ARTARTARTARTFART
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
I'm aware that it's one of the earlier comics, I've been reading them since day 1 after allProduct Placement said:Well, that was one of his first strips. It's fairly common to see a wast difference between early strips and the newest one in a comic that's been consistently maintained for years.Daystar Clarion said:Holy shit, Cory's art has come a long way since those days
He's gotten really good, the improvement is astounding.
Still, if you think that's a massive improvement, you should see some of the webcomics that I've seen.
It's still good, though. He's clearly become better at it.
There IS one valid reason to want to draw the respect of critics: non-gamers listen to them on the idea of what is and isn't worth indulging in (not that I think this is a good thing, but it's how things are for the moment). If gaming is going to draw general respect, and with it examination, funding as an artform and protection from idiots who want to censor everything they don't like, it needs popular opinion behind it.
I don't think there should be any question as to whether games are art, but that's what we have to deal with now. Video games skyrocketing popularity occurred when many big name critics were grown. They see it as a kids thing because kids got into it. Once the generations that grew up on video games reach similar prominence, I suspect we'll see a change.
I don't think there should be any question as to whether games are art, but that's what we have to deal with now. Video games skyrocketing popularity occurred when many big name critics were grown. They see it as a kids thing because kids got into it. Once the generations that grew up on video games reach similar prominence, I suspect we'll see a change.
This comic lacks in gameplay and emmersion. The cinematics aren't that good either.
OT: I'm guessing something like a certain webcomic made you want to strangle people who claim what art is and isn't?
OT: I'm guessing something like a certain webcomic made you want to strangle people who claim what art is and isn't?
It's why we should feel privileged that we can enjoy the merrits of movies, literature, AND games.
I think this is one of your best strips ever. Extremely insightful. Our complexes, our industry, our immaturity and our adolescence, all condensed in three comic strips.
Absolutely masterful.
Bravo!
Captcha: rain go away
You know it's July and I'm in Greece, don't you Captcha? What rain? It's the middle of the freaking summer and I am in one of the most popular summer destinations in the world...
Absolutely masterful.
Bravo!
Captcha: rain go away
You know it's July and I'm in Greece, don't you Captcha? What rain? It's the middle of the freaking summer and I am in one of the most popular summer destinations in the world...
I think 'thomas was alone' is propaply one of the best examples of games as art as:
1. it has a clear story that is easy to follow.
2. it is emotional without ever seeming like it forcing it.
3. the characters have an arc.
and most importantly.
4. gameplay, effects/reflects both the story and the characters, the gameplay is not a mere tool to get to the next point in the story, and characters never do anything in gameplay that would contradict their personalities (in fact their gameplay is what their personalities/character relations are based of).
1. it has a clear story that is easy to follow.
2. it is emotional without ever seeming like it forcing it.
3. the characters have an arc.
and most importantly.
4. gameplay, effects/reflects both the story and the characters, the gameplay is not a mere tool to get to the next point in the story, and characters never do anything in gameplay that would contradict their personalities (in fact their gameplay is what their personalities/character relations are based of).
I agree with this comic, and that's something I never thought I'd say.
What I think we should do is stop trying to make games fit some arbitrary label and just keep doing what we're doing. By trying to make games more like movies (this is for you David Cage) we demean the entire medium. It sends the message that it can't stand on it's own and needs other mediums to support itself. And for what? To impress some snooty twat-racket who never scored a Pump Action/Afterburner combo in Bulletstorm in his life?
In short; We just need to stop giving a fuck.
What I think we should do is stop trying to make games fit some arbitrary label and just keep doing what we're doing. By trying to make games more like movies (this is for you David Cage) we demean the entire medium. It sends the message that it can't stand on it's own and needs other mediums to support itself. And for what? To impress some snooty twat-racket who never scored a Pump Action/Afterburner combo in Bulletstorm in his life?
In short; We just need to stop giving a fuck.
I kind of long for the day when art goes back to just meaning the work you did.
Many portraits of people were made under the direction of the people paying the painter, they are still considered art today.ticklefist said:
Indeed, they lack any kind of reader interaction or even motivation on our part. Though that choose your own adventure, man, the gameplay was really old school.
In any event, I've never been sure what the deal was. The only difference between games and movies is the degree of audience interaction. Does a higher degree of interaction make something cease to be art? Does the ability to choose alternate dialogue make the dialogue any less so? I can understand them not liking the form, like I do not enjoy modern art in most of its form (garbage). But I understand that it is art that other people appreciate.
In any event, I've never been sure what the deal was. The only difference between games and movies is the degree of audience interaction. Does a higher degree of interaction make something cease to be art? Does the ability to choose alternate dialogue make the dialogue any less so? I can understand them not liking the form, like I do not enjoy modern art in most of its form (garbage). But I understand that it is art that other people appreciate.
Personally, while I do see videogames as an art form, I don't think they're the same kind of art as movies. Just like movies aren't the same kind of art as books, and books aren't the same kind of art as video games.
