Convincing my art teacher that video games are art

[TheRookie8]

"The post is on topic, so I fail to see why it is flame-baiting. Games simply are not art. This is why I feel people who HAVE to run around and white knight the medium as artistic must have some kind of "problem" with games, since we haven't had something that truly justifies this medium as art. Ultimately, no game has come along that shows that the elements exclusive to video games can make them art. Most people simply define an artistic game as one with good writing and good visuals (and perhaps music as well), which is a narrow and shallow definition: the visuals are subpar compared to painting and film, and the writing subpar to stage, literature and film, due to the fact that games have to AT LEAST be 8 hours, which comes down to a quantity over quality thing (I don't think the gaming community will ever accept more and more games of significantly shorter length, even for greater artistic merit, which is sort of ironic when you think about it).

We haven't had the Citizen Kane of gaming yet, so to speak. Is it coming? Maybe... maybe not."

You seem fairly convinced that the current videogame medium is not art, though your final statement suggests that the medium could be capable of achieving artistic expression in the future. What's your opinion in that regard?

 

[WarCorrespondent]

Braid, World of Goo, Shadow of the Colossus.

Can't argue.

 

[tlozoot]

Yeah, I can better see where you're coming from now. I still think, however, that a game with incredible music, an incredible story, and an incredible aesthetic with somewhat dull gameplay would have a bit more artistic merit than one with incredible gameplay but the rest of the elements being somewhat weak in their presentation.

The reasoning being that while the gameplay is the only 100% unique part of the medium, all of the other parts are still 100% original to the game they're presented in. I suppose that would make that game a method of distribution for that art and not truly art itself, though. And that's likely the point you're trying to get across.

Yeah, I can agree with you on that. It's just for the purpose of proving videogames can be artistic as a medium itself, you need to show that the unique element working seamlessly.

You could make a case for great graphics/great music/bad gameplay game as being artistic, but it wouldn't work as an argument for games as art.

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

Try also Bioshock and explain to your teacher the philosophy and the metaphorical statments behind it or even psychonauts on how traveling into someone sub conscious also L.A. Noire gives a nice view of old Los Angels. [and Shadow of the colossus]
Hope this helped

Seconded. Except for maybe Bioshock. All the Ayn Rand and consumerist philosophy is hidden too far beneath the veneer of shooter where you electrocute people, incinerate people or electrocute people after you've incinerated them. That superficial coating may be too thick for your art teacher to penetrate, at least at first.

As for other suggestions: From Dust for XBLA is about re-acquiring lost heritage and survival; It also has gorgeous art direction to boot so I don't think you can go wrong with that.

Also, that upcoming Journey game for the PS3. I don't know if there are any gamplay demo videos out for that. If there is, form what I've heard of the game, it could be a veritable GOLD mine!

 

[Exodus666]

Sure if u want to argue that Video Games are art obviously the choice would be to go for the "artsy" games.

But thats not doing the medium justice, as u are trying to sneak a whole medium past by using only its most prominent examples.
U should write about GTA.

wait wait wait... hear me out...


GTA is a game that has been in the media a lot, and is for most the WORST example of video game indulgence in our basest instincts.

But see... u dont HAVE to kill anyone in GTA, u dont HAVE to kill civilians, or buy hookers and run them over with ur car when u are done with them.

These are choices, choices that exist in real life as well, and the idea that a game that exposes the brutal possibilities of real life is automatically villified simply for acknowledging them.... is art.


Think about it.

-Exo

 

[Stall]

I agree with you here - nice music and nice visuals an artistic game does not make. Are the visuals bad compared to film and painting? Many times yes, but not in all cases. However, I'm willing to forgive a lapse in visual fortitude if it means I can explore the world in three-dimensions. That kind of exploration makes up for a lot of the raw technical skill you see in film.

Usually we see a lot in the way of quantity of quality in games, but that certainly doesn't mean that this will continue. Developers will get better at telling stories in games. Developers will find better ways in which to entwine the gameplay and mechanics with the tone of the game. I think that is inevitable. Also, thanks to digital distribution we're seeing a surge of indie developers and indie games coming to readily accessible platforms. Many of these games are of the appropriate length, even today.

