Poll: Are videogames art?

FrostDragon

New member
Jul 28, 2014
8
0
0
Think about it.
Think about a world.
Think about a world where video games don't exist.
Can you do it?
It's the New Media. The media for intellectuals. The media that takes you to your extremes -- with a quick hand and a cool mind you dominate the masses, overcome your deficiencies, slay the oppressors. Can you think about a world where these things don't exist?

Think about the Civil Rights Movement. What if Martin Luther King Jr. didn't have the courage to fight for what he thought was right? Now think of Phil Fish. Do you think he could have told his story? Fought for what he thought was right? Think of Edmund. Could he have fulfilled his awesome vision? Video games are a main reason people in today's society are strong. Video games are the reason why we have solidarity; fighting transphobia, homophobia, sexism, transsexism, racism, and classism is a rally behind the media of video games and developers like BioWare. I would even argue that we are stronger than we were in the 60's. No one is a Ku Klux Klan member if they have video games. This post is a thank-you letter - a love letter - to the medium that is changing this world.

Once upon a time, to make a game you'd need the money only a huge corporate publisher could give. Which type of people got this money, you ask? Typically, men - white men - and their interests showed through in their games. In those dark days, the only games being made were those featuring angry white men shooting giant guns. Videogames were seen as the medium of children, providing meaningless, thoughtless entertainment. No more. It should be noted that studies have shown that 63% of gamers are female. While previously they could not be represented thanks to the kind of people making the games, with the rise of indie games anyone can make their own game - whether they are in a position of privilege or not - and the results are clear for all to see. No longer the sickeningly masculine, bull-headed fare they once were, the videogames of today are a beautiful reflection of the human experience.

Take the indie smash hit Thomas Was Alone. Deceptively simple, minimalist art belies deep gameplay and the message within. This is not a meaningless tale of colored shapes - it is a heartfelt tapestry showing the despair and the ecstasy, the peaks and the troughs, the love and the hate, the joys and the fears: everything it means to be human. Thomas Was Alone is clear evidence that we don't need corporations or hundred-man teams or big publishers who care nothing for us gamers. We just one (wo)man with a vision, with heart, with the desire to make something truly great.

Thomas Was Alone is not alone (pun intended!) in this voyage into, dare I say it, art. That's right! Despite the uninformed, almost idiotic criticisms of Roger Ebert (RIP) videogames are indeed art - perhaps the highest form of art. Braid is another indie chart-topper, and rightfully so - not only is it a better game than anything the big publishers churn out to desperately try to stay afloat as the gaming public wake up and realize the true potential of the medium, but it is also a subversion of videogames in general, a deconstruction of what we, as players - as GAMERS - will do. Braid initially presents us with a "Damsel In Distress" plot. While seemingly problematic, this trope is later turned on its head in the ending. Braid beautifully and expertly interweaves gameplay, story and deeper meaning - the core aspects that constitute the fabric of any game worth its salt - into a life-affirming, almost mystical experience that is a joy to partake in. I won't spoil the ending for anyone who hasn't played it yet (though I'm not sure such people exist!) but anyone who has played Braid will know what I mean when I say that, upon completing this wonderful journey, I sat in my computer chair in awe. I looked outside my window, up into the stars, and knew how insignificant I was.

Innovators such as David Cage spearhead gaming's march toward enlightenment, with his magnum opus Beyond: Two Souls showing us the kind of storytelling games are capable of. B:TS is a piece of transcendental fiction - slipping the bonds of it's medium and becoming something greater than both games and movies, a piece of true art. To the mainstream public, our medium is little more than a plaything, a child's timewaster. Our Citizen Kane may be on the horizon, should other developers follow in Cage's footsteps - a work we, as gamers, can point to and say "yes, this is what games are capable of. This is why games are art".

