Why is it so imporant for video games to be considered art?

[DioWallachia]

I think that you have the answer to your own question.

Quality doesn't determine popularity (directly). The reason video games that the "core audience" appreciates don't sell nearly as well as a modest book or movie is because the barrier of entry is higher. Members of the "gaming" community often take for granted just how much of an investment it is to get into gaming. Sure, since we know that we'll get a return, dropping a couple hundred dollars on a console is not a big deal. On the other hand, it isn't a sure bet for someone who hasn't played a game before. With a movie or a book, one can easily meet the price of admittance without any worry of being stuck with a game that they hate. This isn't because they have "monkey brains" as you want to claim, but because gaming isn't inherently engrossing.

Furthermore, because of the necessities for playing games, they are never going to become huge in a place that isn't economically stable enough to support them, limiting their relevance to the developed world.

Just to get the point straight, the "monkey brains" i refer to its the kind of people that EA aims for their......ejem...marketing, specially the marketing made for Dante's Inferno and Dead Space 2 as illustrated by Extra Credits episode of EA marketing.

As heartwarming that episode may seem, there is one thing that wasn't explained; If you think about it, the notion of a bunch of professionals aiming for a audience that "apparently" dislikes that sort of generalization is counter productive, but nobody is going to waste millons on marketing that they know it isnt going to work, right?? There IS an audience for that game

So the point of this (and sort of the point of this topic) is: Are we complaining about these kind of games because we honestly care or because we are being pressured into it?? As many have pointed out here, most of us like the notion of games as Art so they dont get marked as a waste of time along with the people that plays them, but are we really doing this for a higher purpose since the beggining or we childishly believe that as soon games hit the "Art" mark all the problems will fade away because we were shotting people in the face happily until someone dared...DARED I TELL YOU!! to say that its childish?

It isn't important that we get more people in the gaming community able to speak eloquently about games. We have plenty who are ready and able. What we need is people respected in other art forms that see the inherent value of video games. We have a couple, such as Steven Spielberg or perhaps Guillermo Del Toro, but not enough to make it prevalent. This isn't something that's just going to spontaneously come about, but must simply be a product of video games being a major cultural force, which I would say they have become. Speaking to any person today, there is a good chance that they at least know someone who plays video games. This wasn't true more than a few years ago.

Right, it is sort of like i said about having people that are gamers now to have a job in other mediums to promote games, you know, doing what George Lucas and Steven Spielberg did for the things they love when they were kids.
However, i fail to notice what is missing in this picture because i am pretty sure this people that are respected in other art forms as you said probably had the same problem as us right now; The medium they love didnt get any attention and they had to make OTHER experts in OTHER mediums to recognize their loved medium. They did resolve it in the end and you think that eventually it WILL happen to us now, but it is taking so munch time that you cant help but wonder if in a twist of irony, the experts are just being narrow minded just as the people they fought before or at least being deceived just as them

 

[DioWallachia]

Hey OP, reached any conclusions yet?

 

[Freechoice]

Also, if it's considered an art form, then I believe it acquires a certain amount of protection. Basically, external validation is the path to legitamacy in mass media.

This as well. Although most games fall under the category of art in the same way that a melted Jolly Rancher is considered food.

 

[Waffle_Man]

-snip-

We seem to be largely in agreement. I would fully contend that a number of people who jumped on the "games as art" bandwagon simply did so because they were afraid of censorship. However, I don't think the "true motive" of it all is really important.

I actually considered posting along those lines last year, but didn't. Why? Because I had a realization. When a person says something enough, they being to believe it. Even if the current generation of of gamers didn't really care at the time, they're certainly expending a lot of time, energy, and money trying to make games more legitimate as a form of art. Thus, regardless of the reason, there is a demand for more time and thought being put into games.

Art has never really been given demand from pure motives. A number of individuals who hired artists to make many of the classic works we see today didn't have any where near as much thought about the piece as the artist did. That's what makes art so special. It was superfluous moves of human thought and will. It found a way of appealing to a large audience without compromising it's foundations.

 

[Treblaine]

The question is in the title . Why is it so important for video gakes to be considered art? Does it really matter? If they are considered art , then what? Gamers could pride themselves at being art fans? I just don't see the importance of videogames being considered an artform or not .

Now i am not saying i don't see games as art but art or not i will continue playing videogames . Is it just so the media would see gamers as somethin more than childish adults? If you are ashamed of gaming and need validation from the outside world for you hobby, i think theres a problem .

Discuss

Because if they are not art then they are unlike almost every other type of media, in fact they would be in a category with only one other type of media:

Pornography.

Pornography doesn't have first amendment protections, it's distribution, possession and production is hugely regulated and as such it has REMAINED as pure pornography.

Art means video games get First Amendment protection and remember the Bill of Rights in the United States constitution doesn't make rights... it recognises them as inherent so it isn't just a matter of US Jurisdiction, it is a matter of a very large and influential country as the united states declaring it as true for all people and that they will abide these rights.

Video Games don't have to be "high art" but they have to be recognised as more than mere pornography, there is some significance to it that means the government has no right to trample over it with reckless abandon saying "you can't do this, can't do that, must have this" etc as they so easily could, they could pass legislation saying no exposure of even the existence of such games to anyone under 18, the ability to ban websites entirely.

Art is saying there is some... ANY... meaning to the work, even if it is all about blowing up aliens, is there something of significance to that? A prono is just about seeing fucking, but even Halo tries to have characters and to tell a story that means something in itself. Even multiplayer only games like Team Fortress 2 crafts a backstory and amazingly characterise each role.

 

[Verzin]

someone else probably said this. in a hurry; didn't real all comments.

Answer to your question OP: it protects games and game developers from censorship. also, it encourages developers to actually expand the medium instead of just making carbon-copies of other popular games for the money.