I certainly do agree. We are JUST NOW entering an era in which technology is becoming less and less of a limiting factor to games, which is a big deal. We are just now realizing that games can tell a story differently than film, novels, or the stage, and there are people trying to figure out how to capitalize on it. I'm not sure how it will happen, or it it will even happen, but getting our Citizen Kane has a better chance of happening today than any other point of time in this medium's history. And the point on indie games is a good point as well; hopefully, they will be able to get the funding and support they need to explore what they wish to explore.

And on your point about getting to explore a world in three-dimensions... I think this is one of the biggest disadvantages of video games, to be honest. The fine arts, art art, stage, and film, all have the advantage of being able to present visuals in the way the creator wants the audience to see them in order to garner some kind of emotional resonance or give symbolic importance. I think games are at an inherit disadvantage here since the creators lose this ability to control the audience's perception of what he or she is creating. Though I suppose it allows the viewer to experience it in a more real manner, I am not sure if that trade off is worth it. I think gaming can stand to learn so much from sculpture for this reason, since they have long since mastered learning how to focus the audience's perception on a three dimensional object.

 

[Ramzal]

So I've been in an art class for 2 years now I need to make a ðïò finishing work in the third year, so I decided to make a video game


So I've spoken to the head of the art subject in my school and she wants me to send her an explanation as to why video games are art(Which is at least better than outright dismissing video games as art, like most people I know do).

I watched the Extra Credits episode on introducing people to gaming and I know she ls fascinated by the renaissance era so I am using Assassin's Creed 2 as an example



Any advise or opinion would be welcome

If you are making a video game from the ground up, simply make it, explain the process you went throught while making it and the effort behind the music, what the characters in the game mean, and express the meaning behing the background. The video game itself is not the art form but rather all the aspects of the game put together to make the game. Designing characters is an art of drawing as is making a background scene for them to be in, music in a game is art to express the feeling of the moment. Writing is art on the level of literature and building a meaningful character.

Seriously, the video game itself is not art. Jim Sterling has that right and Extra Credits is in the wrong about it. It's the effort put behind the aspects of the game that make it art. Not the person playing it making it art. If you draw the character, make the area they are in, and music. Congrats, you are part of the art that is making something or expressing something.

I'll give you another example. Gears of War 3 is about as deep of art as you can get in a video game that is coming out. Yes, it's a cover based shooter, but a lot of people disregarded something. In making the game they decided one of the goals is to make it about Marcus's loss of a father and having to deal with his appearence again. The entire leading team of developers for this game have either lost their fathers through illness or grown without one in their life.

This is art. It is expressing your feeling and real life experience in a medium. That is the life of real art. Be it paint brush, slapping trash cans together, or in a toy that people can enjoy in their free time.

So, keep your game simple, but at the same time give a little bit of yourself and your life experience into it so that you can express to her the actual meaning behind it.

Edit: In general, I don't know why gamers seem to want to preach this if they have nothing to do with the artistic aspect of video games. It's like stealing someone elses work. -_-

 

[MightyRabbit]

How about turning it around, deny paintings are art and get her to justify why they are art to you.

 

[tlozoot]

And on your point about getting to explore a world in three-dimensions... I think this is one of the biggest disadvantages of video games, to be honest. The fine arts, art art, stage, and film, all have the advantage of being able to present visuals in the way the creator wants the audience to see them in order to garner some kind of emotional resonance or give symbolic importance. I think games are at an inherit disadvantage here since the creators lose this ability to control the audience's perception of what he or she is creating. Though I suppose it allows the viewer to experience it in a more real manner, I am not sure if that trade off is worth it. I think gaming can stand to learn so much from sculpture for this reason, since they have long since mastered learning how to focus the audience's perception on a three dimensional object.