I pose to you the question, then - has this moment arrived? Are games yet art, or have we yet to wait longer for validation? Perhaps you think that masterworks such as Bioshock: Infinite have already shown the way, or perhaps you think that we are on the cusp of being an artform, but have some ways to go yet? I've been tossing this question over and over in my mind for a while now, and thought this would be a good forum to ask.
 

senordesol

New member
Oct 12, 2009
1,302
0
0
Games were always, are now, and shall continue to be art.

I'm not sure what bearing MLK would have on that.

There is separation between what makes a game a game (as opposed to a book or a movie), there is theory and study devoted to the differences between 'good' and 'bad' games; just as there are such devoted to 'good' and 'bad' literature.

A game's worth is measured in something beyond it's mechanical effectiveness (as opposed to an 'artless' machine), and such value is subjective.

So...where's the disconnect?
 

StriderShinryu

New member
Dec 8, 2009
4,987
0
0
Absolutely. Now, not every game is intended as a piece of art but that's no different from any other art form. Not every movie, book, painting, piece of music, etc. needs to be considered a shining example of artistic endeavor for those media forms to be considered art and games should not be viewed any differently. Videogames are absolutely a media form with artistic potential.
 

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Feb 9, 2012
18,537
3,056
118
Even if you wanted to ignore the rather broad definition of "art", there's no question there's a definite artistic input in every game.
 

carnex

Senior Member
Jan 9, 2008
828
0
21
I always hated this idea that paintings are arr, or that music is art or whatever. Art is, for me, status of a work that says something about quality and, perhaps, intentions of that work. All that music, paintings, books or games are is artistic medium. Form in which a work of art can take place

So, games are artistic medium. And what games are art is a long winded debate.
 

Happiness Assassin

New member
Oct 11, 2012
773
0
0
According to the Oxford English Dictionary the first definition of "art" is thus:

"The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power."

By this definition, how are video games not art? By what stretch of the definition could video games be said to not utilize creative skill or imagination? Or that video games are devoid of emotional power or beauty? 'Cause I have played several games that was every one of these.
 

Mimic

New member
Jul 22, 2014
108
0
0
I always found the question rather odd. Even on a basic level they all have a made visual component be it simple, realistic or more stylised. That to me means they are and I don't really know how they could not be. I think sometime people are more thinking about 'Art' as in a higher form of meaning that can be shown though a media such as a take on life questions and meanings, society and philosophy. However, it should be said that art doesn't have to be made with this even in mind and people can find their own meanings from it. You don't really hear people questioning other genres in the same way. I mean many of the Old Masters of oil painting were commissioned to portray royalty and lords purely to show a display of wealth and last for posterity, there wasn't necessarily a deep meaning to it, but no one really questions it in the same way.

I'd personally be more interested in the standard people think they are not art apply to videogames and whether its consistent across the various media that art can be created in. Ultimately, I think it probably has more to do with personal taste and sometimes even a little disdain for the media.
 

mitchell271

New member
Sep 3, 2010
1,457
0
0
Well, you're asking a very biased group of people for starters. If you wanted a good sample, maybe ask this question on multiple forums and submit it as a daily poll for traditional media's websites, with an article to go alongside.

Personally, I say yes. Films are art, even though majority seem to be for the general public, overloaded with flash, have minimal substance and just want your money. Same situation with music; orchestral music in any form seems to considered high art (which is why I believe 2Cellos is as popular as they are, just so people can say, "I listen to classical"[footnote]Yes, they're incredible too, I know. I wish I could play as well as them[/footnote]) while pop music makes millions of dollars and takes about an hour to write because it's almost exclusively 1-4-5 chord progressions. It's identical in all art forms. The indie and less well known stuff tends to be much artier than the mass market material because they have free roam and they want to craft an experience rather than a pure source of entertainment.
 

Lilikins

New member
Jan 16, 2014
297
0
0
Also saying yes, someone let out their imagination to project what they wanted to. Some of them of course could be considered 'simulations' instead of art yet nevertheless, Mona Lisa was also art no? Art comes in many shapes and sizes, so what may be art for one person, may not be so for another.

Yet nevertheless if some chap can throw buckets of paint at a wall..and sell it for 1.6 million as 'art' then..yeah haha someone saw art in it.

