I think I would. My problem is that viewpoint tends to make a "only some games are art" mentality that discourages the study of video games as art. And that is simply not acceptable. It feeds the idea that only games that are good, or somehow "more arty," are artworks, which leads to all sorts of immense problems. That's what I'm arguing against, I suppose; not so much the idea that some games aren't made to be artworks, but that games shouldn't be studied as a general, all-encompassing art form because they're also used for non-artistic principles.Bobic said:You seem to be arguing the point you want to argue rather than the counter to the point which I was making. In fact, your point kind of agrees with what I was saying. To put it simplyThaius said:That is true; video games are a far more diverse medium in that sense. I personally study them as a narrative art, but they are capable of so many more things than that. Which is why I think a distinction will be coming soon, between game games and artistic games. One would still be able to make the argument that they're all art (they still require a team of artists to make), but I think a distinction between games made to create competition and games made to for artistic reasons (which, by the way, include entertainment through the art form) would be helpful. But I still hold that it is important to consider video games an art form, because they are capable of it and recognition of that fact is what will allow us to study them as such. Film would never have developed as an art form the way it has if it was only recognized and appreciated by a few random guys that made artistic films; it had to be culturally accepted as a medium of creative expression. Just because not all video games are meant to be art does not mean that acceptance shouldn't happen, especially since the same discrepancy appears, though perhaps to a lesser extent, in every other artistic medium out there.Bobic said:I'm not saying that no games are art, I'm just saying that there is a perfectly legitimate reason to say "only a few games are art". The medium can be used for art but a significant amount of the time it is used to create a challenge for people to overcome like the aforementioned screwball scramble, or a way for people to compete with eachother, which puts them in the same category as sports.Thaius said:Perhaps not. Maybe the early examples of a medium, before it even realizes it can create art, do not count as art. But video games are hardly alone in that. You've likely heard of the film The Great Train Robbery. Know why it's remembered like it is? Because it was the first movie with a story. Before it, people would just lay down a dollar or two to watch a horse run for a few minutes. Film was a spectacle, a tech demo, an artless diversion. For that matter, I highly doubt the first thing done with written language was writing an epic poem. All art forms, in the history of existence, were used for non-artistic purposes before the artistic merit was realized. That makes it a little difficult to classify those early examples as art, perhaps, but it does not mean the medium is not an art form.Bobic said:But would you count games with no artistic merit as art? Is space invaders a piece of art? If so, why doesn't screwball scramble count as art?Thaius said:Games are absolutely art. The annoying thing to me is the "only a few games are art" idea. Guys, the medium of video games is a form of artistic expression. To say, "only the really good and artistic games are art" is essentially saying that there is no such thing as bad art. Video games require creativity and skill to complete, and thus they are all art, even if not all of them are good art.
For that matter, unless you are going to count things like instructional math videos that just show a hand writing on a whiteboard as art, or a Terms of Service document, every art form has non-artistic uses. It still does not change the fact that the medium is capable of artistic merit, and will be considered an "art form" even if it can also be used for other purposes.
Agreed?Radeonx said:Some games are art, and some are toys.
