How much longer until videogames are accepted as an art form or beneficial to society?

[Wingmna]

It will become an art, when idiots try and stop making into an art.

Pretty simple, if you try and force it into an art mode, then it will never be unique on its own and never be considered good enough.
The greatest games ever are the least to be considered art, yet trash like SotC that fails as a game is the one game that is considered the most artistic.

Either way, games are meant to be fun, whether or not art has anything to do with it isn't the point of videogames.

TBH, videogames will never be art.
They have more in line with the nature of sports then more subjective/authoritive mediums. And no, don't even start to claim sports are artistic. Anything outside of a videogames unique aspects is like saying football is artistic because of the design of the uniforms or how green the grass is (e.g. Braid is considered art for its art style, not its run-of-the-mill mechanics... why? Because the niche gaming community are morons).

 

[clockout]

I'll never revere them as art, nor movies.

 

[Peteron]

They aren't either. Not even in the slightest. Everyone has to understand that they a created as a way to have fun and pass time. You guys think way to deeply on this subject. A video game is JUST a game.

And a book is JUST words, and a movie is JUST pictures.
You really don't understand what artistic value is do you?
Though I gotta say, with today's selection of games, it's not hard to see why people like you still exist.

Yup, you pretty much summed it up.

 

[Chamale]

Or once some amazing non violent and beautiful game comes out and they start changing their tone because of that.

You mean like Flower, or Portal? We know that there are great games. The anti-video game lobby ignores them and gives free publicity to Rapelay and Postal 2.

 

[Peteron]

They aren't either. Not even in the slightest. Everyone has to understand that they a created as a way to have fun and pass time. You guys think way to deeply on this subject. A video game is JUST a game.

Or maybe you don't think deep enough about them? Do not knock it unless you actually delve into it.

A game is a game! Developers don't attempt to make "works of art, that will most surely benefit society." They try to make money! Think realistically, don't fantasize.

You've never heard of indie developers have you?

Try this on for size: Closure

That is an independently developed and designed game that probably made little to no money, but was still made because the creator had a message they wanted to get across.

If you don't consider flash games 'real' games, you hooty-tooty Escapist you, Try this one: Flower

It isn't market focused, even though it was made for the PSN and developed by an actual company. Instead it was focused on delivering it's message to the player about life and urbanization.

Here's what is amazing: In any industry, you will have those people that are more concerned with pushing the bounds of what their medium can do, rather than being concerned with making a profit. This. Is. Fact.

I applaud you. Unlike everyone else who responded to my post, you used logic and a detailed explanation to support your beliefs. And you do well at proving your point. While I was not targeting Flash Games you still managed to provide detail.

 

[Zyphonee]

They aren't either. Not even in the slightest. Everyone has to understand that they a created as a way to have fun and pass time. You guys think way to deeply on this subject. A video game is JUST a game.

Or maybe you don't think deep enough about them? Do not knock it unless you actually delve into it.

A game is a game! Developers don't attempt to make "works of art, that will most surely benefit society." They try to make money! Think realistically, don't fantasize.

Hehehe, aren't you close minded? Look at films for example. Sure, there are people out there like James Cameron who prefer to make commercial successes and get money by making a timesink, but for as long as there is someone like Kubrick or Hitchcock who can see the potential of a medium to transmit an experience, or convey a message, there is potential for a new artistic form of storytelling to arise. I'm not saying there should only be artistic games like Shadow of the Colossus and we should shun Halo and Gears of War, but games have one thing that books and films will never have; the fact that everything you do will have a deep impact on how the rest of the story will go. The game is demanding that you sit down for a minute and stop thinking of the story from a third person perspective, which means that games can be really deep too.
Take for example the genre of comic books, and how they took the name of Graphic Novels after Alan Moore realized that he could do something different. That was the point in which the comic book industry acknowledged it's full artistic and narrative potential, and comic book artists started seeking to do something a whole lot more meaningful, that's what makes the Mass Effect series so good, the situations you are confronted with have several layers of philosophy built into them. Now only imagine that more game developers fully acknowledged themselves as craftsmen who are seeking to represent an experience, any game could greatly escalate beyond "Just a game", and go for something more meaningful, which, regardless of the game being set in horror with psychologically subjective themes, like Silent Hill, or an action game that seeks to show how desperate war is, like Call of Duty 4, would make ANY game better, some to a minor grade, and others extremely noticeable.

Now please stop being such a troglodyte, you give games, gamers and game developers a bad name.

 

[DeathsHands]

Why do games need to be an art form of a benefit to society anyways? They're made so people can have fun.

 

[MrhalfAwake]

I just don't see why people feel the need to justify their hobby as art. It's like their embarrassed by it so they're trying so hard to get everyone to think it has some kind of genuine value to society as a whole. Im sure there are more than handful of games that can be art. But the big thing to realize is, it doesn't matter

Video games as a whole are not art simply because they as a whole don't have to be. If you genuinely like playing games then just play your damn games and nuts to anyone who says otherwise. You don't have to justify it to anyone. If you and a select few of your friends and family still put time aside to game than that time is more valuable than any art piece can ever be, and as long as you and the ones you play with feel it was time well spent then it doesn't matter what someone like Roger Ebert says.

Something Doesn't have to be art to be good and you're losing out on valuable game time trying to argue it with people who frankly don't give a damn.

 

[Piction Froject]

I just don't see why people feel the need to justify their hobby as art. It's like their embarrassed by it so they're trying so hard to get everyone to think it has some kind of genuine value to society as a whole. Im sure there are more than handful of games that can be art. But the big thing to realize is, it doesn't matter

Video games as a whole are not art simply because they as a whole don't have to be. If you genuinely like playing games then just play your damn games and nuts to anyone who says otherwise. You don't have to justify it to anyone. If you and a select few of your friends and family still put time aside to game than that time is more valuable than any art piece can ever be, and as long as you and the ones you play with feel it was time well spent then it doesn't matter what someone like Roger Ebert says.

