BBC Debate: Games Aren't Art ... Yet

[Lukeje]

If he hasn't played a game which ``changes how I(he) see(s) the world in a significant and deep way'' then he's been playing the wrong games.

 

[The Wooster]

Did i once deny that any other industry had shovelware, hell no. In fact if you read my post i poked fun at hollywood for just that. The difference is whilst other industries have the highs (and many more of them) gaming so far has very few ones.

Take that as you will

And I'm just saying the ratio of highs vs lows is likely not as different for games as those other mediums.

 

[jurnag12]

Let me just quote someone (Penny Arcade, if I remember correctly): if hundreds of artists work on something together for 5 years, how can the result not be art?

 

[Littaly]

It sounds like he has a pretty sound stance on it. Then again, as stated at the bottom of the article, the whole discussion really hinges on how you define "art", making it a pretty pointless discussion.

 

[The-Epicly-Named-Man]

1) 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

2) Works produced by such skill and imagination

3) Creative activity resulting in the production of paintings, drawings, or sculpture

4) The various branches of creative activity, such as painting, music, literature, and dance

5) Subjects of study primarily concerned with the processes and products of human creativity and social life, such as languages, literature, and history (as contrasted with scientific or technical subjects)

6) A skill at doing a specified thing, typically one acquired through practice

Not something that makes you reflect on life. But even if it was, some games still qualify for that (BioShock, Deus Ex, Mass Effect). This is not a debate, it's one-side making qualifications up, the other suggesting games that fit their qualifications and being ignored. It's pointless, really.

 

[Dastardly]

BBC Debate: Games Aren't Art ... Yet

A fair, even-handed criticism of the idea.

Like movies, many games contain art. That doesn't make the game itself art. The problem here is us, as gamers. We continue to pick the wrong examples to prove this point.

We pick games with stunning visuals... but that's visual art.
We pick games with great stories... but that's literary art.
We pick games with memorable music or voice acting... wrong again.

Look at movies: What elevates a movie from "containing art" to "being art" is when the features that are expressly unique to movies are used to elicit an emotional response from the audience. For instance, when the camera work is used to alter the audience's response to a scene or a character -- now you have something unique to movies (cinematography) that is contributing directly to a change in the audience's experience. There's your "movie art. All the other stuff is just collaborative inclusion of other artistic media.

What is it that is unique to games? 1. Player input. 2. The rules that govern player input (aka "game mechanics") When these are used in a way that alters the player's emotional response -- such as creating tension by reducing visibility or movement speed while wounded, or forcing tough choices by limiting the player's selection of weapons -- we're starting to move toward games becoming art.

If there are any that claim no art exists in games, I can only say they've not looked hard enough.

They're looking at the wrong examples. And so are we.

 

[theonecookie]

Well it's nice and all that games could be art in the future But then I ask my self why is the art community something we want to associate with you know the one filled with nothing but pretentious assholes (well maybe not everyone) and con-men.

On that level as well do we want games being made for the purpose of being art and not entertainment sure you can make something for the purpose of entertainment and have it be art but something made for the purpose of art will rarely be entertaining you only need to look at the film industry to see this

 

[Bishop99999999]

Yeah, well I don't think that a skinny pale college student living naked in a motel room for a month slinging his own feces at a painting of Jesus in a Nazi uniform is art, but he still gets grants from the NEA. Who are we to judge?

Video games are art. We are currently in the droll repetition of popular themes period.

 

[Ickorus]

All the AAA titles aren't art but there are several indie games I can think of that would fit the demographic, for instance The Stanley Parable.

Not his fault at all but he needs to go deeper.

GAMECEPTION

 

[Vegetunks9000]

Me thinks they should get him to play Child of Eden

 

[Preacher zer0]

oh come on... there are countless lauded absract paintings of cubes and colored stripes... They are considered art by the big artsy farts, how much does a black cube on a white canvas make you "question your life"?

What qualifies as art is subjective to an individual's ability to appreciate the piece in question.

I would consier ICO to be closer to "art" than say... an unmade bed in a room in the Tate gallery.

IMO the fact that such a debate even exists means games MUST be art.

Anyway most art heads who are also involved in gaming do consider games to be art and well frankly they are the only ones qualified to judge.

I doubt any of the "art experts" in this debate have ever finished SotC so they're arguing from ignorance.

 

[ionveau]

Video games are art the same way porn is art, porn is mass produced, such as bringing out a new COD game every year, movies cant bring out a new movie with the same name every year, porn can.

 

[Mr Somewhere]

I would contest with his definition of art. I think his logic sound, though I don't agree with him, but I find that his opinion is valid. I would like to think that there are a number of games that are at some point going to be viewed as early classics, but for the moment we've a long way to go.
Even those with higher intent are at times awkward in their delivery.

 

[Carnagath]

"I'd suggest that the things we really consider art are the things that allow us to ask profound questions about who we are, how we live and the state of the world around us."

Oh, wow. Really? This guy is director of an art institute? That's what art is? So, if something doesn't cause you to ask "profound questions", but just has a great emotional impact on you, it's not actually art? So, it's pretty safe to assume that, according to him, the painting used in this article's OP, The Scream, is not art, because it doesn't make you question your life and the world around you. Where do they find these clowns, seriously...

 

[Frostbite3789]

I'd say the fact that they combine many different artistic forms into one, would make them qualify, but ok.

You have writing, artists, digital artists, directors, musicians and much more.

So, how can you say something that combines many different forms of art, isn't art itself?

 

[Kurai Angelo]

Why does any discussion of art have to at some point mention Tracy Emin/Damian Hurst in a negative light. Seriously, it's as guarenteed as Nazis showing up in a thread...

Especially in this OP mentioning her was completely pointless.

 

[TheBritishAreComing]

Games aren't art? What about Bastion? That was a piece of art. Same with Limbo, The Witcher 1 & 2, Aquaria, Braid, and Amnesia (at least in my opinion). How could these games not be considered art? He must only be looking at mainstream titles, who continue to cater to the mainstream mass, who couldn't understand art if it broke their nose.

 

[SageRuffin]

Jesus, we're talking about this again?! Can't we just play the fucking video games and be done with it?

I like good graphics, sound, and narrative as much as the next guy, but can't we let this rest already? D: