logo
​Violent and lewd! Not Grand Theft Auto, Shakespeare's Macbeth

​Violent and lewd! Not Grand Theft Auto, Shakespeare's Macbeth

The Guardian2 days ago

Last week, the Guardian spoke to the team behind Lili, a video game retelling of Macbeth, shown at the Cannes film festival. The headline quote from the piece was 'Shakespeare would be writing for games today', which I have heard many times, and does make a lot of sense. Shakespeare worked in the Elizabethan theatre, a period in which plays were considered popularist entertainment hardly worthy of analysis or preservation – just like video games today! The authorities were also concerned about the lewd and violent nature of plays and the effect they may have on the impressionable masses – ditto!
But if we agree that a 21st-century Shakespeare would be making games, what sort would he be making? If our central thesis is that Shakespeare would be interested in mass, popular entertainment, then – if we're talking pure revenue – he would be making casual smartphone games: Tencent's multiplayer arena battle game Honor of Kings, for example, made $2.6bn (£1.9bn) last year. However, while the Bard was certainly interested in royalty and honour (and making money), it's hard to see Hamlet working as a multiplayer arena-based online battle game structured into an endless series of fast-paced skirmishes. Our titular hero would barely get out the words, 'O, that this too too solid flesh would melt, thaw, and resolve itself into a dew!' before being vaporised in a scorching barrage attack. For similar reasons, I can't see Shakespeare making battle royale games such as Fortnite because, while he certainly liked a battle and lots of deaths, there's not a lot of room for narrative complexity or rousing military rhetoric when the sole aim is to shoot as many people as possible while dressed as a giant banana or Sabrina Carpenter.
No, I think if Shakespeare was magically reincarnated in the first quarter of the 21st century, there is only one genre he'd be working in: the open-world role-playing adventure. Here, he'd have the time and space to weave complex narratives involving dozens of characters and diverse environments. King Lear's moors would become a desolate explorable wasteland, much like the post-apocalyptic hellscapes of Fallout or Death Stranding; Macbeth's castle would resemble the haunted dungeons of Elden Ring or The Witcher 3; the Verona of Romeo and Juliet would be a beautiful, troubled take on GTA's Los Santos. Shakespeare's major thematic obsessions – war, revenge, madness and the nature of free will – are all major elements in fantasy RPGs; his ability to weave in all classes, from the lowest peasants to the most vainglorious kings, is reflected in the social strata of the great open-world titles. Shakespeare's histories mixed real-life and fictional characters, as does the Assassin's Creed series, titles that are also interested in the classic Shakespearean concerns of identity, disguise and illusion.
More broadly, open-world games have the same sort of freewheeling structure and psychological flexibility as Shakespeare's plays. They have subplots and side quests, they have nonlinear timelines and complicated, morally ambiguous characters; they are expansive and baggy, and wide open to varied interpretation. Vitally, open-world games let the spectator into the narrative as a viewer and an actor; similarly Shakespeare wanted his audiences to be drawn into the action, using asides, quips and monologues to break down the divide between stage and pit. Loud, opinionated and combative, video game players have much more in common with Shakespeare's Elizabethan audiences than polite modern theatregoers.
