Can Video Games Be Art?
- Thread starter El_Sam
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yes. Art is usage of creativity and imagination. You need imagination and creative skills to create a video game. Even if it's the same old game recreated over and over again, there's still a creation factor.
Yes.
Oh, you wanted an explaination?
They look pretty =) But seriously, if you go on visuals alone, some games are more beautiful than famous pictures.
Oh, you wanted an explaination?
They look pretty =) But seriously, if you go on visuals alone, some games are more beautiful than famous pictures.
Urgh... Seen this thread twice this month.
I guess they are, seeing as some of them have great visuals. But primarily, they're entertainment.
I guess they are, seeing as some of them have great visuals. But primarily, they're entertainment.
Beautiful Katamari. Now that's art!
Anywho, Video Games can be called an Art Form because its a means of expression. Animation, music, even the occasional still frame; they're all art in and of themselves. So a collaboration of all those mediums would yield a group artistic production, hence video games.
Anywho, Video Games can be called an Art Form because its a means of expression. Animation, music, even the occasional still frame; they're all art in and of themselves. So a collaboration of all those mediums would yield a group artistic production, hence video games.
Absolutely. I've always defined art as the representation of ideas and emotions. At some level, all video games do this. Some are good art, others are bad art; but this is true of movies, music, plays, and any other art form.
What has always angered me is when critics say video games can't be art because they're interactive. Since when has non-interactivity defined art? If anything, its a limitation of other art forms that video games don't have.
What has always angered me is when critics say video games can't be art because they're interactive. Since when has non-interactivity defined art? If anything, its a limitation of other art forms that video games don't have.
No. Art must do one function, video games entertain visually and audio wise.
Video games can be played for fun and gratification which Art just isn't
Video games can be played for fun and gratification which Art just isn't
I believe they are art. Some people consider movies to be art, so why not? Video games have person-made characters that are drawn by artists, they have soundtracks which are written by musical artists, and some have conversation (looked it up and there's an "art of conversation.")
Video games are like plays, you're a character in that play and you control that actor and continue the script, which is the plot of the game.
Video games are like plays, you're a character in that play and you control that actor and continue the script, which is the plot of the game.
As far as I know the games are art thing is just an excuse buggy games get
EDIT: But some of the sketches used for them could be considered art
EDIT: But some of the sketches used for them could be considered art
What about movies and plays (especially musicals and operas)? By your definition, none of those can possibly be art because they involve visual and audio entertainment. And why can't art be fun and gratifying? Again, movies and plays (even the more artistic ones) can be about fun and entertainment.The Rockerfly said:
Video games have been declined the 'Art' label for a long time, but from what I've learnt in those few modules in college, anything can be Art as long as you can explain it, photographs, films, literature, sculpture made up of ordinary objects.
For example if we take Mario.
Super Mario Brothers is a post modern deconstruction of the storytelling genre as a whole, it takes apart the idea of 'Hero' of Greek Origin and replaces it with a fat plumber whose main skill is to Jump.
Another interesting aspect is it's similarity to Buddhism, obviously an inspiration to the Japanese designer who created Mario. There are points, but they mean nothing to the player, you cannot buy anything with the points at most attaining another 'life'.
As Mario traverses through the levels seeking the ultimate goal 'The Princess', he realises that he is always one step behind, facing increasingly harder demons. Along the way he will die and as the player dies, they learn from their mistakes and start again at the beginning similar to the Buddhist concept of reincarnation. No matter how many 'lives' you get, the game never changes, players must constantly seek enlightenment through the endless cycle of 'playing' the game.
Eventually, after going through the existential angst and understanding that there is only one way to Nirvana, the player may finally rescue the Princess and is rewarded with a 'Game Over' screen adding another layer of endless rebirth and death played by millions of people all over the world. Is this really Nirvana? or just a Matrix within a Matrix so to say?
Also the pipes, Toad, the Koopas and Luigi represent repressed homoeroticism.
Go google "post modern MGS2" you'll understand how brilliant Kojima was.
Now go do one for Gears of War or Halo
For example if we take Mario.
Super Mario Brothers is a post modern deconstruction of the storytelling genre as a whole, it takes apart the idea of 'Hero' of Greek Origin and replaces it with a fat plumber whose main skill is to Jump.
