Hello fellow composers and game producers,

I've started an article series on Video Game Music on my website, starting with Part I: Knowing the Difference.

Check it out here.

Cheers!
Moritz

Cool! Thanks for sharing this. Are you open to some constructive criticism?

Thanks,

Nate

Cool! Thanks for sharing this. Are you open to some constructive criticism?

You're very welcome. And of course, fire away!

You're very welcome. And of course, fire away!

Cool! I like what you're doing with the staggered release of the article bit by bit - but to be honest this current draft (or version) is almost too short and lacking too many firm details to really capture my attention. I fear for other readers - it might be the same. I'll pinpoint some of the issues that jumped out at me on my initial read as well as some of the disagreements I have with your points below:

Surprisingly enough, there aren't many articles about video game music on the internet.
[/quote]

There isn't? A quick Google search of "Video Game Music Articles" showed 315,000,000 results. Granted, not every one of these hits is an article on video game music but a quick scan revealed articles from NPR, BBC and CNN. Those are not small names and I found many other articles sprinkled throughout. Couple this with the extensive talks and sessions that happen at GDC and other game development conventions where game composers often show exactly how they handled this and that... and I wonder how can you support this argument.

There are probably a number of reasons for this, one being that magicians don't like to show how their tricks work.

Well, at the risk of putting myself out of work, I've decided to put some thoughts on this topic down and share them with you. This might be interesting if you're a composer yourself, but it should also prove informative for game producers who would like to gain an insight how to communicate with their contract musicians more efficiently.
[/quote]

Part one didn't show any of these "tricks" and didn't even provide examples of what you did cover. I'd either remove this sentence to avoid misrepresenting your article's content... or add in examples and more substancial material in later sections.

The main reason why many great film music producers aren't quite that good at video game music and vice versa is quite simple when you think about it: just like you have to be a film freak if you want to be successful at film music, you have to be a video game nerd to understand the art of game composing.
[/quote]

Actually recently there have been quite a few very successful composers who have crossed over (from both directions) with solid results. The score to MGS3 by Harry Gregson Williams was the first thing to pop into my head and Tyler Bates has done several video games as well as many block buster films. Then there's Bear McCreary who has also been very successful at both genres. While I agree with you that video game and film/TV/linear composition require different approaches - your premise that great film composers make sucky video game composers isn't accurate. Couple this with the fact that larger scale projects often have an audio implementer that works with all of the music then applies the needed edits (for the interactive part) as well as hooking up the triggers and your argument goes out the window. Note: this is mainly for large scale projects. For indie level stuff - odds are the audio guy(s) will be doing EVERYTHING and in that case perhaps your stance can hold up a bit better.

VGM is often repetitive.

Especially if we're talking about arcade or puzzle games. Your tracks will probably need to loop without becoming boring or distracting from gameplay. This is one of the major challenges. An action scene that may take 10 minutes in a movie might take an hour in a video game.

[/quote]

Is it VGM music really repetitive? One of the recent trends I've seen in game scores today is event based music instead of constantly looping music in the background. Also with more powerful audio tools (like Wwise and Fmod) many games are now using interactive audio that changes when events in the game happen. So while certain elements of VGM are repetitive - it's much less than the ol' days of 8-bit ever present, continuously looping music. Let's go the other way - many film scores have 1-3 main themes. Take Star Wars for example: you have Luke's theme, Empire Theme and a few other themes for secondary characters. You also have some incidental or filler music but when most people think of Star Wars (Ep. 4) they tend to think of those two themes. You hear these themes all of the way through the movie. John Williams keeps coming back to them - but in derivative ways. So it could be said that film score music is repetitive as well... but in a somewhat different manner than video game scores.

VGM has different moods.

Do you know a movie with a soundtrack similar to Tetris? ...didn't think so! Also, ''moods'' (a communication design term, more on that later!) might change quite a bit during the course of a game, especially in the Adventure / RPG genre.