Ah, the Roger Ebert argument. =p

Player freedom can be a hindrance if you let it, but in a scripted, linear experience the designer makes it so that player freedom is an illusion. Paths you take, objects you approach, scenery you take note of are all planned for by the designer. Good level design means that the player will unconsciously do what the designer wants them to do. Of course players are welcome to abuse the freedom, but then again it's not Shakespeare's fault if you decide to only read the first page of Romeo and Juliet in a funny accent.

Basically I think a well designed game is capable of both allowing the player the illusion of freedom and having them perform and see what you want them to. Whether this has been done skilfully today or not is a matter of debate, but I think it's easy to see the possibilities in the medium.

 

[kebab4you]

Not sure where you are from, but if you´re from the US you could just point at the recent law that declared games as an art form and tell her to shut it.

Also if you need programmers I'm up for a challenge(no payment,ofcourse).

 

[Xaio30]

"Braid" for crying out loud! It has the story, art-style, graphics and music to make it qualify as "art"!

 

[intheweeds]

Another hint: Defining what art is may help you explain how games are an art form to your teacher.

I was thinking this myself. Although 'defining art' isn't easy, I would actually go with examples of games that:

a) have a distinct message or theme they are trying to portray. (most art i know of is an expression of something, an idea or thought. sometimes it makes a definite statement, sometimes it raises important questions, but the expression of thought is very important to art)

+

b) uses an established art form such as visual art, cinematic work or music to get the message or theme across. (this will make it easy to bridge the gap, your teacher cannot argue once you have an example which encompasses A and B at the same time. This step is not needed if it's a great C example)

-OR-

c) then its easy to argue that interactivity is a medium by which artists can get a message across in the same way as music or visuals. Tell your teacher to think of it as a new 'artistic medium'. Examples of this are movement controls in horror games which make you feel more helpless (but i don't recommend using a horror game as an example unless you can find one that also has A and B.)

You need an example which has A + B or C. (preferably both)
I'm actually thinking something like the 'Reciept Racer' that was on here a while ago(http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111200-Haste-Literally-Makes-Waste-In-Receipt-Racer). It's definitely a video game. It most certainly has a definitive message (A- check). It uses it's interactive medium to portray its message in stunning clarity. (C - check).

The message and the medium are paramount. If you are missing one or the other - it will be very hard to argue it's art.

 

[Neo1656]

Let us not forget the games of Jason Rohrer. See Passage, Gravitation, Between. Or even look at his presentation at GDC this year when he introduced Chain World.

 

[Jazzeki]

allright to start out: games are defiently art for a very simple reason. everything is either a tool or art and games defiently aren't tools (well a few are but that's not the point)
art is about expiriences to to be specif it's an expirience made for you by others rather than made by chance. art is about feelings wether it be conveyed trough art music or story witch in turn actualy makes games and movies the most somplete works of art in th world. they are the only ones that encompas every aspect of art games more so by involveing you as a person directly into it.

 

[Alphakirby]

So I've been in an art class for 2 years now I need to make a נןע finishing work in the third year, so I decided to make a video game


So I've spoken to the head of the art subject in my school and she wants me to send her an explanation as to why video games are art(Which is at least better than outright dismissing video games as art, like most people I know do).

I watched the Extra Credits episode on introducing people to gaming and I know she ls fascinated by the renaissance era so I am using Assassin's Creed 2 as an example



Any advise or opinion would be welcome

Show him The Path or Limbo. That is the best advice I could give you. Hell anything made by Tale of Tales should work. (The Path,The Graveyard,Fatale)

 

[intheweeds]

I agree with you here - nice music and nice visuals an artistic game does not make. Are the visuals bad compared to film and painting? Many times yes, but not in all cases. However, I'm willing to forgive a lapse in visual fortitude if it means I can explore the world in three-dimensions. That kind of exploration makes up for a lot of the raw technical skill you see in film.