Another interesting aspect is it's similarity to Buddhism, obviously an inspiration to the Japanese designer who created Mario. There are points, but they mean nothing to the player, you cannot buy anything with the points at most attaining another 'life'.
As Mario traverses through the levels seeking the ultimate goal 'The Princess', he realises that he is always one step behind, facing increasingly harder demons. Along the way he will die and as the player dies, they learn from their mistakes and start again at the beginning similar to the Buddhist concept of reincarnation. No matter how many 'lives' you get, the game never changes, players must constantly seek enlightenment through the endless cycle of 'playing' the game.
Eventually, after going through the existential angst and understanding that there is only one way to Nirvana, the player may finally rescue the Princess and is rewarded with a 'Game Over' screen adding another layer of endless rebirth and death played by millions of people all over the world. Is this really Nirvana? or just a Matrix within a Matrix so to say?
Also the pipes, Toad, the Koopas and Luigi represent repressed homoeroticism.
Go google "post modern MGS2" you'll understand how brilliant Kojima was.
Now go do one for Gears of War or Halo
I've never understood why anyone who plays and enjoys games would say, "No, games aren't art." Why not? Is "art" not cool enough or something?
Hmm I see where you are coming from but I have never seen a musical or a film as Art. Although an Opera maybe different, possibly the only thing I could see as an exception to my ruleCrimson_Dragoon said:
I see Art as a thing of beauty, not fun or entertainment. Really it's a matter of opinion
They can be, in a sense, art.
At least to some it can be art, you know what they say "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" And the same can be said about art
At least to some it can be art, you know what they say "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" And the same can be said about art
I guess they could be but then again why would you want them too be? I remember seeing a painting that simply said "fuck" in varying sizes and fonts. This was hanging in a Pittsburgh museum and the guy had an entire wing devoted to him. Art is however the beholder looks at it. Games are a really hard medium to pull this off because you need gameplay and interesting things to keep players attention. If you made games art you would probably lose a lot of the gameplay elements as more and more people jumped on board. You would probably end up with a 200 dollar console and games that just had you walk down a street while people were randomly molested and mimes played with themselves.
To me the art industry has progressively gotten less about art and more about pushing the boundry of what you can get away with and label it as art. When a guy pisses on a canvas and hangs it up that isnt art is a piss soaked paper. When someone draws something a 5 year old can do and then backs it up with a 3 hour speech on the current events you no longer have art you have a guy that wont shut up. Contrary to what I said earlier I guess I am rather jaded on what art has become.
There are hundreds of ways you can view this and some games have done a very good job with it, take World of Goo for instance. You end up wondering exactly why those little goo balls have that insatiable urge to go into pipe. You start to worry exactly what the company is doing to these little balls of goo and in the end you are left to pull a lot of the explanations for yourself. I can see it working in certain facets and having the occasional game that is artsy however I cannot see it going mainstream. If it did I am sure you would have a situation as I stated earlier. Games are about having fun and rewinding or experiancing a story or enjoying gameplay elements. If you end up with an artform instead of a form of entertainment you well lose the entertainment.
To me the art industry has progressively gotten less about art and more about pushing the boundry of what you can get away with and label it as art. When a guy pisses on a canvas and hangs it up that isnt art is a piss soaked paper. When someone draws something a 5 year old can do and then backs it up with a 3 hour speech on the current events you no longer have art you have a guy that wont shut up. Contrary to what I said earlier I guess I am rather jaded on what art has become.
There are hundreds of ways you can view this and some games have done a very good job with it, take World of Goo for instance. You end up wondering exactly why those little goo balls have that insatiable urge to go into pipe. You start to worry exactly what the company is doing to these little balls of goo and in the end you are left to pull a lot of the explanations for yourself. I can see it working in certain facets and having the occasional game that is artsy however I cannot see it going mainstream. If it did I am sure you would have a situation as I stated earlier. Games are about having fun and rewinding or experiancing a story or enjoying gameplay elements. If you end up with an artform instead of a form of entertainment you well lose the entertainment.
What about paintings that are "meant" to be seen with certain pieces of music on in the background? They're done by pretentious wankers, but they're still art.The Rockerfly said:
If we live in a world where Tracey Emin is allowed to be called an artist, then Hideo Kojima and Cliffy B are too.