[/quote]

The music used in original Tetris wasn't written for the game - it was music that was public domain (therefore could be used freely) in the game so this point conflicts with your statement that VGM has different moods. This music, for example the Russian tune "Kalinka" was used in a theatrical performance in 1860 then later became a traditional folk tune. Likewise the Dance of the Sugar Plum Fairy from the Nutcracker was part of a ballet and written well before Tetris came out. So I disagree with your point - VGM doesn't have different moods. Many of the core moods found in video games easily translate to other media including books, films, plays and TV shows. Moods, to me, include anger, tension, joy, mysterious, etc. Just look at home many books, graphic novels and films have been made from video games. The moods easily transfer over - so video game music doesn't have different moods.

VGM has a different history. It might seem over the top, but I think that just like a jazz musician studies the playing styles of the ''late greats'', a video game composer should know quite a bit about the times before modern DAWs and large sample libraries.

[/quote]

I agree with this point and, to be completely honest, feel that you should take some time to learn more about past video game scores and the composers yourself. I'm not trying to rake you over the coals here but you make several points which, when compared to history, are easily shown to be inaccurate. If you're going to make a stand and publicly state something then you should back it up with some evidence to show whey you're opinions or remarks are valid. This was one of my major issues with your article. You didn't provide any "proof" or supporting material to back up your points. My other critique of the article is that it doesn't go into much detail at all. The title is "Knowing the Difference" and yet... this article barely skims the surface. You brought up sharing tricks then proceeded to share nothing. Again, I completely understand the staggered release but, in my opinion, there's simply not enough real material here to make me want to come back and read future installments. Couple this with some of the inaccurate and unsupported points you made and this article is easily forgettable.

A good article will often "preview" what you're going to learn in later sections. For example it could be as simple as saying:

"After you've read this section you'll know how to create interactive music that can change on beat/measure/time as well as how to edit sound effects to make them looping then hook them up in audio engine X."

While you do give a preview that the next section is "Knowing Your History" - as a reader - I'm worried it might just skim the surface just like this section did.

I'm not saying this to be rude or upset you. I'm trying to give you an honest appraisal of this article in hopes that you'll take my constructive feedback and make tweaks to this article. I think this article has potential but you need to dig deeper to make it truly a worthwhile read - at least in my opinion.

Thanks,

Nate

Hey Nate,

I'm not saying this to be rude or upset you. I'm trying to give you an honest appraisal of this article in hopes that you'll take my constructive feedback and make tweaks to this article. I think this article has potential but you need to dig deeper to make it truly a worthwhile read - at least in my opinion.[/quote]
No problem, I invited you to give a review - I sure wasn't expecting such an extensive one though, thanks for taking the time!

Lots of your thoughts are well worth contemplation, although you took me all to literally in some cases - of course there's always two sides to a coin, that's why I refrained from using words like "never" or "always" in this article, which wouldn't be very journalistic in this case. E.g. I didn't write:

[color="#1C2837"] [color="#1C2837"]great film composers make sucky video game composers[/quote]
[color="#1C2837"]
[color="#1c2837"]Instead I wrote:

[color="#1c2837"]

[color="#1C2837"]The main reason why many great film music producers aren't quite that good at video game music and vice versa[/quote]
[color="#1c2837"]A better way to put it could be "many [...] wouldn't make good video game music composers and vice versa".
[color="#1C2837"]
[color="#1c2837"]Also, I intended to include many of the things you mentioned in later articles that go into detail about the statements of Part I.
[color="#1c2837"]I think I don't even disagree with anything that you wrote, we're just looking at things from different angles or I didn't express myself clear enough.

[color="#1c2837"]But I don't want to pick the whole thing apart now - in fact, I've got a better idea:

[color="#1c2837"]I won't rewrite the article, but I'll quote you on the points you mentioned in the coming articles, as a second opinion. Of course, you're welcome to review the article before I post it in that case.
[color="#1c2837"]Other people are also invited to join in the talk, of course. We'll make it a "philosophical dialogue", if you want to call it that. ;)
[color="#1c2837"]At least the article is bound to be interesting and informative that way, don't you think?

[color="#1c2837"]Let me know if you like the idea, and thanks again for your thoughts on my article!

