Professional Game Composers and Amateurism

I have to say that like Cellius and GoldfishX, I do believe the original intent of a track should be considered in an arrangement. I don't like it when I can hardly recognize the connection and when the structure or mood that made the song worthwhile in the first place is all but lost. That's not to say that the arrangement should be completely straightfoward and uncreative. Only that I like for the spirit of the original track to be retained in some fashion. Otherwise it might as well be an original track with no relation to the original.

Perhaps I look for a middle ground of sorts. When something is too faithful to the original, it might seem pointless. When something deviates too much, it might miss the point.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Liontamer

Some of y'all are implying that something like this is something that should be patently discouraged as a VGM arrangement. Because while the melody is indeed in play, the genre's not "sensitive to the original's context." And let's not forget the run-on of "why did he add these compositional cockwaving original passages, wtf, he's just glorifying himself and showing off and not tributing the game music enough."

I don't have a problem with that particular arrangement. It seems faithful enough despite the genre (it may not be technical of me to say this, but I think it maintains a certain consistent spirit, albeit with more of a techno mystique to it) and also creative enough so that it's not a simple retread. I don't much care for it, but listening to the original, I don't much care for that one either. I guess it goes to show that many things can factor into the like or dislike of something.

An ideal arrangement to me is something like McVaffe's "Crystalline Caverns" remix or Protricity's "Cursed Pirates of the Sea" remix. I like it when the creative aspects seem to add to and blend with the original intent. A recent example of something that doesn't do that, despite being a pleasant track on its own, is Pot Hocket's "Sleep, My Sephy". I can see how that sort of thing might make one wonder about the arranger's intentions. I think Xaleph's "Son of Chaos" is more appropriate and effective as an arrangement. I guess you could say that I get a sense of how much a particular arranger cares for the original track depending on the approach they take. I tend to look for that passion in an arrangement.

Originally Posted by Liontamer

Honestly, everything I'm hearing sounds like "Well, I don't want someone to approach an arrangement "that way"...except if I like the artist and/or genre, and it sounds cool. Then it's ok." Basically what Goldfish was saying. But if you like this SMB arrangement, Goldfish, isn't that completely hypocritical? It's not even 45% Super Mario Bros. By your own reasoning re: Rockman X and Brink of Time, you would now have to dislike this as well. :-)

I'm not GoldfishX, but I don't care for that one at all, and for the reasoning that the SMB aspect seems an afterthought. I see where you're going though. GoldfishX is a bigger fan of ROCK 'N than I. It's possible that the genre is playing some small role in turning me off to the track, though I believe what I'm saying when I say that the lack of SMB in an SMB-inspired track has something to do with it.

Still, it's not hypocritical of him as much as it is an admission of genre preference as an additional factor, which you do mention afterwards.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Dhsu

As for the topic, I have to admit I always find these discussions very interesting, both because I used to have the exact same mentality of "honoring the composer" by keeping the arrangement as close to the original as possible, and also because nowadays I actually judge an arrangement's quality by how well the original melody has been transplanted into a radically different context.

Actually, I think you're the first person who has said anything about keeping the arrangement as close to the original as possible. I think that the degree of variation or deviation is the only thing being disputed here. The question is, how many things can or should be changed while still retaining the notion that the track is indeed an arrangement of a preexisting one? I doubt if there's any wrong or right answer.

Originally Posted by Dhsu

An arrangement creates its own context, its own "spirit," so I hope people see why such complaints are moot at best.

You have a different definition of "spirit" is all. "Spirit" doesn't mean sticking to the same genre. It just means having some recognizable and resonant semblance of the original track. The Chocobo themes all have the same spirit even though the differences keep the underlying theme from getting stale.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.