275: Philosophy of Game Design - Part Three

Aiddon_v1legacy

New member
Nov 19, 2009
3,672
0
0
no. fucking. shit. Logan. I already knew about the big questions about art philosophy long, long, LONG ago and you have really done nothing I didn't hear in philosophy of art class. This is not somehow an epiphany for the "games are art" argument (which has a lot against that's for sure), it's just that now you know what the damn questions are.
 

DayDark

New member
Oct 31, 2007
657
0
0
Everything has the potential to be viewed as art, it's all in how you approach it.
 

Burgled

New member
Jul 14, 2010
3
0
0
Philosophers are rarely any help. Generally they just make stuff up and then talk themselves into circles.
 

disappointed

New member
Sep 14, 2011
97
0
0
The question of whether or not games are art isn't one that can be resolved simply by providing a definition for art which encompasses gaming. For one thing, you would need that definition to be broadly accepted in order for your argument to be broadly accepted.

So it's refreshing to read an article that doesn't try to resolve the question but rather frames it within the context of established theory. We didn't all study philosophy of art so this article was highly informative, to me at least.

Oh, and a huge +1 to the final conclusion. For the art of gaming to evolve, it desperately needs to be more accessible to would-be creators. Developers should waste less time making their own bland, generic content and put more effort into empowering users to show them how it should be done.