Usually we see a lot in the way of quantity of quality in games, but that certainly doesn't mean that this will continue. Developers will get better at telling stories in games. Developers will find better ways in which to entwine the gameplay and mechanics with the tone of the game. I think that is inevitable. Also, thanks to digital distribution we're seeing a surge of indie developers and indie games coming to readily accessible platforms. Many of these games are of the appropriate length, even today.

I certainly do agree. We are JUST NOW entering an era in which technology is becoming less and less of a limiting factor to games, which is a big deal. We are just now realizing that games can tell a story differently than film, novels, or the stage, and there are people trying to figure out how to capitalize on it. I'm not sure how it will happen, or it it will even happen, but getting our Citizen Kane has a better chance of happening today than any other point of time in this medium's history. And the point on indie games is a good point as well; hopefully, they will be able to get the funding and support they need to explore what they wish to explore.

And on your point about getting to explore a world in three-dimensions... I think this is one of the biggest disadvantages of video games, to be honest. The fine arts, art art, stage, and film, all have the advantage of being able to present visuals in the way the creator wants the audience to see them in order to garner some kind of emotional resonance or give symbolic importance. I think games are at an inherit disadvantage here since the creators lose this ability to control the audience's perception of what he or she is creating. Though I suppose it allows the viewer to experience it in a more real manner, I am not sure if that trade off is worth it. I think gaming can stand to learn so much from sculpture for this reason, since they have long since mastered learning how to focus the audience's perception on a three dimensional object.

I agree and disagree at the same time.

I agree that three dimensional exploration makes a focus difficult, but not all games are AAA titles and not all games are three dimensional. I argue that art is the simultaneous combination of a message, statement or question and a medium in which to express it.

In video games what is our medium? Is it good visuals cinematic work or music? No. Those already exist without games. What video games give us that no other medium has is interactivity. A good artistic game in my eyes is one that A) has a definitive message and B) gets it across through interactivity.

See http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111200-Haste-Literally-Makes-Waste-In-Receipt-Racer for a great example of what i'm talking about.

 

[MarkyJ]

what makes film art?

The elevation and use of the elements exclusive to film to tell a story in a significantly different way than that of a book or play. Film isn't art because of the writing or visuals, but because of how filmmakers use what makes film film to tell stories in a way not possible without them. If you took a well constructed film and tried to tell that story as a book or play, then you'd lose a lot. I think games are getting closer and closer to doing this, but I don't think a game has come along that couldn't have its theme or story told in a different medium without losing much. We need to focus on what makes games games to cause widespread acceptance that this medium is art... not just show people that games can have good writing and pretty visuals, since that alone isn't enough.

Like I said, we haven't had our Citizen Kane yet. Perhaps it is coming... perhaps it is not. Who knows?

It could be argued that some games tell a story in the way that other forms cannot through use of choice. I would point to games such as Mass Effect as an example. Art is subjective; meaning varies from person to person (even the very definition of art can vary depending on who you ask). Some games are subjective in that the player can actually change the story. Think of how 'Romeo and Juilet' would be different if Mercutio and Tybolt never fought. A game could make that drastic alteration to the story possible (if the developers thought of it) as a result of player choice. In this way games tell a story in a significantly different way through the use of interaction, letting the player be the artist and (within limits) create the story.

That could be the element exclusive to games you are looking for Stall.

And it's likely this next suggestion won't garner me any fans but...minecraft.
Continuing the whole interaction line of tought, minecraft and similar games make the player the artist. Is someone who sculpts with mouse and keyboard any different from one who sculpts with hammer and chisel? This would be and example of a game while is less a finished piece of art and more an artistic medium istelf through which art can be created.

I have to apologise. I'm not a very creative person and I don't truely understand art so accept the above as suggestion and opinion rather than fact. Just my thoughts on the issue.

 

[Optiluiz]

No... Just... No.

As long as Films and Performance Arts are considered art, videogames are art.

Wait... was that... a troll comment? DAMMIT... Made me reply for nothing. Also, OP, explain that having the 'viewer' be an active participant in the story makes the immersion that much better. Lend her a game or something. She's seen movies, she's seen great works of art, but how many games has she finished?