Is Multiplayer art?

[default]

No it is NOT art.

It's just a bunch of models or sprites and balancing algorithms. No story, no narrative, no feeling. Not art.

And you know what? I'd have to disagree that games are art anyway, in the form of the big AAA titles we play (Call of Grittiness, Gears of Gore, God of Gore, Final Irony Seventy-Billion).

My definition of 'art' is something that is deeply beautiful or evokes introspective feeling and thought. Most games do not fall into this category. They are just 'making pictures'. Hell, making pictures of course still takes tremendous amounts of talent and time, but it is not art.

 

[TheRaider]

i think part of the reason for this, is a lot of the games your talking about go for realism and aren't stylized.

WOW has some pretty impressive art and that is multiplayer, as with starcraft 2

 

[Taddy]

You tell me...
Imagine looking at a nice painting, colors are nice and balanced, its very detailed and realistic. Then you see people getting shot in the distance and some guy keeps yelling racist comments in your ear along with a seven year old screaming random words. And while you were watching this another player comes by and kills you point blank and starts T-bagging your corpse calling you a n00b..so yeah I guess that is art.

Yeah pretty much this, but i can't help feel that something is missing...

 

[Firetaffer]

No it is NOT art.

It's just a bunch of models or sprites and balancing algorithms. No story, no narrative, no feeling. Not art.

I find the balance and polish put into a multi-player game to be 'art.' I mean it takes skill and artistic talent to create something that is interesting to use, and well balanced. Team Fortress 2 could be considered a good example, the way everything flows together yet being so different is something that is difficult to achieve. Personally I don't think all art requires a story, narrative, or feelings. Starcraft could be another good example, a counter to every unit, three very different kinds of gameplay. Perfection. It could just be me but this is how I view art.

 

[Enemy Of The State]

because a 12 year old screaming ****** isn't art

/thread.

Ninja'd! Pretty much sums up what a lot of people would think.

 

[default]

No it is NOT art.

It's just a bunch of models or sprites and balancing algorithms. No story, no narrative, no feeling. Not art.

I find the balance and polish put into a multi-player game to be 'art.' I mean it takes skill and artistic talent to create something that is interesting to use, and well balanced. Team Fortress 2 could be considered a good example, the way everything flows together yet being so different is something that is difficult to achieve. Personally I don't think all art requires a story, narrative, or feelings. Starcraft could be another good example, a counter to every unit, three very different kinds of gameplay. Perfection. It could just be me but this is how I view art.

I never said art required narrative or feelings, but that seems to be the only way in my mind most games may accomplish this.

I'm a game designer and artist myself, and believe me, there is a huge line between typing code and animating sprites to do what you want and truly expressing feelings and values through image.

Oh hell, a perfectly balanced machine that works seamlessly is a beautiful thing, but it isn't art.

Aesthetics is the key word I'm going for here...

 

[viranimus]

Yes I would have to disagree on the notion of multiplayer being art.

For one.. Im not aware of (though there well might be) a game that is multiplayer only without a single player campaign. The multiplayer typically does not use new art, new writing, new AI, new mechanics than what exist from the stand alone single player effort. (although I do respect DLC such as map packs do use some new art)

A game can be considered art as a whole product. The single, the multiplayer, the narrative, the mechanics, ect. Considering one piece of the puzzle to be separated from the whole would be like considering Mona Lisas eye a separate entity from the whole painting.

And yes.. 12 year old kids throwing temper tantrums is not art.

 

[UtopiaV1]

I hate these discussions about art, because everyone knows art is subjective, and it's such a piss-weak argument. Art is anything and everything, which is utter bollocks because no other medium follows that ruleset. Music is SOUND, full stop, films are MOTION PICTURES, full stop, and if I hear anyone say "Well, they're both art" then I'm just gonna stop you right there because you haven't been listening (or reading) properly.

If everything is Art, then nothing is Art because, in order to define something, there must be a polar opposite to compare it against. If you can't say something isn't art, then you have no way of knowing what real art is, which lends itself to being a logical impossibility.

No, multiplayer isn't art, because it's not hanging up in the Louvre. (I'm not saying ALL art must be in a museum or gallery, but you get the gist...)