Am I the only one that finds the "Games are art" argument really pretentious?
- Thread starter Buccura
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'm sorry, but when I think of art, I always think of the picture kind and that's all that art will ever be to me.
Well my thinking is really more like "message" is art. It's the fact that you're saying something about the world you're in.
However you get that message across, the message is art. Be it a movie, a book, or a picture.
//now for the controversial part//
I feel like games can contain art. Any game can have a message to it through the story, the conversations, the flavor text, and things like that.
But a game is different in that the definition is merely a set of rules. Is DnD art? Or is it merely a set of rules? If you ask me, DnD itself isn't art, but it IS a way to gather with friends and create art yourself. There is art that utilizes the DnD set of rules, but that art is separate from the game itself. You can stamp different art into the same package.
Is Monopoly art, or is it simply a set of rules that you can stamp a different piece of art into?
I think therefore, that games can contain a message, and therefore can contain art, but a game in and of itself -- simply a set of rules -- isn't art.
I look forward to a game that can make the set of rules itself into something that creates a meaningful artistic message, but I don't even know if that's possible. Always worth trying though.
However you get that message across, the message is art. Be it a movie, a book, or a picture.
//now for the controversial part//
I feel like games can contain art. Any game can have a message to it through the story, the conversations, the flavor text, and things like that.
But a game is different in that the definition is merely a set of rules. Is DnD art? Or is it merely a set of rules? If you ask me, DnD itself isn't art, but it IS a way to gather with friends and create art yourself. There is art that utilizes the DnD set of rules, but that art is separate from the game itself. You can stamp different art into the same package.
Is Monopoly art, or is it simply a set of rules that you can stamp a different piece of art into?
I think therefore, that games can contain a message, and therefore can contain art, but a game in and of itself -- simply a set of rules -- isn't art.
I look forward to a game that can make the set of rules itself into something that creates a meaningful artistic message, but I don't even know if that's possible. Always worth trying though.
I) They can art to whoever the fuck wants them to be art.
ii) They can be NOT art to whoever the fuck wants them to not be art, cause it doesn't affect me either way.
iii) Haven't we been through enough of these fucking "Am I the only one____" threads?
IV) I've been doing too much music theory, so if anyone here can figure out what I'm referring to then...feel happy or some shit...
ii) They can be NOT art to whoever the fuck wants them to not be art, cause it doesn't affect me either way.
iii) Haven't we been through enough of these fucking "Am I the only one____" threads?
IV) I've been doing too much music theory, so if anyone here can figure out what I'm referring to then...feel happy or some shit...
Well at least that?s specific of you.SL33TBL1ND said:
I think art is considered to seriously. It seems to be more a word of validation than anything. Things want to be considered art because for some silly reason it will be considered lesser if it is not labelled so.
So, a game is only art when someone plays it? Okay, I'll buy it. More than that, I love it. I'm a supporter of the idea that art exists primarily between the object and the audience. But what of the craftsmanship that predicts and takes advantage of player behavior as a means of conveying a story; the subtle (or not subtle) ways in which a level designer can manipulate a player? A game, and a video game especially, is not just a set of rules; it is an environment in which those rules exist. Even if it's as simple as the line down the middle of the Pong field, that line informs behavior; it recalls a border, and prompts the instinct that the dash on the other side of that seemingly innocent line is my enemy.joebthegreat said:
Does level design qualify as a sort virtual installation piece? (Keep in mind that I'm not talking about aesthetics, or even world building; these are things that other art forms do already. I'm talking about manipulating the way the player chooses to interact with the environment on an intellectual and emotional level.)
Well, in my opinion, all forms of entertainment count as a part of the arts. Movies, games, books, sculptures, whatever. Someone put effort into making their creation pleasing, and if even one person enjoys it... that's art. However, you can often tell when a game is /designed/ to be art - usually it's either in a painterly style, or it's going very far to get every last detail perfect. Those sorts of games are art, no question about it.
i agree, actually. i strongly believe that some games are art. i consider ico to be far more deep and artistic than a painting of a soup can that, for some reason, is worth millions of dollars. however, you cant argue that ALL games are art. to give an example, doa: extreme beach volleyball. if thats an example of fine art, then so is showgirlsBuccura said:
Hrmm...Richard Hannay said:
I'd like to make a quick note that I like you.
The environment that surrounds you, the level design, the textures on the walls, and the layout that leads you where you go, it's all one giant picture in the end, one giant picture that must have a message. That most definitely would HAVE to be art, as it inherently has a message to it.
While I would stand by my notion that a "game" is not inherently art. The virtual world built within a video game must inherently be art. Along those lines so must be the characters that we see, and really anything visual within the game.
You're entirely right. No video game is "just" a set of rules. I think where the difference comes in is that people seem to treat the entire video game as an art form, whereas I would say any game (including a video game) is a set of rules, which can have any kind of different art imprinted on it.
That's my opinion at least. And it varies depending on your definitions of course.
That's just the thing though. A wall painted blue is still art. Just art that doesn't particularly invoke much emotion.Claiming that lackluster games like every average fps (blacksite, timeshift, etc) are art, is for me like calling a wall painted blue for art. Us gamers often think were some hyper intelligent repressed revolutionaries, when in fact where acting more like sheeple than the common justin bieber fan
Non-arty games are a different kind of art... but they're still art. Maybe bad art, maybe art that expresses itself in a different way. But art.
The thing about art really is that it's not meant to be seen, but more meant to be felt. This is why people say that to dance, you just have to feel the rhythm, if that makes any sense.
I can tell you that music is art, and I can tell you video games can be a container through which that art might reach you.bl4ckh4wk64 said:
Is the canvas art? Is the ink art? Or is it instead what we choose to say with them?
(PS. for the OP, I guess it gets pretentious on any side of the argument, eh?
)