Something Doesn't have to be art to be good and you're losing out on valuable game time trying to argue it with people who frankly don't give a damn.

OK before I start I want to make sure you know this is not towards fully. Now with that out of the way. I'm not justifying anything! I AM SIMPLY IMPLYING THAT YES GAMES MAY OR MAY NOT BE AN ART AND THAT'S STRICTLY OPINION, BUT WHY NOT ALLOW IT TO BECOME LABELED AS AN ART. THE ONLY DOWNSIDE IS THAT NOW GAMES WOULD ACTUALLY BE MADE BETTER AND DIFFERENT GIVING US THE GAMING COMMUNITY FRESH GAMES AND NEW IDEAS THAT WILL ONLY IMPROVE THE QUALITY. THE BENEFIT TO SOCIETY WAS JUST AN AFTERTHOUGHT I ONLY PUT IT IN TO MAKE THE DISCUSSIONS BETTER, IT WAS NOT TO BE TAKEN SO LITERALLY. I LOVE GAMES, LOVE THEM ENOUGH TO HOPE THEY WILL ONE DAY REACH A NEW LEVEL IN SOCIETY AND NOT BE LABELED SUCH DEGRADING THINGS. ITS NOT FANTASIZING WHEN IT'S A POSSIBILITY. PERSONALLY FROM READING SOME OF THESE RESPONSES I AM GENUINELY UPSET AT CERTAIN PEOPLE WHO LACK SO LITTLE CONFIDENCE IN THIS MEDIUM. THAT IS ALL.

 

[Gordon_4_v1legacy]

Why should it matter if video games are or are not considered art? The only thing that matters is that they should be enjoyable and fun.

Being considered art would allow games a certain amount of freedom and legal protection under United States law. I see no reason not to allow video games the same protection standards as film, music and literature.

 

[Christopher Roberts]

if Portal wasn't "The Game", there never will be one.

and to answer your question: not until there are no more religious (or otherwise closed-minded) zealots out to cockblock the whole world.

What he said, maybe without the Portal part. It was great, but not "The Game".

 

[Pyroguekenesis]

It will probably happen when people stop trying to burn gamers for heresy against the arts. Or once some amazing non violent and beautiful game comes out and they start changing their tone because of that.

But we still have to kill Jack Thompson..that's a must

What about games like Fl0wer? It is truly an artistic game and not even violent...but shame its not all that well known...I think its probably games like; God of War series, Call of Duty Series and pretty much any game with sex,nudity, violence...omg GoW.. is popular for so many players that the peaceful ones out there are overshadowed.

 

[Twilight_guy]

My first thought is: are you channeling the spirit of W.E.B. Dubois?

Legitimacy is not a singular momentous event but rather a continuous stretch of time in which public opinion gradually turns and shifts. The inertia of the thoughts of a group of people is tremendous and we cannot expect it to suddenly move in leaps in bounds so we simply watch and ensure that it continues a gradual turn.

 

[Hatchet90]

If you have to question whether or not something is art, then it definitely is art.

 

[likalaruku]

Have you seen the landscape design in Lord of the Rings Online? If that's not art, I don't know what is.

 

[HigherTomorrow]

Are you a hardcore gamer? Really get into games and look for those cult games?

Yes, I would say I am, and have in fact played and own the entire MGS series, plus quite a lot of cult hits (I own Portal. I like Portal. But it's not like God came down, shat out a game, and that game was Portal. Portal's good, clean fun, but not the most amazing entry into the game industry.)

The problem is, it isn't us hardcore gamers that need to be changed. It needs to be the casual gamers and the media who view games as toys or as murder simulators.

 

[Diserasta]

It will become an art, when idiots try and stop making into an art.

Pretty simple, if you try and force it into an art mode, then it will never be unique on its own and never be considered good enough.
The greatest games ever are the least to be considered art, yet trash like SotC that fails as a game is the one game that is considered the most artistic.

Either way, games are meant to be fun, whether or not art has anything to do with it isn't the point of videogames.

TBH, videogames will never be art.
They have more in line with the nature of sports then more subjective/authoritive mediums. And no, don't even start to claim sports are artistic. Anything outside of a videogames unique aspects is like saying football is artistic because of the design of the uniforms or how green the grass is (e.g. Braid is considered art for its art style, not its run-of-the-mill mechanics... why? Because the niche gaming community are morons).

I disagree. Think about it this way. Video Games don't have to be fun. They have to be compelling and draw you in. Halo is compelling in it's gameplay, Mass Effect in it's story, Flower in it's looks and The Path in it's atmosphere. SotC didn't have the best gameplay in the world, sure, but it had a solid storyline and nice artistic (visual) design, if a bit low-res due to the age. They are ALL valid video games. Sure, normal games are meant to pass the time, but the only reason video games should be called such is because they're interactive.

Fuck, I'll even quote a dictionary for you. Art is the deliberate arrangement of elements to affect the senses and emotions. Now, games like Halo or Vanquish aren't going to affect you emotion too much, but they're still enjoyable. The thing that makes games like Flower, SotC, The Path and Closure so "artistic" is the fact that they are meant to spark emotions.

On a final note, and once again, Video Games. Do. Not. Have. To. Be. Fun. Games are for fun and to pass the time, Video Games are an interactive medium for the transfer of a message. They CAN be purely for fun (such as with CS, or Halo, or Vanquish, hell most arcade games fall in here), but there are video games with a deeper point than just giving the player entertainment.