There was also some cleaning lady who accidently left her trolly/junk by an art auctions place after cleaning, it also got sold for a few grand soooo.. yeah haha. Art is in the eye of the beholder I guess.
 
May 26, 2014
43
0
0
Portraits were commissioned by the landed gentry in times gone by (hey, no photos back then ;)) and while I agree this was certainly an undeniable statement of wealth, the artists in question would often use the opportunity to develop techniques of both brushwork and composition. Da Vinci's Mona lisa is most famous for her smile, but it should really be more famous for the technique used to achieve such blended tonal change over such a small canvas.

Art has always been subject to disdain too, by then contemporary eyes, Salvidor Dali and his surrealism (who hasn't got a lobster phone these days), Marcell Duchamp (if you want a p*ss, don't bring your own urinal mate, who the f*ck is R. Mutt anyway?) and his Dada.

Even Monet was heavily criticised at the time for his technique and visual style. He's now regarded as a master.

Games receive some recognition these days, Bioshock won a Bafta for visual design, and rightly so, the artistic styling was well thought out and imagined to depict the evolved art deco setting.

Appreciation for the artistic aspects of games can only grow, as long as developers continue to expand them.
 

JazzJack2

New member
Feb 10, 2013
268
0
0
I do believe video games are art but I find it hilarious that you provide David cage as an example of artistic maturity and paint him as someone developers should aspire to be and I find it particularity bizarre you chose Two Souls which is definitely one of his worst games.

If I was to make a list of games that I would consider as good examples for the artistic possibilities of games I would choose things like

-Elite
-Dwarf Fortress
-Grim Fandango
-Hotline Miami
-Minecraft
-The Souls series
-STALKER SoC

And probably a ton of other games I forgot about
 

Phoenixmgs_v1legacy

Muse of Fate
Sep 1, 2010
4,691
0
0



StriderShinryu said:
Absolutely. Now, not every game is intended as a piece of art but that's no different from any other art form. Not every movie, book, painting, piece of music, etc. needs to be considered a shining example of artistic endeavor for those media forms to be considered art and games should not be viewed any differently. Videogames are absolutely a media form with artistic potential.
Exactly,

"90% of everything crap" - Sturgeon's Law
 

Elvis Starburst

Unprofessional Rant Artist
Legacy
Aug 9, 2011
2,742
730
118
I'm gonna be the one to say "OH GOD, are we talking about this again?!" YES. IT IS! Holy Hell! >.<

Calming down... Yes, video games are art. I have no reason to doubt why. I don't have some fancy explanation as to why, but they just art. They're an art form. I elect Journey as my best example. Just look at it. Listen to the things it makes people feel. Look at how beautiful it is. I just point to that and call it at day with this kind of discussion
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
Sometimes, questions are best answered as mad libs. Check this:

[rhetorical question]

[answer with expansion]

Therefore, games [are/are not] art, as according to the subjective definition of art I subscribe to, which is [definition of art in quotation marks]

Here's my variation!

Do games specifically make the player feel emotions?

Yes. They entertain, sadden, anger, and even scare the player.

Therefore, games are art, as according to the subjective definition of art I subscribe to, which is "human-made media that are designed to evoke emotions in people that interact with them".

inb4 someone tells me my definition is wrong.
 

Racecarlock

New member
Jul 10, 2010
2,497
0
0
Oh yeah, that's exactly what I want. Games to become like movies but with only slightly more button presses than a DVD menu.

Besides which, I doubt david cage's stories would impress the prime time NBC audience, much less prove the medium's ability to be art. I mean, maybe beyond two souls would make a good low budget syfy movie, but it's not good.

I mean, with thomas was alone I can at least see you having a good point, because that game actually gives a crap about using interactivity to tell a story. The Stanley Parable and Bastion and Brothers are other good examples of this.

