Proof that video games can be art

[Rylot]

I feel weird about 'art' games like this one. I love art. Simple pencil on paper drawing is something I've done since I could hold a pencil. Art is both a stress reliever and a passion of mine. So why the hell do I hate 'art' games like these so much? Granted with games like this is more of a cerebral artistic concept than a 2D image on a flat plane with some sort of residue, but I like concept art and the avant-garde is something I briefly studied at college with a lot of enjoyment. But I still don't like these kinds of games, I wonder why that is?

 

[Drakmeire]

Better example would be One Chance on newgrounds.
In the game you play as a scientist who must save the world from an illness but you can choose to work all week, spend time with your family, or generally mess around. The real value of the game comes after you finish it.
If you decide to play again you will be sent to whatever ending you got and the game refuses to let you play again (there are ways to bypass this but it defeats the purpose) meaning Yes, you did only have One Chance and now you must live with your choices.

 

[l3o2828]

Well in my first go i disobeyed most of what it said.
When it asked me my gender i said man, i only obeyed when the voice asked me to stay still
I dunno what the voice represented, it could be ourselves looking for acceptance within our own actions and by our own actions, it could be society rewarding us with a lack of freedom setting the standars and calling us ugly or dissapointing if we dont act our part out.
Sheesh, it could even be a representation of our mother,who she always loved us but deep inside wanted something different from us.
It is indeed art.
I mean, everygame is art.
This one is particularly easy to go all philosophical about,but it ain't that great.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Here's a fun argument, art is boring, games are fun, if a game is art, then it no longer qualifies as a game, and vice versa. I actually saw someone make this argument and then realized that I personally hate art, and I'm tired of this stupid argument, games are games, who cares about what other section of anything they fall into other than "horror, RTS, RPG, FPS ect."

I hope you don't get too angry about people quoting you for this comment, but I hate this argument so much. Understand I'm not really angry with you specifically, but everyone else who says this. I ask you, would movies be better without Citizen Kane, Would paintings be better without Van Gogh, would fantasy or RPGs even exist without Tolkein, who's books are largely academic in meaning and purpose? Art can even be fun. Lord of the Rings is fun. So are Pixar movies, which I would call art. Art is a good thing and video games could do better with more of it.

OT: I think video games are art because the making of them is a verb. This means that it is a medium of expression. Within my personal definition of art form, That makes video games an art form. That being said, most games, as nouns, are not art. Some are though, and they are all pieces of entertainment within an art form.
I have played that game before and I mostly disobeyed. Don't remember how it ended all too well. I really liked it though.

 

[Rude as HECK]

Ok, let's bring the argument back from "Are games high art"- which people seem to want to argue- to the facts of the matter:
Music is regarded as an art.
Storytelling is regarded as an art.
Character design is regarded as an art.
Oh, fuck, you say that something that combines these three elements- and more- isn't an art? Well, that rules out movies too.

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

(my definition) Art: Something made semi-objectively with the primary purpouse of being enjoyd by non physical means. I've thought that back and through for hours, I'll think that back and through for hours more and probably find something illogical in it and change it, but right now that's the only rational definition I can think of for art. So at least for the moment, to me games are art.

The sad part is, whether or not something is art is an entirely pointless question.

And fuck, I just thought of something wrong with that. And I don't know how to fix it.

You know what, fuck it I give up. I just don't care anymore.

Edit: playd the game. The ***** (it's a woman because of glados, just so you know) Lied to me in the beginning for no reason so I proceeded to do everything against her will.

In the end she asked me would I go or be close to her, and I chose close because she seemed pretty omnipotent and it would be sweet living with someone like that. So she basically told me to go fuck myself with my varied choices and start over. Well FUCK YOU. I'm not playing through this again, your controls where shit and your puzzles were mediocre.

 

[TheGreatAndPowerfulZOG]

Alright, here's my issue with "art games": Most of them, this one included, seem to have been designed completely around a single metaphor. While it's neat to play this, or Jason Rohrer's Gravitation, it honestly feels a little gimmicky. It's just such a simple mechanic, I don't think it justifies the minimalist style. If you think about minimalist Film or Paintings or Music, is the meaning immediately clear? Is it even clear that there is a "meaning"? Metaphors should be weaved into a work of art, not be the entire inspiration behind the work.

Personally, I feel that art is entertainment, and entertainment is art. The only difference is the level of sophistication and thematic harmony. I think of Mario Galaxy as a work of art, because I think it's brilliantly designed and evokes emotion, even if that emotion is just what you might call "fun".

 

[Use_Imagination_here]

(my definition) Art: Something made semi-objectively with the primary purpouse of being enjoyd by non physical means.

That is the almost polar opposite of art. That would mean that art is solely the process of your rational mind. Which it definitely isn't.

Discussing wether or not VGs are art is actually a bit important, since art has been one of the ultimate expressions of free will throughout history.

Did you not read the other part of that post where I said that I realised that was illogical?

And how is it an important question? Art is important, that's for sure, but how Is our DEFINITION of art important? Am I going to enjoy a book less if it isn't considered art? NO.

What you decide to label something is completely meaningless compared to how you exprerienced it. It's a pointless question.

Edit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ON0tUATUeP8&feature=related watch that.

 

[EvilPicnic]

The game was not as good as the Stanley Parable as far as that message goes...

And in relation to your main point, surely your assertion that this is 'evidence' of art is meaningless, as art is almost entirely subjective. Art is only what we all agree art is.

Games will be considered to be art when we consider them to be art- nothing more and nothing less. And just because I personally consider something to be art doesn't mean you will, or should.

The only area I can see this as having any 'meaning' is in the area of government funding for the arts. On a personal level it is just that: personal.

 

[Savagezion]

You know, I couldn't even get through one playthrough because the controls pissed me off too much. I wasn't seeing anything particularly clever about it and I found it wasn't an enjoyable game because my control over my actions was horrid. Execution is just as important to art as the idea behind it. It isn't just about what the artist is trying to convey, but how well they execute the design. This game fails very hard on technical merit.

 

[EvilPicnic]

Why is defining ANYTHING important? Think about that.

And in relation to your main point, surely your assertion that this is 'evidence' of art is meaningless, as art is almost entirely subjective. Art is only what we all agree art is.

So is your mum (and science, biology, scissors, chinese food, a grape, an omelette, a grape omelette).

But unlike scissors or grapes, art (and the scientific method) are intangible. They are social constructions which only exist because we agree they do.

Without getting too philosophical, a grape exists as something whether we categorise it as a 'grape' or not, whereas I think that without society the abstract concept of 'art' would not exist at all.

My only real point was that, as I believe there is no definitive agreement of how to categorise something as art, it is impossible to produce 'evidence' to help the case. It's not a 6legs=insect situation.

 

[Luke5515]

Maybe I'm the minority here but I see no artistic merit in this game whatsoever.
In fact, I see few redeeming qualities about it as a game. Nothing about that felt meaningful, deep, or even entertaining.
I truly believe that games can be art, but what the hell was that?