Why do video games need to be art?

[Aurgelmir]

It's a simple question:

Does video games have to be considered art?

I personally do think some games could be considered art, but at the same time I do not think its a big deal.

Games doesn't become any better by being called art. Nor do they get any worse if some off shot fancy pants I have never heard of think it is not art.

Do people need games to be art, so that they feel better about being gamers?
Again I do not understand this, and I highly doubt games being socially accepted goes hand in hand with it being art.

So I ask you once again:

Why do games need to be art?

 

[The Austin]

They don't NEED to be, they just ARE.

Ebert doesn't seem to get it though.

 

[delet]

No, videogames need to be considered a normal form of media. Just like books. Just like movies. Just like TV.

They can be art later.

 

[Mimssy]

If you want to look at art as a medium of emotional expression, then anything that's more than just a hack and slash should aspire to be art. I don't know if I would consider a lot of video games to be art (though there are many that can be art with immersion- like hands on performance art); There is an important artistic quality in storytelling.

I feel like my response didn't really answer anything... oh well.

 

[ReckzB]

This is an amusing subject to discuss, I will say.

A kindergartener just took a piece of blank paper and scribbled random coloured crayon and pencil all over it. His teacher will say "That's some good art, Billy!" and probably pin it up on the wall under a laminated banner made in Microsoft Publisher titled "Kid's Art".

But a game with a compelling story, enticing gameplay, and beautiful scenery is not. No sir. Not so long as a movie critic has something to do with it.

I'm going to stand by my 'art is an opinion' remark...

 

[Pegghead]

I think it's mostly due to the wider community of gamers wanting games to be seen as more than just teaspoon shallow entertainments and things which instantly make you nerdy and that's rightly so.

Personally I think games can be art, and what I stated before is the reason why gamers feel a need for games to be art.

 

[bloodshed113094]

They don't but gaming magazine's need an extra topic sense so very few games actually come out every other month they need a couple filler pages in the months were they haven't enough new or old to talk about. Plus it gives nerds like us something to discuss on down time.

 

[MMETEORAGA1994]

I think the main reason so many gamers (myself included) consider some games as art is because so many others argue that it is not art. When we can't classify a game and need something else to describe it's unique experience, we call it art. And others will argue that it isn't, IMO, because games are still a relatively new media and seen by many as a 'plaything for kiddies' that can't be taken seriously. I would classify these people as ignorant

 

[Enigma6667]

Games are able to create wonderful stories, and brilliant characters, that use the medium to their fullest advantage. And even games that don't have those things at the very least have fantastical environments, a variety of ways to kill someone, original level design, and etc.

People still have no idea what 'art' truly is, but if you're going by definition, art is "the process of deliberately arranging elements in a way that effects the senses or emotions." Even simplistic games like Geometry Wars and Super Mario Bros. can do that, while games like Shadow of the Colossus, Portal, Silent Hill 2, and etc. add some more complexity into it by seamlessly using the interactivity element games have to take full advantage of what gaming can achieve as an art form.

Games are already art, it's just that people seem to refuse to accept that fact. I don't need games to be considered art in order to make myself feel better, because I can just tell myself that Silent Hill 2 > Meet The Spartans and that's all it really takes.

 

[HeySeansOnline]

Anything with creative input is art, even humorous games like Doom, or Painkiller are art do to that fact that the humor is creative. This applies to most games as a whole. Even games that aren't creative at all are art on some points, for example Big Rigs over the road racing is horrible, but some designer put some effort into oh say the trucks, so that technically makes it art in some low way. So In that way almost all games are art. Even If a game called something like "Boob Horror Chainsaw Machine Gun Frenzy IV: The Revenge of Nazi Prince Baadgui" came out, there'd probably be some art In there, due to the inherent work put In a game.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Art doesn't ask to be recognized, it just is, without outside council.

Though I will say, I've cried at more video games than traditional art and music combined. Books are still in the lead though. DAMN YOU, Where the Red Fern Grows! Stop ruining my masculinity in grade school!

 

[Meemaimoh]

Of course they don't need to be art. How many movies released each year are truly artistic?