[color="#1c2837"]Cheers,
[color="#1c2837"]Moritz

Lots of your thoughts are well worth contemplation, although you took me all to literally in some cases - of course there's always two sides to a coin, that's why I refrained from using words like "never" or "always" in this article, which wouldn't be very journalistic in this case. E.g. I didn't write:

[color="#1C2837"]great film composers make sucky video game composers

[color="#1c2837"]Instead I wrote:

[color="#1c2837"]

[color="#1C2837"]The main reason why many great film music producers aren't quite that good at video game music and vice versa[/quote]
[color="#1c2837"]A better way to put it could be "many [...] wouldn't make good video game music composers and vice versa".
[/quote]

My bad. I never intended to say that you actually said that and just got carried away with my writing. But you did imply that many film composers are not good at composing video game music which simply isn't universally true these days. As I said in my previous post there has been quite a bit of cross over and these days.

[color="#1c2837"]Also, I intended to include many of the things you mentioned in later articles that go into detail about the statements of Part I.
[color="#1c2837"]I think I don't even disagree with anything that you wrote, we're just looking at things from different angles or I didn't express myself clear enough.

I understand you intend on going into deeper detail. My point was perhaps some of that should have been included in part one to entice the reader even more. It could just be me, but when reading through your introductory segment of the article I kept asking myself "when he is going to get into the details?" It didn't make me want to stick around and wait for the next segment because I didn't get much out of the first one, to be honest. I'm being somewhat long winded but I what I'm getting at is the balance between a staggered release and giving enough meat to make the article interesting and entice the reader to remember your article, want to come back for me and share it with their friends and peers.

[color="#1c2837"]I won't rewrite the article, but I'll quote you on the points you mentioned in the coming articles, as a second opinion. Of course, you're welcome to review the article before I post it in that case.
[color="#1c2837"]Other people are also invited to join in the talk, of course. We'll make it a "philosophical dialogue", if you want to call it that. ;)
[color="#1c2837"]At least the article is bound to be interesting and informative that way, don't you think?

That is an interesting idea. I wouldn't open it up to just everyone because then it becomes much less of an article and more of a thread... and we all know how far astray threads can go sometimes. Instead I'd open it up to a select number of people you pick then have a round robin sort of discussion. And yes, I think each person involved should be able to review the article before it's published. It could be fun! You don't have to include me but if you wanted to, I'd be happy to take part.

Thanks!

Nate

Great Nathan, I promise the next articles will be more detailed and informative.

Just wanted to let you know: the second article is online!

This time we talk about reference material and clichés. I'd be happy to read some feedback.

Click me!

Hey,

nice work with the website, had a read of part I & II. I found it very interesting. It becomes almost second nature writing music sometimes, but when you really come to think of the core elements of writing music, it's a lot harder, by the looks of things, I believe you have everything. I was trying to think back to my school days and trying to remember the 7 elements of classical music, I believe you have everything + more.

1. Pitch
2. Tempo
3. Dynamics
4. Timbre
5. Texture
6. Structure
7. Duration

Just some things to mention

The explanation I came up with is simple. The reason for this is not that video games have different moods. VG music has some distinct clichés

[/quote]

I would like to know how you came up with that conclusion. As far as I understand cliches are often used in film music too and VGM is heavily influenced by film music. The only difference between movies and games is that games are non-linear. You could almost argue that games are a type of interactive movie and I think that the styles aren't that dissimilar. So if your taking the music away from the medium, I'm really not sure how people would be able to distinguish the difference. I could give you a list why dance music is different from classical music, I'm not sure I could give a list of how VGM as a genre of music is different from film music, especially as you get a lot of movie based games. Do they use the music from the film in the game? (i'm not sure about that, my movie knowledge is poor). I'm not saying your results or conclusion is wrong (as clearly there is something there) and obviously some VGM is going to be a lot more unique, like super mario for example, it's a lot more like a song then film music., i just feel there may be another factor contributing to it. Maybe ask them why they felt like it was VGM rather then film music.

Something else to add or think about. You talk about the cliches and references from a writing music point of view, but I feel maybe you have overlooked effects and DAW. Maybe you were intentionally saving this for another chapter. I'm not sure.

but...