They each offer something that the others can't in some way. To me, it doesn't make sense to be saying that one is inherently better than the others. Sure, I do prefer video games to other forms of medium, but that's just me.
They each offer something that the others can't in some way. To me, it doesn't make sense to be saying that one is inherently better than the others. Sure, I do prefer video games to other forms of medium, but that's just me.
I don't think someone is saying one is better than another. It's that a group of people are saying an entire medium of art is not art. It'd be like a painter saying that film is not art because of X (where X is some arbitrarily decided upon factor that they pulled out of their ass). Your first paragraph seems to grasp the concept that it's a different media for art which explains why you'd misunderstand the debate to be the value of forms of art rather than the definition of games as art.scorptatious said:
Dialogue, scenery, plots, movie sequences, scripting, all of these are present in games. A digital painting is no less art than a physical painting. It's just a different method of making it like oil paints are to water colors. The storylines are basically exactly equivalent to movies.
The only difference is the interaction. The ability to be inside and to control aspects of the painting. Nathan Drake is a work of art. Someone designed him, chose colors and styles for him. Being able to have him move around on screen doesn't magically make him less artfully designed. And yet, these people do.
What we're running up against is the same thing movies had to compete with when they showed up. This is the natural process of art going from just a toy/pastime to an accepted medium. We certainly want it to be accepted, every bit as much as producers wanted movies to be appreciated in its earliest forms for what it was. There's nothing wrong with wanting that validation. It's just how we pursue it that makes us look silly or esteemed. This is why I pose a question regarding interactivity. Because Games have all the same aspects as movies, for example, with additionaly audience input. This defines the argument in an intellectual way rather than a groveling knee hugging approach of emotional appealing.
You guys best not be mocking obtuse indie title #44384.
And if they were serious, they'd go after it on commerce grounds.
A bunch of people shout at each other and nothing is resolved.Thunderous Cacophony said:
A legal or constitutional label is far from the designation of Roger Ebert or anyone else of his ilk.Dragonbums said:
And if they were serious, they'd go after it on commerce grounds.
I always felt that if video games were not 'high' art according to Roger Ebert it's because video games achieved too much. The label 'art' could not contain them.
The next time someone tells me 'video game stories are crap,' I'm using a variation of her reply. Maybe something like "Books and movies want you to be completely passive. Nothing is expected of the audience except to come along for the ride."
The next time someone tells me 'video game stories are crap,' I'm using a variation of her reply. Maybe something like "Books and movies want you to be completely passive. Nothing is expected of the audience except to come along for the ride."
Really good use of Jim Sterling in there, I'm sure he would appreciate it!
On topic, I guess my grip with statements like "X can never be art" is that if the person saying it is actually saying "X can never be good/high art" then why don't they say it like that? Because if you say something isn't art, of course you are going to get a backlash of people saying yes it is art and here are the various reasons why video games are art. That way, we can hopefully have better discussions on the nature of treating video games as either high art or at least what might need to be done to get them to that point other than simply stating the obvious over and over again.
As to whether or not we are getting to that point of games being high art, I think we are getting closer to that. Spec Ops: The Line was able to make me feel shame and guilt for my actions in that game and it wasn't because the game kept on telling me what I was doing was wrong. I was able to see it myself and experience it as I played the game, so much so that I would like to try again to see if I can "fix" what I did, though I know deep down that won't work. If some other games could come out that did what Spec Ops: the Line did, I think we would be on the right track.
Though at the same time, I do like to play games just for fun as well, as I like having fun more than being depressed by my actions all the time!
On topic, I guess my grip with statements like "X can never be art" is that if the person saying it is actually saying "X can never be good/high art" then why don't they say it like that? Because if you say something isn't art, of course you are going to get a backlash of people saying yes it is art and here are the various reasons why video games are art. That way, we can hopefully have better discussions on the nature of treating video games as either high art or at least what might need to be done to get them to that point other than simply stating the obvious over and over again.
As to whether or not we are getting to that point of games being high art, I think we are getting closer to that. Spec Ops: The Line was able to make me feel shame and guilt for my actions in that game and it wasn't because the game kept on telling me what I was doing was wrong. I was able to see it myself and experience it as I played the game, so much so that I would like to try again to see if I can "fix" what I did, though I know deep down that won't work. If some other games could come out that did what Spec Ops: the Line did, I think we would be on the right track.
Though at the same time, I do like to play games just for fun as well, as I like having fun more than being depressed by my actions all the time!
There's also another response. Art can be crappy and still be art. Look at a lot of modern art. Some of it can look like trash that someone forgot to clean out. Some people literally take a dump on a canvas and call it art.Gene O said:
Quality =/= art. Quality merely makes art good or bad art. Art is too broad a term to limit. But yes, the audience interaction is the only difference as far as I can tell. Plot twists in games have been even more meaningful to me than movies because of my ownership of the avatar I'm controlling. What's more, I've seen a lot of crappy movies with much lamer plot twists than games. For someone to make such a laughable claim about all games like they've played them is just silly.