David cage shoved some button pressing into a movie that plays like christopher nolan wrote a shitty, melodramatic version of the Blue Dragon anime. It's nothing more than an overly complicated DVD menu where you basically select the ending, but in a really roundabout way. I get it that people like his games. Whatever, people can like what they like. But being the next evolution of this medium and having all games follow in his way? Hell no.
 

Zhukov

The Laughing Arsehole
Dec 29, 2009
13,769
5
43
I have this sneaking suspicion that the OP is taking the piss.
 

zen5887

New member
Jan 31, 2008
2,923
0
0
Yes and no.

Games definitely can be art, some are, most aren't, and that's okay.

I used to be right at the front of discussions like this, yelling and carrying on about of course games are art, how could anybody thing otherwise. But something happened, either my definition of 'art' developed or my cynicism of the gaming industry caught up to me. It's a complicated question and depends on a lot of different contexts.

I'll try to be as condensed as I can because honestly, I could write for days about this.

Basically, art is only art in a certain context and it has to be, at some point in it's design, deliberate. So a particularly beautiful scene in nature that you stumble across on a walk isn't art. It might give you an emotional reaction and think about the existence of God or the folly of mankind or whatever but in the context, a random occurrence in nature, it isn't art. Art is a social construct so, yeah. However, if somebody took a photo of the pretty scene or painted it and said "this is art" then, well, it gets more arty because there are bias' and social contexts applied. Whether or not it's good art or not is something entirely difference.

So with deliberate design and context are important in art, this is where videogames as art gets blurry. Games like FIFA don't exist to promote any kind of artistic message. They act as a tool to experience playing a game of football. It does it's darndest to have good AI and realistic ball physics and graphics. FIFA is a table that we eat off. It might look really nice, and be really well made, but we use it for something. Something other than art. On the other end of the scale we have games like Spec Ops: The Line or Papers Please. These games have something to say. Rarely would somebody play Papers Please so they can experience what it's like to be border control worker in the same way they would play FIFA to experience what it's like to be a footballer.
Where it gets really messy is something like Call of Duty. Call of Duty is wants the player to feel something, there is a story with characters and music and big emotional beats where people die in slowmotion. But I don't think I'd be wrong in saying the primary objective of Call of Duty isn't to present an artistic message, it's probably to make squillions of dollars. Does this disqualify it from being classified as art? I don't know, it definitely wouldn't be my first example when presenting a case, but I don't know if I'd totally discount it. I don't think it's too far away from pop music or blockbuster films, there is potential for artistic merit, and they are obviously really really well made, but I don't think you could ever call them art without putting a "but" after it.
 

ChineseGuy212

New member
Apr 18, 2013
8
0
0
FrostDragon said:
...Innovators such as David Cage spearhead gaming's march toward enlightenment, with his magnum opus Beyond: Two Souls...
Thanks OP, I just snorted coffee all over my monitor, haven't laughed this hard in a while. I can't believe people are taking this post seriously.
 

stroopwafel

Elite Member
Jul 16, 2013
3,031
357
88
mitchell271 said:
Well, you're asking a very biased group of people for starters. If you wanted a good sample, maybe ask this question on multiple forums and submit it as a daily poll for traditional media's websites, with an article to go alongside.

Isn't that rather pointless though? It's like asking people who have zero interest in classical paintings what they think of The Night Watch.

I guess all games are art if you take the literal definition of the term, but if you take its associative meaning I don't know. They are certainly craft, but creative entertainment doesn't necessarily equal art. Neither in my opinion do indie games that try to be as artsy fartsy as possible just for the sake of it.

The are some games I would consider art the most prominent being Metal Gear Solid 2 and Silent Hill 2. Both for very different reasons. One for being a self-referential, self-aware game that deconstructs its entire narrative and the other for being build on esoteric foundations. Neither of these games were probably designed with 'art' in mind though.

Also being considered 'art' doesn't necessarily put one game above the rest. Some of my favorite games that I like way more than MGS2 or SH2 I would not consider art. Most of all I think art should say something about human emotion or the time we live in on an abstract yet tangible level, and I think the before mentioned games both do this.