This potential intersection between Shakespeare and open-world games is quietly gaining traction. A few years ago the RSC employed three artists to consider the interplay of live theatre with technology and one of them, the digital artist Adam Clarke, tested ideas for hosting Shakespeare performances within Minecraft. More recently, we saw the brilliant documentary Grand Theft Hamlet about an attempt to stage Hamlet within Grand Theft Auto during the Covid lockdowns. What, after all, is an open-world online video game if not a technological rendering of Shakespeare's fundamental philosophy: all the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players.
It is always intriguing to see highly recognisable video game genres getting clever reinterpretations. Rift Riff by Dutch game designer Adriaan de Jongh and his small team is a tower defence game like, say, Plants vs. Zombies, except here the landscape is much more open and there are little tactical additions, such as being able to lay down the foundations for new towers before you have gathered the required resources to build them, which makes planning fun and creative. Add in the lovely, inviting visuals and sound effects and you have a captivating strategy sim suitable for newcomers and veterans alike.
Available on: PC
Estimated playtime: 15-plus hours
Writer, director and video game fan Alex Garland has been confirmed to helm a forthcoming live action movie adaptation of Elden Ring, produced by A24 and Bandai Namco. If it's going to be authentic, the first two hours of the film will revolve around the lead character being repeatedly slaughtered by the Tree Sentinel knight at the very start of the quest.
Pac-Man is now officially 45 years old and the BFI has a piece tracing the evolution of the game from that old story about the pizza to the fact that all the ghosts have different personalities. Ms Pac-Man is a better game, though.
Game design luminary Peter Molyneux recently held a Q&A session at the Nordic Game 2025 conference, and gaming news site GI.biz wrote up his excellent answer to the question, whatever happened to Project Milo? And frankly, if you have to ask what that is, you'll never know.
I am poring over Hurt Me Plenty, a lavish coffee table book about the best shooter games of the noughties, published by Bitmap Books. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, Half-Life 2 and Unreal Tournament are all analysed here, as well as lesser-known oddities. (Codename: Nina – Global Terrorism Strike Force anyone?) A fascinating overview of this foundational period for modern shooter design.
Unreal estate: the 12 greatest homes in video game history
Fortnite returns to iPhone app store in US, ending exile imposed by Apple
Hello Stranger – interactive thriller puts remote worker in trial-by-internet | ★★☆☆☆
Sign up to Pushing Buttons
Keza MacDonald's weekly look at the world of gaming
after newsletter promotion
This one came to us from Andy on email who asked:
What's the strangest game you have ever played? Last year I played Harold Halibut on Game Pass, which I think is probably the weirdest game I've ever experienced. I'd love to hear about other strange gaming experiences.
I've played a lot of games that are famously weird, such as Seaman (look after a talking fish with the voice of Leonard Nimoy), Mister Mosquito (you're a mosquito) and Katamari Damacy (you're making giant balls of junk for the king of the universe), but I've also played many more obscure weird games, such as Spectrum classic Fat Worm Blows A Sparky (you're a microscopic worm trapped in your own computer), the bizarre Amiga adventure Tass Times in Tonetown (you're trapped in an alternative 1980s punk dimension) and the PlayStation 2 voyeur sim, Polaroid Pete (you're a photographer trying to take snaps of weird things happening in local parks).
My favourite is Sega's Emergency Call Ambulance, which is like Crazy Taxi except you're driving an ambulance with a critically ill patient in the back and if you get into too many collisions you have to give them CPR or they die. This was a big arcade release, but somehow never made it to home consoles. I simply cannot understand why.
If you've got a question for Question Block – or anything else to say about the newsletter – email us on pushingbuttons@theguardian.com

