Video Games are not art!

[Imp Erection]

If a monkey took a dump and smeared it over a wall, there will be a person who calls it art for every person that simply views it as shit on a wall.

This debate is so old and uninteresting now.

This actually happened with paint. An "art critic" called a painting done by a monkey as an amazing art piece without knowing it was done by a monkey

...

Wow. Well, there ya' go! >.>

 

[Ipsen]

Art: the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance. (From dictionary.com)

See, art does have a definition.

From that definition, its easy enough to see that yes, everyone's opinion may differ, but one thing remains true for art; it stands out.

And if you want to resolve this debate, you have to start comparing video games to other VIDEO GAMES. Video games are obviously entertainment,like books and movies, but what this debate really asks is if games are all the same, or hold the same entertainment value. I believe the original poster already answered this, and Im 99% sure all of you can too.

However the 'Games aren't art' comment implies games cannot be art, that's what the argument is about.

'Are not' does not equal 'can not'. So you cant FAIRLY make an implication, one way or the other.

 

[crudus]

Roger Ebert tried to say they weren't art and lost. ok, lets break it down.

Well I may be stating the obvious here, and I may get shot down, but think about it. You don't just say Books are Art, you talk about specific examples from that medium as art, Like the Canterbury Tales or Dracula.
Films are not art, The Godfather and Alien are.

I do say books are art, all of them. Whether they are good is a different matter.

Spoiler: Here's three pictures

The first and second are very famous works. The third is the fifth image I found on google. I am not sure if anyone is going to argue these three images are art, but for the sake of my point assume nobody will argue. Now, the first two are "good" works of art. I don't like the first one for various reasons but I can say it is good. I both like the second one and think it is good. The third isn't good nor do I like it. You can rearrange my opinions and someone will agree with it. The same can be said for books.

It just seems so odd to me now that I think about it, why are we trying to get our medium called art, when we already have art within our medium, Like Bioshock (Which seems to be the mandatory 'this is art' example), Silent Hill 2, Red Dead Redemption, Knights of the Old Republic and even the thief series.

We try to get our medium called art because it is disrespected. We use games like Bioshock and Silent Hill 2 as our leading examples and hide games like Silent Hill: Shattered Memories. Just like books people choose leading examples like Frankenstein and Moby Dick and don't use books like Things Fall Apart to make their points.

Synopsis: Art is an opinion

The word 'art' is incredibly subjective. One man's trash is another man's treasure, and all that.

Spoiler: proof

 

[Guitarmasterx7]

the title of "art" is overrated. If you go into an art museum, you'll find that half the paintings look like someone just mashed the paintbrush randomly onto the canvas until everything was full. Entertainment or intellectual engagement to me holds so much more value.

 

[Ldude893]

You seemed to have missed the entire point, that this old discussion was about.

Ebert said games could never be considered art period. No examples or specific titles are required, he said the entire medium is incapable of being art.

Anything is capable of being art. No one with an ounce of intellect said that games are all art. People only argued that games could be considered a medium, like books or film, that you can find pieces of art in.

It was only Ebert's elitism that prompted him to make such a wildly inaccurate and generalising statement in the first place.

Agreed. Now let us stop bickering about games being art or not, I was sick of this whole debate months ago.

 

[Kurokami]

Art: the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance. (From dictionary.com)

See, art does have a definition.

From that definition, its easy enough to see that yes, everyone's opinion may differ, but one thing remains true for art; it stands out.

And if you want to resolve this debate, you have to start comparing video games to other VIDEO GAMES. Video games are obviously entertainment,like books and movies, but what this debate really asks is if games are all the same, or hold the same entertainment value. I believe the original poster already answered this, and Im 99% sure all of you can too.

However the 'Games aren't art' comment implies games cannot be art, that's what the argument is about.

'Are not' does not equal 'can not'. So you cant FAIRLY make an implication, one way or the other.

If that's what they intend to imply when making such a comment I can, perfectly fairly I might add, make that connection. If a man calls a Homosexual person a 'Fag', or a white man calls a black person a '******', both of which are said with the intent of being offensive, should they not take it so? Hell, if a man calls them black or homosexual with the intent of offense it remains offensive.

