Miyamoto: "I Never Said Games Are Art"
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Now the industry is turning on itself? We just got rid of Jack Thompson...
How much gaming knowledge does Miyamoto have outside of Nintendo?
How much gaming knowledge does Miyamoto have outside of Nintendo?
Not trying to be a huge philosophical prick here, but art is not necessarily entertainment. I would say that the goal of art is to exist, and to convey a feeling of some kind. Entertainment has far more specific goals then that.Henrik Persson said:
But I'm just being a huge metaphysical prick.
I agree with Miyamoto. Video games are intended to entertain not to be pieces of art. The goal of art and entertainment are completely different. Art tries to make you think but it doesn't need to entertain to be considered good. Entertainment tries to entertain you but it doesn't have to make you think.
At the same time though you can definitely have games that entertain and could be considered art. Primarily games are supposed to entertain, yes, but I think there's a place to be artistic as well.AgentChunk said:
Every time the Escapist has an article on Miyamoto they use the same picture. And every time I'm remind of the thought "Why is Link not in there!"
The Legend of Zelda is his greatest contribution after all.
The Legend of Zelda is his greatest contribution after all.
As much as I agree with the sentiment that Miyamoto's games are, in fact, art, I have to point our the fallacy of the "Let's see you do better" [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ptitlecl8xukzuauw1?from=Main.LetsSeeYOUDoBetter] argument. One does not need to be an artist to critique art.derelix said:
I love to see someone who's actually humble and just in it for the love, you know? I happen to disagree with Mr Miyamoto, but I'm damned proud to see him get this award.
Can we put Miyamoto-san in touch with David Cage and the rest of the pretentious "games are art" assholes? It is not a coincidence that the best game designers are the ones who know what gaming is---a means of entertainment, sometimes mindless, sometimes thoughtful, but NEVER on par with "ars gratia artis".
Roger Ebert is still right. And games are still awesome in spite---nay, BECAUSE---of the fact that they've no pretense toward artistic overreaching.
Roger Ebert is still right. And games are still awesome in spite---nay, BECAUSE---of the fact that they've no pretense toward artistic overreaching.
While I disagree with Miyamoto, I can't say I disrespect him any less. And I'm actually amazed at how humble he is about the whole thing. Maybe it's due to his being Japanese, or due to his own nature, but either way his attitude toward this is somewhat refreshing.
Games can still be art, and if Miyamoto had said it, it could finally change some peoples' minds. As long as it doesn't go into "artistic overreaching."
Games can still be art, and if Miyamoto had said it, it could finally change some peoples' minds. As long as it doesn't go into "artistic overreaching."
How can you NOT love Miyamoto?
Mario and Donkey Kong (and the NES) helped blow away the gaming crash of the 80s. Mario 3 is still one of my favorite games of all time. He's LEGENDARY - people worship the ground he walks on and all this time he's kept his cool. He never let the fame or fortune go to his head and remains a humble man, admiring his inspirations.
Even if Miyamoto doesn't feel he deserves the award, I sure as hell do.
Mario and Donkey Kong (and the NES) helped blow away the gaming crash of the 80s. Mario 3 is still one of my favorite games of all time. He's LEGENDARY - people worship the ground he walks on and all this time he's kept his cool. He never let the fame or fortune go to his head and remains a humble man, admiring his inspirations.
Even if Miyamoto doesn't feel he deserves the award, I sure as hell do.
It's good to see Miyamoto being humble, but how will we ever get the world to realize games are art if the leading mind in the industry won't even admit it?
Heheh he is just as awesome as Ever =D
All his buddies are probably happy he got it.
but yeah I can see why he was all shocked and all.
Television arts award and stuff at first doesn't seem like something related to games at all.
Yet consoles are played on TV.
Its great he took the award not just for himself but for everyone who put their work into the games he helped create.
All his buddies are probably happy he got it.
but yeah I can see why he was all shocked and all.
Television arts award and stuff at first doesn't seem like something related to games at all.
Yet consoles are played on TV.
Its great he took the award not just for himself but for everyone who put their work into the games he helped create.
All art is entertainment, all entertainement isn't art. Unlike most entertainment, art exists to evoke feelings, but it does so to entertain the observer. There is no art not meant to be viewed by bored people.
In this thread: Kids who know nothing about art and whatever discussions are there to be had.
Put simply, if you consider things to be art, they suddenly are! Oh shit, what a novel concept. There's no grand official committee deciding what is or isn't "art," and really if modernism, etc etc are any indication ANYTHING can be as well art. So yeah, to take an example from another poster, a 4 year old drawing can be just as much "art" as anything anyone else did including but not limited to certain famous Italian painters. Hell look at guys like John Cage or Duchamp. Really now, to anyone serious about the topic (art history, etc) games are just another medium and it's not important if anyone thinks they are or not "art", they just are and that's all that really matters. "Art" itself is a pretty meaningless word in any objective sense, so it's not really to be taken too seriously specially as a label of anything.
So think that ICO is art? Great! Think it isn't? Great!
The important thing is it exists, regardless of anyone's opinion on it.
All the rest is trendy nonsense.
Put simply, if you consider things to be art, they suddenly are! Oh shit, what a novel concept. There's no grand official committee deciding what is or isn't "art," and really if modernism, etc etc are any indication ANYTHING can be as well art. So yeah, to take an example from another poster, a 4 year old drawing can be just as much "art" as anything anyone else did including but not limited to certain famous Italian painters. Hell look at guys like John Cage or Duchamp. Really now, to anyone serious about the topic (art history, etc) games are just another medium and it's not important if anyone thinks they are or not "art", they just are and that's all that really matters. "Art" itself is a pretty meaningless word in any objective sense, so it's not really to be taken too seriously specially as a label of anything.
So think that ICO is art? Great! Think it isn't? Great!
The important thing is it exists, regardless of anyone's opinion on it.
All the rest is trendy nonsense.
If anyone can say this, its Miyamoto, his focus is entirely on gameplay alone and the man is a genius at it. But that doesn't mean that there are games out there with different experiences that can be considered art. Its two sides of the same coin.