Games Will Never Be As Deep

[mark_n_b]

The first time you've seen Luke blow up the Deathstar, it's an emotional high. The 92nd time you TRY to blow up the Deathstar, the response is "Fuck this!" followed by much controller throwing.

In summation, it is my opinion games as art should not be attempted, and games as fun should be the ideal*.

The problem being you are inherently defining art as something that cannot be fun. Not true in the least and, in my opinion, kind of a shallow assessment of the concept of "art"

Repetitive structure games, the unwinnable kind, like gallaga focus on a different emotional response and style of play that inherently avoid controller throwing. Other than that 92 attempts at the Deathstar is evidence of a bad game (comparable to a bad film or a bad painting) undeniably a form of art, undeniably a failure as a piece.

I see little point in explaining further, if you are going to premise the discussion on definitions that I would argue are incorrect there is really no discussion to be had.

 

[PsykoDragon]

Art is simply a work of creativity that appeals to at least one person. To that person, it will be art, to the rest, it will be trash. & by creativity, it doesn't mean coming up with something new. Well, it COULD mean that, but it could also mean a DIFFERENT WAY of coming up with something already done.

Off the top of my head, some games that I consider art are (in no particular order) Painkiller, Legacy of Kain: Defiance, & Max Payne 2. Notice my focus on violent games. But why THESE violent games? Because in painkiller, you get to mow down HUGE CROWDS of monsters with really wicked weapons. Because in Defiance, you get to toss people around with telekinesis like never before. Because in Max Paybe, you find yourself jumping into a room full of goons, saying "o crap", & even though I tapped the bullet-time button, in the end I can't believe that I made it out of that in one piece.

Movies that I consider art are Fight Club & Final Fantasy Advent Children.