You're right, the sentence isn't the same and I'm not arguing with the technical/literal translation, never have either. The OP chose to take that into consideration instead of looking into the actual meaning (in general) behind the comments which is that games cannot be art.

 

[.Ricks.]

Art is a form of expression derived from the artist's vision, feelings or opinions. Game developers transfer their stories, artworks, characters and imagination into a game the same way a Writer does to a Book or a painter to a canvas.

In short, yes games are art and if they are good or not doesn't factor into that. Just as there are good painters, good musicians and in this case Developers there are bad ones and their medium doesn't stop being art for that. There are simply masterpieces and pre-school drawings and even those are art to their creators.

 

[Sephychu]

It's all about semantics.

To me, art just has to evoke emotion.
Games do that plenty.

 

[Hiphophippo]

The question isn't whether or not video games are art; it's whether or not they can be art. And since anything can be art, it's a stupid question to be asking in the first place.

Sadly, this creates that fucking annoying loophole where some douche can colour a canvas black and sell it for a couple million bucks at some cheap-ass cafe in a rural town.

Then it was still art to at least one person. You and I might think that's ridiculous but we don't speak for everyone.

 

[Rakkana]

I'm fed up of these stupid threads! Art is subjective! Everybody knows this!

 

[Tipsy Giant]

The question isn't whether or not video games are art; it's whether or not they can be art. And since anything can be art, it's a stupid question to be asking in the first place.

Sadly, this creates that fucking annoying loophole where some douche can colour a canvas black and sell it for a couple million bucks at some cheap-ass cafe in a rural town.

If some douchebag wants to throw a Mill down the drain on a black canvas thats his business, he is nowhere less valid than spending that on a da-vinci painting, one is art to someone and one isn't, who is to say who is right, noone thats who

 

[Tipsy Giant]

The question isn't whether or not video games are art; it's whether or not they can be art. And since anything can be art, it's a stupid question to be asking in the first place.

Sadly, this creates that fucking annoying loophole where some douche can colour a canvas black and sell it for a couple million bucks at some cheap-ass cafe in a rural town.

Then it was still art to at least one person. You and I might think that's ridiculous but we don't speak for everyone.

Ninja'd to the point, dang

 

[Superior Mind]

Interesting hypothesis but I would say it is completely incorrect. You're saying that art is determined by quality and quality of art is purely subjective. The films you named as art, The Godfather and Alien, I know people who've found one or both of those films pure garbage. I myself think Citizen Kane, another film which I'm sure you would consider "art", is a boring pile of mediocrity.

There is such thing as good art and bad art, (which is of course subjective to the person experiencing it.) By your reasoning their would be no such thing as bad art and art would exist because of some unspoken status quo of what is deemed to be "good".

I'm sure you had some great epiphany with that one but in the whole "what is art" debate I'm afraid you earn a C-.

 

[Blogg10]

One man's trash is another man's treasure, and all that.

I take it you've visited the Tate then?

 

[Mr Pantomime]

The Only thing that is art is Karumak's avatar

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Games are an artform, therefore they can be used to form art.

Straight definitions. Straight proof.

 

[TiefBlau]

Hello, now that I have your attention let me explain this.
Now before last night I was one of the biggest champions of the whole 'Games are Art' Bandwagon, but then something occurred to me... There is not one form of medium that is actually art, because that's not how it works.

Well I may be stating the obvious here, and I may get shot down, but think about it. You don't just say Books are Art, you talk about specific examples from that medium as art, Like the Canterbury Tales or Dracula.
Films are not art, The Godfather and Alien are.

It just seems so odd to me now that I think about it, why are we trying to get our medium called art, when we already have art within our medium, Like Bioshock (Which seems to be the mandatory 'this is art' example), Silent Hill 2, Red Dead Redemption, Knights of the Old Republic and even the thief series.

I feel as though I've just said something too obvious to have really gotten the point, but to be fair, people often miss the main point whilst looking to far into the big picture.

I think literature is art.
I think movies are art.
I think video games are art.

But even putting that aside, you are arguing semantics. Even using your terms, the majority of people saying "video games aren't art" are implying that "no video game can be considered art". This includes Bioshock, Red Dead Redemption (haha), and KotOR.