In that case we agree completely. Keep on preaching brother.Thaius said:I think I would. My problem is that viewpoint tends to make a "only some games are art" mentality that discourages the study of video games as art. And that is simply not acceptable. It feeds the idea that only games that are good, or somehow "more arty," are artworks, which leads to all sorts of immense problems. That's what I'm arguing against, I suppose; not so much the idea that some games aren't made to be artworks, but that games shouldn't be studied as a general, all-encompassing art form because they're also used for non-artistic principles.Bobic said:You seem to be arguing the point you want to argue rather than the counter to the point which I was making. In fact, your point kind of agrees with what I was saying. To put it simplyThaius said:That is true; video games are a far more diverse medium in that sense. I personally study them as a narrative art, but they are capable of so many more things than that. Which is why I think a distinction will be coming soon, between game games and artistic games. One would still be able to make the argument that they're all art (they still require a team of artists to make), but I think a distinction between games made to create competition and games made to for artistic reasons (which, by the way, include entertainment through the art form) would be helpful. But I still hold that it is important to consider video games an art form, because they are capable of it and recognition of that fact is what will allow us to study them as such. Film would never have developed as an art form the way it has if it was only recognized and appreciated by a few random guys that made artistic films; it had to be culturally accepted as a medium of creative expression. Just because not all video games are meant to be art does not mean that acceptance shouldn't happen, especially since the same discrepancy appears, though perhaps to a lesser extent, in every other artistic medium out there.Bobic said:I'm not saying that no games are art, I'm just saying that there is a perfectly legitimate reason to say "only a few games are art". The medium can be used for art but a significant amount of the time it is used to create a challenge for people to overcome like the aforementioned screwball scramble, or a way for people to compete with eachother, which puts them in the same category as sports.Thaius said:Perhaps not. Maybe the early examples of a medium, before it even realizes it can create art, do not count as art. But video games are hardly alone in that. You've likely heard of the film The Great Train Robbery. Know why it's remembered like it is? Because it was the first movie with a story. Before it, people would just lay down a dollar or two to watch a horse run for a few minutes. Film was a spectacle, a tech demo, an artless diversion. For that matter, I highly doubt the first thing done with written language was writing an epic poem. All art forms, in the history of existence, were used for non-artistic purposes before the artistic merit was realized. That makes it a little difficult to classify those early examples as art, perhaps, but it does not mean the medium is not an art form.Bobic said:But would you count games with no artistic merit as art? Is space invaders a piece of art? If so, why doesn't screwball scramble count as art?Thaius said:Games are absolutely art. The annoying thing to me is the "only a few games are art" idea. Guys, the medium of video games is a form of artistic expression. To say, "only the really good and artistic games are art" is essentially saying that there is no such thing as bad art. Video games require creativity and skill to complete, and thus they are all art, even if not all of them are good art.
For that matter, unless you are going to count things like instructional math videos that just show a hand writing on a whiteboard as art, or a Terms of Service document, every art form has non-artistic uses. It still does not change the fact that the medium is capable of artistic merit, and will be considered an "art form" even if it can also be used for other purposes.
Agreed?Radeonx said:Some games are art, and some are toys.
An excellent way of putting it, I completely agree with you, I myself can be completely absorbed in games. Red Dead Redemption being an absolute time absorber for me. ^^wrightry said:I feel that video games are the only medium where the observer can be totally immersed in the world of the art. I feel like video games ought to be considered an art form all their own because no other art form can absorb the audience like videogames can. Obviously people can get enraptured in paintings and theatre etc. but the way it happens in videogames I think makes them worthy of being called art. A game doesn't even have to look great to be immersive: see the original Half Life. I just think making a world come to life ought to be considered an art form like theatre/movies are. Its a similar dynamic only you're in control so it gets even more immersive.
All creative works are art, but not all art is good.Altanese said:I didn't vote in the poll because I didn't see an option for "Some games are art, others not." Video games as a whole are not art, and if you're going to count an entire medium for expression as "Art" or "Not art" then please tell me how books can all be art when both "Great Expectations" by Charles Dickens and "Twilight" by Stephanie Mayer are books. For that matter how does one classify music as art when you can listen to Tchaikovsky's "1812 Overture" and Beiber's "Baby"?
There will always be critics for art though. ^^Revrant said:Yes and no, the Transformers series sure as fuck isn't art, but it is recognized as such, the same is true of games, the Call of Duty franchise is action filled jingoism, mindless arcade fodder, Heavy Rain is a piece of art.
We just have to reach the threshold where the majority finally concedes the point, in this case the critic community seems to be one of the major obstacles.
Now, see, this is part of the problem I had with this poll. I know a lot of people consider any form of expression to be 'art', but I think art has to move the human soul.Kahunaburger said:All creative works are art, but not all art is good.