Since when was art purely about looks? A video game that was to be considered art would have to have that very art incorporeated into the gameplay. I know Flow or whatever the name was called itself art, purely based on looks, but I wouldn't agree, that's like making a movie of still pictures without sound and calling it art. It should encompass the entire medium, and the games medium is about player input, about gameplay. That gameplay has to be a part of the artsy experience, as well as visuals and audio for a game to be truly considered art. Sort of like Myst.sv93 said:Thirded, if a game looks good and plays like crap what is the point of playing it? Why not just watch some videos of it on the Internet?Hunde Des Krieg said:SecondedBored Tomatoe said:No, I would not.
But you'd read a thought-provoking book even if it wasn't fun, wouldn't you?-Zen- said:I would not. Just like I wouldn't buy a dull book just because the font's pretty.
We're talking about art, not aesthetics. Good books with ugly fonts.-Zen- said:I would not. Just like I wouldn't buy a dull book just because the font's pretty.