What's needed is industry-wide recognition that there is an audience (and a relatively large one, at that) for artistic games. Lots of gamers like artistic games because lots of gamers like innovation. By formally classifying games development as an artform, the message can be sent to investors and producers that innovation can be a valid gamble. In turn, we'll see less brown FPS clones on the market and more games like Portal, Braid, Mass Effect - games that are, in one way or another, exciting and new.

Case in point? Portal. Even Valve wouldn't invest enough money in the idea to create a full game, but once they knew the innovative game could be a hit, they set to work on Portal 2, a complete, full-budget title. Imagine if the games industry had a culture in which Valve had enough faith to invest fully in the original Portal. That's what the argument for defining games development as an artform is truly about.

 

[Extraintrovert]

Is it required that games be considered art? Probably not. But humans don't exactly do things because they're required. In this instance, it's because people who enjoy games want recognition, both for the medium as a whole and for specific games they enjoy. By "allowing" them to be classified as art it gives the medium legitimacy, making them substantial instead of "merely" entertainment (which I suspect is something enjoyers of film did not so long ago, before they were considered art).

I'm not sure if I actually answered the question...

 

[Hawgh]

They certainly don't need to be. It's just very irksome when people say that they couldn't possibly be.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Why do you need to make a thread about this?

Why do you need to have an account on the Escapist?

Why do you need to care?


See how easy it was for me to ask a question that's pretty much the same kind of question as the one you are asking now? See how incredibly annoying and irrelevant they are?

In case you haven't gotten it, my point is that the question you are asking is stupid.

 

[Blue Musician]

There are still art games debates lately?

OT: I do not really care. Art is an abstract concept it's supposed to give a message and emotion to some people, but some other won't recognize it, just like music.


There is one game that most of the people that have played can agree tht it's a true art game.

[HEADING=2]The Void[/HEADING]

 

[Audio]

Some of the most memorable and high rated games are 'artistic'. It would be great if game designers took more time with games such as 'shadow of the colossus', 'JetSet Radio' and perhaps 'beyond good and evil'.
Personally, I wait for decent looking games to come out. It is disapointing to see companies poop out so many 'standard' games and charge £30. Where as Ico gets left in the discount bin :'(

 

[NickCooley]

Games are games. I play them to be entertained, whether they're art or not doesn't matter at all.

 

[RYjet911]

Gaming as an art form is pretty much like any other form of entertainment as an art form.

Film has 'classics' like Psycho.
TV has the made-for-TV films (In Britain especially we get the hour long BBC films and miniseries).
Books have Terry Pratchett.
And games have the ever increasing series of games that aspire to be more than just gameplay.

They give the consumer a detailed world in which they are given the opportunity to explore in a much greater depth than any of the aforementioned mediums have. Some games choose to give immensely detailed and descriptive paragraphs to explain every little aspect of the game (Mass Effect for example with its Codex and the ability to gain as much information as possible from everyone) while others make the main character as much like the player as they possibly can (Half Life gives very little of the story away, and the lack of cutscenes forces the player to only know as much as the main character would.)

Immersion is certainly the main factor of something being an art form. The generic FPS's, hack and slash, RPG games etc. that arise miss this out, and therefore lose the ability to be considered an art. Those that retain some form of immersion generally are more artistic. As much as I hate the Elder Scrolls series of games, they have a quality about them that makes them an art. Much like books that can make you feel like you are experiencing the characters' own experiences, TV shows and films that invoke strong emotion over subject matter that may or may not be completely alien to you, works of art that look like photographs, games that are able to accomplish all of the above are certainly works of art in my eyes.

But then that's the problem with arguing over whether it's an art form. Roger Ebert for example clearly does not think of games as an art, and are merely some form of toy for people to get amusement out of. But then I watched Psycho just for the entertainment factor. Perhaps it was my video game induced mind that thought the scene of the woman being killed in the shower that invoked such entertainment factors, like when I emulate the scene on Modern Warfare 2 on the Estate level. Damn those campers hiding in the bathroom!

It's merely opinion, and no conversation about it will sway that. Those who find games art will discuss them as such, those who don't will not. Simple as.