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Music icon uses final lifeline on tough 90s pop question on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire – but would you have got it?
Music icon uses final lifeline on tough 90s pop question on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire – but would you have got it?

Scottish Sun

timean hour ago

  • Scottish Sun

Music icon uses final lifeline on tough 90s pop question on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire – but would you have got it?

Keep scrolling to find out what happened when they faced the tough question STOP RIGHT NOW Music icon uses final lifeline on tough 90s pop question on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire – but would you have got it? A MUSIC icon was forced to use his final lifeline on a tough 90s pop question on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire - but would you have got it? Jeremy Clarkson welcomed Jools Holland to the ITV quiz's famous hotseat. 7 Jools Holland took on the challenge of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire Credit: ITV 7 But the musician was stumped on this question Credit: ITV 7 Jools had to use his last lifeline on the question which was 'ask host Jeremy Clarkson' Credit: ITV Jools was in the hotseat for a special celebrity edition of the show, which also featured, Nina Wadia, and Ugo Monye, all aiming to win money for charity. When it was the piano man's time to face Jeremy, he struggled early on. He used both his "ask the audience" and "phone a friend" lifelines by the time he reached the £1,000 question. Jools then used his "50/50" on a question about Joe Wicks. So when he got to the big £16,000 question, he only had one lifeline left. Which was lucky because he was totally stumped when he was asked a question about the Spice Girls - a band he has a close relationship with. Host Jeremy asked: "The maiden name of which Spice Girl was also the name of two US presidents?" The answers to choose from were: A) Emma B) Geri C) Victoria or D) Melanie C. However the music legend, who appeared in the famous girl group's 1997 film SpiceWorld The Movie - was left scratching his head, and had to use his "ask the host" lifeline. Between him and Jeremy, they managed to answer the question correctly, which was, "C) Victoria." Celeb Millionaire contestant forced to use lifeline on tricky Shakespeare question - but could you get it right- After it was revealed he had got the question right, the pianist pretended to wipe his brow and fall off his chair in exasperation. Jools went onto bow out of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? with £16,000, which he donated to The Prince's Trust and Caring Hands charities. ACTRESS STUMPED In the same episode, fellow contestant, actress Nina Wadia, also found herself stumped - this time over a tricky Shakespeare question. The former EastEnders star has already exhausted three lifelines before facing the big £64,000 question. It posed: "The origin of the modern phrase 'there's a method in my madness' can be traced back to which Shakespeare tragedy?" 7 Jules got the question right in the end, after using his last lifeline Credit: ITV 7 Actress and comedian Nina Wadia also took on Who Wants To Be a Millionaire? Credit: ITV Nina's available options were A) King Lear, B) Macbeth, C) Othello or D) Hamlet. Having been asked by Jeremy, the star admitted she "loves Shakespeare" but was struggling to work out the correct answer. She believed either B) Macbeth or D) Hamlet was right, although wasn't fully certain on either. 7 The actress was stuck on a difficult Shakespeare question for £64,000 Credit: ITV Nina therefore opted to use her last lifeline - Ask the Audience - to help out. The results showed 43% believed the answer was Macbeth while Hamlet placed second with 32%. Nina selected Macbeth, but the correct answer turned out to be Hamlet. She still walked away with £32,000 for her charity - having set her safety net at that amount - in the episode first aired last year. Who has won the jackpot on Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? Who Wants to Be a Millionaire has offered hundreds of hopeful contestants the chance to become millionaires, but there has only been a handful of lucky winners. There have only been five real winners so far on the show as Charles Ingram, who was the third winner of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? in 2001, had his claim to the prize thrown out because of cheating allegations. The official winners are... Judith Keppel In 2000, garden designer Judith Keppel made quiz show history as she became the first ever winner of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire. Judith is also the only woman ever to have won the million-pound prize. David Edwards Former physics teacher David became the second contestant to win the top prize in April 2001. Following his success, Edwards went on to compete in both series of Are You an Egghead? in 2008 and 2009. Robert Brydges Oxford-educated banker Robert became the third Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? champion when he won the quiz show several moths after David in 2001. Robert has stayed out of the limelight since his win. Pat Gibson World champion Irish quiz player Pat won the show in 2004. Amazingly Pat had TWO of his lifelines still available for his final question, something no other winner has managed. Ingram Wilcox Ingram came close to losing on Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? in 2006 as he had used all his lifelines up at the £32,000 mark, but in a shocking twist he went on to scoop the jackpot. In the end, the right answer ultimately turned out to be B) Serendipity. Nicholas didn't let much disappointment show, as he optimistically said: "Still get £125,000." Speaking afterwards, Jeremy estimated: "We've just seen a contestant lose what we think is the biggest amount of money in Millionaire history." Who Wants To Be A Millionaire airs on ITV1 and ITVX.

EastEnders star wiped out of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? after struggling with Shakespeare question - do YOU know the answer?
EastEnders star wiped out of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? after struggling with Shakespeare question - do YOU know the answer?

Daily Mail​

time2 hours ago

  • Daily Mail​

EastEnders star wiped out of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? after struggling with Shakespeare question - do YOU know the answer?

An EastEnders star was wiped out of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? after she struggled with a Shakespeare related question. On Thursday, ITV aired a repeat of December's celebrity instalment of the quiz show, which saw soap star Nina Wadia, 56, attempt to win cash for charity. She worked her way through the questions and eventually used up three of her lifelines. However the star, who previously played Zainab Masood in EastEnders, found the £64,000 question particularly tricky. Host Jeremy Clarkson, 65, asked: 'The origin of the modern phrase 'there's a method in my madness' can be traced back to which Shakespeare tragedy?' From A-list scandals and red carpet mishaps to exclusive pictures and viral moments, subscribe to the Nina had to choose between A) King Lear, B) Macbeth, C) Othello and D) Hamlet. 'I love Shakespeare and I actually know this but right now I can't... for me right now it's all of them,' she stressed. The actress was torn between Macbeth and Hamlet, confidently discarding the other two options. In the end, she decided to ask the audience for help and 43 percent selected Macbeth. 'I just instinctively feel it's Macbeth but then Hamlet...' she deliberated. 'Alright, I'm going with the audience and I'm saying my final answer is Macbeth,' the star decided. Jeremy teased: 'Good news, you haven't lost any money.' But then he revealed: 'That I'm afraid is the wrong answer.' The correct answer turned out to be Hamlet. Despite getting the answer wrong, Nina still managed to bag a huge amount for charity. The former Top Gear presenter said: 'Oh that is annoying isn't it. 'But it's not the absolute end of the world because in a way you're still leaving here with, for your charity, £32,000.' Who Wants To Be A Millionaire? airs on ITV1 and is available to stream on ITVX.