For example when your talking about the mood of music, different amounts of reverb and delay can also effect the feel of the music, it can make it feel more atmospheric, or spooky. Less reverb can make music feel a lot more in your face.

Also, when you were talking about trying new things with your music, such as weird scales etc, the same can be done with effects in your DAW such as maybe using gates for example to create weird effects, just to name one of many example.

I hope some of this helps, and it hasn't just been a big ramble.

Just something to think about, keep up the good work I look forward to reading what you write about interactive music,

Thanks for the feedback.

Hey,

nice work with the website, had a read of part I & II. I found it very interesting. It becomes almost second nature writing music sometimes, but when you really come to think of the core elements of writing music, it's a lot harder, by the looks of things, I believe you have everything. I was trying to think back to my school days and trying to remember the 7 elements of classical music, I believe you have everything + more.

1. Pitch
2. Tempo
3. Dynamics
4. Timbre
5. Texture
6. Structure
7. Duration

Yes, there are several ways to look at it, but in the end, it just comes down to the four categories I mentioned. Rhythm, Harmony, Melody, Sound.

Something else to add or think about. You talk about the cliches and references from a writing music point of view, but I feel maybe you have overlooked effects and DAW. Maybe you were intentionally saving this for another chapter. I'm not sure.

but...

For example when your talking about the mood of music, different amounts of reverb and delay can also effect the feel of the music, it can make it feel more atmospheric, or spooky. Less reverb can make music feel a lot more in your face.

Also, when you were talking about trying new things with your music, such as weird scales etc, the same can be done with effects in your DAW such as maybe using gates for example to create weird effects, just to name one of many example.[/quote]
Effects are effects. Sure, they can become a vital part in defining a mood, but it's indeed something to talk about in a later article. Maybe it's even worth an own article. I use different DAWs, but my favorite one is Ableton Live and if I had an area of specialisation, I'd say it would be warping, chopping and FX'ing the hell out of samples and instruments. So I'm definitely keeping this in mind.

The only difference between movies and games is that games are non-linear. You could almost argue that games are a type of interactive movie and I think that the styles aren't that dissimilar. So if your taking the music away from the medium, I'm really not sure how people would be able to distinguish the difference. I could give you a list why dance music is different from classical music, I'm not sure I could give a list of how VGM as a genre of music is different from film music, especially as you get a lot of movie based games. Do they use the music from the film in the game? (i'm not sure about that, my movie knowledge is poor). I'm not saying your results or conclusion is wrong (as clearly there is something there) and obviously some VGM is going to be a lot more unique, like super mario for example, it's a lot more like a song then film music., i just feel there may be another factor contributing to it. Maybe ask them why they felt like it was VGM rather then film music.[/quote]
This will probably become a lot clearer in the next article when we look at some examples. The reason why people recognized the VGM was because the tracks induced certain mental images: "Oh, that's probably a fight scene!" - "That sounds like Game Over, try again!" - "This one reminds me of a hero sneaking through a magic forest..." - I was surprised myself how amateurs were sometimes even able to recognize the setting!
My girlfriend studies communication design and we often have chats about similarities between graphic design and music composition. Visuals are actually just the same thing. I bet most people could tell the logo of an action gaming title and the logo of an action movie apart as well, in many cases. And that's the genre where game and movie are most likely comparable.

So... VGM seems to tend to be more incentive, encouraging or stimulating, whatever you may call it.
Also, take a look at games that embrace this gaming "spirit". For whatever reason, most games with a bigger budget seem to want to sound like big movies, just like they want to look super-realistic. Larger-than-life orchestra sounds and crisp voice-acting. And then there's phenomenons like Minecraft where a single composer like C418 does minimalistic electro music that somehow manages to sound just like the game looks, and people like it. But I'm not writing these articles to comment, both approaches have their audience. I'm just trying to say that even though the divisions are blurring, there's at least a difference in how composers, directors and producers should hear VGM compared with film music, especially when you're not making an interactive-movie-kind-of game. Music is music is music, I'll give you that, but the intention of film music is to accompany the moving pictures and the story. The intention of game music is to accompany the player's involvement in the pictures and the story.

...and as for the story told, well, Super Mario makes a great game series, but it sure made a terrible movie!