in the history of videogames.
Herein lies the basic problem with 3D games attempting to approach photorealism. When attempting to emulate something the human mind has already tied intimate connections, even the slightest altercation feels awkward. Certainly the uncanny valley is the height of creepiness, but it’s mostly because of the fact that the valley approaches being human, but is off in slight ways so as to make us naturally wary. However, it makes us wary because what we are seeing is us reflected in an uncanny manner.
While we don’t get the same awkward feeling about the rest of a 3D environment, because of that keen sense of an emulated, specific-to-reality type, we are aware of associational disconnections. Part of that disconnection is because we tend to ignore associational objects in reality, but part of it is also sublimation of the false reality. Effectively, while we are still very aware that 3D grass looks nothing like actual grass, it’s still acceptable, despite a keen awareness of its emulation, rather than simulation. The problem is that the grass is intended to look real, rather than artistic, just as the characters are intended to look real. Here we see the problem perhaps in the videogame community, where visuals begin to be equated to their fidelity in relationship to reality or to previous technical achievements. Such a problem degrades the substantive use of the architecture.
When we start thinking in such a manner, videogames begin to go backwards and become little more than processing power and acronyms for visual fidelity. However, videogames as architecture do not necessitate such thinking. What is beautiful about architecture is the thought that went into the design, not how many computer-aided drafting students it took to design it. Videogames as architecture is oft overlooked in favor of powering such previously stated visual fidelity, and as such is a significant blow to creativity, as videogames themselves cost exponentially more to look better in 3D environment, and looking good is often mistaken for being good. However, it is the content of the structure that we will interact with, not its facade.
As architecture, videogames necessitate a good builder, an individual to give space purpose and actions structure. Their intent is rarely to be the best or the biggest or brightest, but instead are oft respected for being different. Though the idea of making houses which no one will or can live in might seem rather trite, there is a certain interesting consideration necessary to constructing monuments, just as much as there is to a bathroom. Even though these environments and prefaces are plain, they serve a vital consideration necessary for videogames to move forward. Videogames are aided by visual, audial, and narrative complexity, but they are not its foci. Designing a videogame is not nearly so much about being an excellent programmer (it will certainly help), but about clearly presenting an interesting interactive idea through architecture.