Help me, I have been Candy Crushed
Help me, I have been Candy Crushed

The Guardian

time2 hours ago

  • The Guardian

Help me, I have been Candy Crushed

As long as I can remember, my wife has started each day with 30 minutes of a Candy Crush game. As long as she can remember, I have started each day by telling her it is pointless casual gamer cack. Now I write for the Guardian, I need to find a more eloquent way of putting that, so I thought I would have a go myself. I am begging you: do not do the same. Candy Crush Soda Saga nearly ruined me in a week. I like the game mechanics. As Oscar Wilde said, the man who doesn't love sliding stuff to form chains of three or more matching shapes does not love life itself. This one is wrapped in a cute candy veneer, all fizzy bottles and gummy bears. And that makes the visuals so alluring. When you slide a Colour Bomb into a Candy Fish all the candies that colour get Candyfished and your eyes are treated to a bazillion of them fizzing around the screen destroying everything, while the firm yet gentle haptic feedback makes it a multisensory burst of pure, effervescent joy. 'What's that clicking noise?' my wife asks. 'Don't you play it with the haptic feedback on?' 'Oh, I turned that off because I thought it was hurting my phone.' 'In what way?' 'I felt it was putting too much … pressure on it.' She says, like her phone is the USS Enterprise and she is Scotty diverting a dangerous amount of power away from the shields. We had many chats about Candy Crush while we both played the game in bed. I'm all for increased interspousal communication, but we used to do this kind of thing with broadsheet newspapers and now we're matching jelly beans on phones. Luckily, you just need one hand to play, so the other is free to punch yourself repeatedly in the face as you realise how pointless your life has become. Sign up to Pushing Buttons Keza MacDonald's weekly look at the world of gaming after newsletter promotion And this game is utterly pointless in the long run. There is no story, no real achievements. It uses a board game path to fake big-time progression, but whether it's me on level 150 or my wife on level 8,452 (gulp!) the pattern is the same: a few easy levels then a super hard one which, if you haven't accumulated enough power-ups, is virtually impossible. That's when the game drops its trousers and flashes its microtransactions. And by that stage you are so hooked by the mechanics and the colour you hand over your few quid for some extra virtual visual bobbins quicker and easier than those crazy kids getting drugs in The Wire. Oh yes! Candy Crush Soda Saga is the game Stringer Bell went to business school to invent. The cigarette was once hailed as the most efficient poison delivery system ever invented. Not now. This game 'suggests' moves to you. These are frequently not the best ones. That is no accident. This is a game designed to make you fail. It's a compulsion loop, sure, but one that encourages you to pay for the pleasure. It's not gambling per se, because you know what you are buying, but, while gambling company ads now scream about setting limits and walking away, this game screams at you to have one more go. I have been addicted to so many things in my life that I stopped counting. (I became addicted to counting my addictions as well.) But this ranks as one of the worst. It only takes three days until I am dangerously hooked. Last Sunday I played Candy Crush Pop Saga for three solid hours. I nearly missed the Scottish Cup final as a result. Unlike my wife, I was dipping into it during the rest of the day as well, thinking, 'Oh it's been 15 minutes, I may have ended up getting a power-up via the Bake a Cake sub game my Candy Crush team are helping me with.' The self-loathing of the addict envelopes me. I know this is not nurturing me in any way, but I cannot stop. At least cocaine was quick. In terms of time? In one week I wasted what could have been, in Zelda terms, one third of a Breath of the Wild, one half of a Twilight Princess or an entire Majora's Mask. And at least they tell stories. If the deadline for this article hadn't made me stop, I would have had to have buried my phone in a lime pit and set it on fire to escape from Candy Crush. The irony is that there's no real difference between this and the arcade offerings that made me fall in love with gaming as child. Pacman, Frogger, Space Invaders et al were all designed to make you pump another coin in the slot when it winked CONTINUE Y/N at you. They were even more repetitive. So I guess by the definition detailed in this Candy Crush castigation, those games were also a waste of time. But why didn't they feel like that? Because back then, all I had was time. It wasn't the dwindling commodity it is in my 50s. Maybe if I played Galaxian now it would feel like playing Candy Crush: a descent into a gaming horror world so uncomfortable it's like watching that Event Horizon movie on treadmill while wearing Lego pants. A game that offers nothing repeatedly. Waiting for Godot with gummy bears instead of tramps. Nothing happens, nobody comes, nobody goes – it's awful.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store