Games will never be accepted as an art form

[Use_Imagination_here]

Sure it won't. Just like movies never were.

For me anyone who condemnes games because of grind is not someone whos opinion I care about.

 

[Something Amyss]

In its time people said impressionism would never be art.
If that's so, what is this?

Spoiler: Monet

OMG that's horrible. It'll never catch on. This Monet is clearly a no-talent hack!

>.>

 

[DexterNorgam]

Games really can't be art. Simply because art cant have any purpose beyond simply being art.

 

[dead.juice]

Personally, I think all video games are art. But in general, they're all just video games.
If your going to make any visuals in a game, whether its a enemy made of red pixels, a weapon made by polygons and metal textures, or a cutscene/FMV using live actors, you need art to bring it across and make it represent what you want it to. But you don't just call games 'a work of art' in the same way you don't call games 'a work of engineering/coding/acting/literacy/production.'

If someone want to make a game because they have an artistic vision or story, then fine. It's 'art', but it doesn't necessarily make it good art. Super Mario wasn't made to be art (FACT: Mario was given a mustache because it was easier than animating a mouth), but the art it contains does it's job well. It's simple and creative, sacrificing detail for clarity, The pixelated art of Mario is now the symbol of a leading game company, as well as a symbol of gaming in general.

 

[Atmos Duality]

If one is so insecure to require popular-justification for their opinions or appreciation of works (whatever they might be), then they have no business criticizing what others consider "art".

Honestly; it's just meaningless trolling at that point.
Especially if it's about a point of obvious controversy.

 

[IceStar100]

Have not seen a moving story really I know many cried becuase of ICO or screamed with anger when someone kill hurt the main of a game.

I've never experienced that myself, I've never experienced a game with the subtlety or sincerity to actually make me feel something in the same way as books, paintings or film.

I could also shot back many never feel anything from a painting. It's just a pretty picture on some cloth. Art give only what you put into it.

 

[IceStar100]

I could also shot back many never feel anything from a painting. It's just a pretty picture on some cloth. Art give only what you put into it.

You indeed could, that's the magic of subjectivity.

I feel I should say something but all I can truely say is "Indeed"

 

[AperioContra]

Games really can't be art. Simply because art cant have any purpose beyond simply being art.

Architecture has long been considered a form of art and it houses a very specific purpose(the purpose of housing. Actually, a strong argument can be made that most of all art has a specific purpose. Whether to revere the gods (Michelangelo's the Creation of Adam on the Sistine Chapel, Dante's Divine Comedy, Jesu, Joy of Man's Desires by Bach) or To make a comment about current societal conditions and the track in which society seems to heading (1984 by George Orwell, In Praise of Folly by Erasmus, The Jungle). More on subject, most of these pieces of art have had great utilitarian Uses of in our lives. The Jungle played a big role in the formation of Unions and public empathy toward the working class, allowing for better working conditions and fair pay in the jobs we enjoy today. In Praise of Folly was an argument for humor in a time in which there was little to be found, changing the common ideals on life and leading to a great rennaisance of humor, paving the way for writers like Jonathan Swift and eventually allowing the Ben Croshaws and Doug Walkers of the world to have their voice. 1984 simply made n accurate prediction 20 years after it had projected it, ok so not ALL of it changes the world.

The point is art has one of the most powerful purposes, it defines the society it exists in. To the point that to this day we judge past societies off of their art.

 

[Zack1501]

So what if people who don't play games don't consider it art? We don't need there approval. games are art because they are made of art. every texture, every 3D model, all of the music, and all of the story is art. but i don't need to make others believe it is. simply put, I accept games as an art so to me games are a accepted form of art.

 

[Jessta]

Honestly I thought games had transcended the general idea of 'art' ages ago, I mean a drawing is considered art, a symphony is considered art, a good novel is something considered a piece of art... most good games now days have a million carefully put together three dimensional pictures, a couple novels worth of dialogue and story, and several symphonies of music all put together in such a way that they can sneak past your defenses and change your mood without you even noticing their presence, combine that with the amount of computer programming and science behind making the game engines and you can hardly compare something like portal 2 or a modern final fantasy game to some crummy picture of a lady smiling or hell even works of famous artists like mozart.

Video games can't be considered art because they already surpassed art so much that there's no real comparison. I mean seriously, how much joy are you really going to get from a single picture or a single song? Art can share an emotion, a VG though? that shares an experience.