Games Now Legally Considered an Art Form (in the USA)

chunkeymonke

New member
Sep 25, 2009
173
0
0
This doesnt even make fucking sense
art is subjective and impossible to define what one person finds as art isn't what the next does how can something be legally subjective?
thats like making a law that pizza is declared tasty!
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
WolfEdge said:
But that's just it. The games AREN'T free, they're paid for by people who have no say in the matter...

It's unacceptable because the people that don't want to give have no say in the matter. It's claiming the rights to the labor and time of someone else. It's just an excepted form of slavery, when you peel away the morality that cloaks it.
You DO have a say in it, you elected your government. OK, your vote (or the few you can convince to vote differently) won't make much of a difference but then again $200k out of a $3.5 Trillion fund of tax money isn't much of a percentage of your money.

It's good to see Americans keeping such a close eye on govt spending but I don't think this particular issue is going to sway many people. It's public arts projects, it's better than a bridge to nowhere.

Also, Taxation is not slavery, you all agreed on this when you voted for your government to expect these kinds of taxes to be spent at their discretion. You are part of a NATION that has elected a government and decided on this type of taxation. You all voted on this and it was decided, sorry your "only essential taxation" government didn't get in power. Maybe because hardly anyone actually thinks that is a good idea (I think your ideas go even beyond the Republican party's stance of tax/spending).

That's democracy. America. Fuck yeah, and so on and so forth.
 

DanDeFool

Elite Member
Aug 19, 2009
1,891
0
41
Dango said:
I still don't really get why everyone thinks games have to be art.
Well, a lot of it has to do with the game censorship debate. The platform advocating game censorship is essentially that games are like pornography; obscene and completely lacking in artistic merit.

And I don't think everyone thinks games have to be art, but more that there isn't any reason why games can't be art.
 

Not G. Ivingname

New member
Nov 18, 2009
6,368
0
0
lacktheknack said:
Not G. Ivingname said:
lacktheknack said:
Dango said:
I still don't really get why everyone thinks games have to be art.
To avoid censorship in the USA.

That's all.
No... well... yes :/

Hay, we want our hobby protected, I don't see why that isn't a worthy note.

Off-topic: NOW THAT CAT MUSIC IS INSIDE MY BRAIN BECAUSE OF YOuR AVATAR DX
NYAN NYAN NYANYAN, NYAN NYANYANYAN NYAN NYAN NYAN
NYAN NYANYANYANYANYANYANYANYANYANYANYANYANYAN
NYAN NYAN NYANYANYANYANYANYAN NYAN NYANYANYNANYAN...

You're welcome.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oep4mRpmrkQ
 

NeoNomad

New member
Jun 11, 2009
37
0
0
Dango said:
I still don't really get why everyone thinks games have to be art.
We want it to be given the status of "Art" because art is not limited to the confines of what is perceived as decent to the government. If it were not art, it would be treated like marijuana because it generates the same amount of hate because the medium as a whole is perceived as a "Mass murder simulator." This is due to games that at times, I say at times because even Modern Warfare 2 made me feel some emotions, are not shy about showing a murder of a human being... that happens to be trying to kill you... and is armed and willing to... If they are comparing this LINE OF CODE and ANIMATION to a human, then we must assume that your character him/herself has the right to defend him/herself right? Sorry, now I'm ranting :p
 

tehweave

Gaming Wildlife
Apr 5, 2009
1,942
0
0
YAY!!!

I threw my hands up in the air. This is fantastic. Wonderful! Now the interactive storytelling medium of video games is an art form. This is awesome!!! Woo hoo!
 

WolfEdge

New member
Oct 22, 2008
650
0
0
Treblaine said:
WolfEdge said:
But that's just it. The games AREN'T free, they're paid for by people who have no say in the matter...

It's unacceptable because the people that don't want to give have no say in the matter. It's claiming the rights to the labor and time of someone else. It's just an excepted form of slavery, when you peel away the morality that cloaks it.
You DO have a say in it, you elected your government. OK, your vote (or the few you can convince to vote differently) won't make much of a difference but then again $200k out of a $3.5 Trillion fund of tax money isn't much of a percentage of your money.

It's good to see Americans keeping such a close eye on govt spending but I don't think this particular issue is going to sway many people. It's public arts projects, it's better than a bridge to nowhere.

Also, Taxation is not slavery, you all agreed on this when you voted for your government to expect these kinds of taxes to be spent at their discretion. You are part of a NATION that has elected a government and decided on this type of taxation. You all voted on this and it was decided, sorry your "only essential taxation" government didn't get in power. Maybe because hardly anyone actually thinks that is a good idea (I think your ideas go even beyond the Republican party's stance of tax/spending).

That's democracy. America. Fuck yeah, and so on and so forth.
Then why not put that control into the hands of STATE governments, which can far more accurately reflect the will of the people, than the federal government, which oversees so many separate clashing cultures (I'm talking specifically about America now, which has a wide abundance of cultures and subcultures spanning across an entire continent) as to make any sort of potential discussion of the matter convoluted and meaningless. Saying "It's better than a poke in the eye" doesn't bring us closer to solving the issue, it's just a dodge.

We constantly espouse the importance of freedom at the individual level, of Liberty and Justice for all, yet when it comes time to truly face what that means, we all just end up attempting to enforce our OWN freedoms, our own moralities on one another.

The "Only Essential Taxation" government has NEVER existed. It's never been attempted, because everybody tries to enforce their own ideologies through subjugation and power. There's always a caveat to the "Freedoms" we want. When we say "Liberty and Justice for All", what we keep quietly to ourselves is, "All Except for Them".
 

coolman9899

New member
May 20, 2010
395
0
0
Dango said:
I still don't really get why everyone thinks games have to be art.
cause then its what it should be, games are technicly a form of art but not everybody high up thinks so, and now some do.
 

irishda

New member
Dec 16, 2010
968
0
0
This is addressed to everyone who feels that now games can't be censored anymore: the game in question still has to be deemed artistic. Really, I can't even think of a game out now that would be deemed "for the public good". (Unless we really do need to call upon the plumbers of the world to save us from an alien/Hell attack on our Mars base that invaded from outer space, and these plumbers all had skill trees, attribute points, and gun-swords).

Video games aren't art in the sense that society understands it now, with the idea being that art is expression which elicits an emotional response. And, let's face it, they can't be. Games can't necessarily be an expression from someone (directors, authors, sculptors, painters, photographers) because video game companies can't hand you a finished product. Every game is a blank canvas or a jumbled picture, waiting for a gamer to either create or solve. (Sorry, FPSer's; of all genres, yours is the one I see the farthest from ever being deemed culturally important since they're all essentially "Mow down hordes of aliens/demons/nazis/arabs to get from here to there".) In that way, the gamer's themselves become the artist, and whatever sort of emotional reaction they have to the game is what they bring to the table.

You could argue that this is simply a new form of art, and you wouldn't necessarily be wrong. The whole idea of postmodernism was that the finished artwork was less important than the actions taken to create said work. But, let's face it, our actions in video games aren't weighted in our personal struggles or emotional experiences; it's about doing what's fun. And that's ok with me, because games should be exactly what they're called: games. Stop trying to make them what they're not because you think people will take gamers more seriously. Games shouldn't be taken seriously, they should be taken as a GAME.

TL;DR: Games may be eligible to be deemed artistic, but I doubt they will be.

PS: I, personally, wasn't sad when Aeris died. As with all JRPGs, I was glad it was one more annoying voice I didn't have to listen to.
 

Kakashi on crack

New member
Aug 5, 2009
983
0
0
That is pretty dang awesome that our government is finally calling games an art (sorry California :p)

In the immortal words of.. ahh forget it... "GET SOME!!!"
 

Littlee300

New member
Oct 26, 2009
1,742
0
0
Dirty Hipsters said:
So...does this mean that videogames would also automatically be considered protected speech now?
Wasn't The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn banned in schools for using the N word? With that being said, I doubt videos games have became much more protected
witness51 said:
On behalf of the United States: FIRST!
You are embarrassing us...
 

pyramid head grape

[Game-Over]
Feb 4, 2011
21,907
0
0
Dango said:
I still don't really get why everyone thinks games have to be art.
Try telling that too the drawing squad of shadow of the colossus. There hearts would break XD


Anyway this is great news next we can vote to get rid of people complaining about games corrupting children.