Would you play an art game?

[Stall]

Well, would you? I'm not talking about a game with artistic elements, a game containing art, or even an artistic game, but a real, in the flesh arthouse game. I don't consider a game that contains art to be art itself, or even an artistic game to be art. There's a fine, but notable difference between being art, and simply containing it. Now I think that games have proven they have the ability to be art, but no one has capitalized on it. I don't believe a true arthouse game exists yet, primarily because the legal definition of art is just now including games, so hopefully a game created for the sole purpose of art will come up someday or another. However, please don't dwell on this... it's not the purpose of this thread.

Now, before you say yes, I want you to think about it. I know the whole 'GAMES ARE TOTALLY ART MAN' movement is popular on this site, but I honestly want you to think about it. To get a better perspective on it all, I advise you to watch an arthouse film if you never have before (watch The Seventh Seal or something). If you have never watched an art film before, then you are in for a huge culture shock. Art films aren't fun. They are a huge chore to watch: You usually have to sanction time out in your day to sit down and watch one, and they are incredibly challenging to sit through (not only because of the typically slow and methodical pacing, but because of the simple content you are being fed). The biggest thing is you will garner no enjoyment from finishing it. Odds say the movie won't end on a happy note, and since the film itself is so challenging, you'll probably walk away confused and hate the film. Most art films are like this.

So, what's the point of an art film then? It's understanding it. Unless you cheat and read an synopsis of the film, it will take you a while to understand what you just watched. You'll have to digest the imagery, symbolism, themes, and all those big words you learned in freshmen English. THEN you'll enjoy the film. The enjoyment of art films comes not from watching it, but from understanding it. This, I feel, is the major factor that separates Hollywood films from art films. A Hollywood film is meant to be fun. It might make you think a little, and be kind of artistic, but it's ultimate goal, beyond all else is to entertain. Arthouse is there JUST to make you think. It doesn't care about entertaining you, or making you laugh, it just wants you to think, and understand it.

Honestly, I speculate an art game will be very similar to arthouse films. Yeah, yeah, don't talk about that interactivity crap. It's not going to make it any more entertaining... if anything, the developer might actually use the interactivity of games to make your experience more miserable to drive home a theme or something. Even further, it will probably be a huge chore to play, and offer little in the way of entertainment value. It will have a slow pace, and move along at a pace it thinks appropriate-- not what you think is appropriate. Beating it will probably not leave you with that "gamer's euphoria" or give you any sense of accomplishment. It will be there to make you think, and unless you want to sit down and really analyze the game (I'm talking about analysis like literature, as in deconstructing the game's analogies, and looking for thematic meaning... like the stuff you did in school), then you will probably end up totally hating it. Arthouse games are going to be just like arthouse films: you will end up enjoying it because you understand it, and interpret it, not because its fun in itself.

So, would you play an art game?

 

[Swny Nerdgasm]

Is the game well made and enjoyable? If the answer is yes, then I would play it

 

[Stall]

Is the game well made and enjoyable? If the answer is yes, then I would play it

I can't help but to feel that you didn't read my post, and just replied based on the title. One of the points I tried to emphasis is that playing an art game itself probably won't be enjoyable at all. The enjoyment will come from interpretation and understanding of the game... not from the game itself. It's not like our current perception of games where you can have fun playing it. The only enjoyment you will probably get from a real, true art game is sitting down and analyzing it.

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

not based purely on it being artistic. Fun gameplay is MUCH more important than graphics.

 

[Android2137]

...So... can you give me an example of what you consider an art game? Because otherwise, I can't fully understand your definition...

 

[TestSubject4]

I dunno, playing a game just to analyse it's elements that lead to an overall theme and message could be fun in itself. Silent Hill kind of had these elements about it as far as interpretation of imagery went. But it would be a near impossible task to make a game based around this concept at all. Simply put you have to be a part of the experience in a game and that tends to put a large barrier between sitting and thinking when there is doing to be done.

I would give it a go, but I have no idea how this could play out.

 

[Racecarlock]

I played through one chance and every day the same dream. One chance was alright, but every day the same dream pretty much turned me off of art house games.

 

[jacobythehedgehog]

Epic Mickey, Drawn to Life, Okami. They were all art games i would say. Eternal Sonata was about music composeres, Music is an art, and yes. All of these games were fun

 

[viranimus]

I have played Art games, and Would continue to do so.

I think the problem here is that your basing your argument that all art games are impossible to enjoy, which is very very incorrect.

Fun is not the only form of enjoyment.

Now take a game like Demon's Souls. It is the furthest thing in the world from being a "fun" game. More often than not, its a game that has even the most dedicated cursing and spewing vile and venom. That is not fun. But the people who persevere and continue playing it, get enjoyment out of the challenge of it.

So.. assuming all games have to be fun Is pretty short sighted and representative as to why the medium has seemingly been stagnating since the rise in popularity of FPS games like Halo/Call of Duty and World of Warcraft that all share this same baser aesthetic.

Edit: Art games. I can only presume, But I think what the OP is referring to is games such as Coil, The graveyard, The path, Endless forest, etc. Games that forego many conventions of gameplay mechanics in order to make a more artistic experience

 

[HumpinHop]

I saw a number of the type of films you're talking about, and part of me shudders at the thought of them being turned into games. Only a part of me though.

Films like 'Dreams' by Akira Kurosawa were fascinating to me. It broke storytelling down to 10 parts and gave each a central theme, and the monotony-breaking originality of it made me love it despite not much at all happening on screen.

However, there's another spectrum that disgusts me. I had to sit through an hour and a half of ten cars crashing into one car, and a man fixing an elevator shaft. Of course, there was some message hidden in it but part of a movie has to be inviting you into searching for that message out of genuine interest, not for its own sake.

I had never thought about a video game in the same realm as those two films, but the idea of it sounds too unique to really pass up. Heavy Rain is the only game I've played that could possibly compare to this concept, and I adored it.

 

[Stall]

...So... can you give me an example of what you consider an art game? Because otherwise, I can't fully understand your definition...

I don't think an art game exists yet, so an example is quite impossible to ask for. Like I said, I think all the games that have come out up to this point have just been artistic, or contain art... and none of them have been the gaming equivalent to arthouse films. Perhaps there is some super obscure game that is can wholy be considered an art house game. It's all rather abstract right now. Like I said, if you watch an arthouse film, then I think you'll get a much better idea of what I am talking about.

But it would be a near impossible task to make a game based around this concept at all. Simply put you have to be a part of the experience in a game and that tends to put a large barrier between sitting and thinking when there is doing to be done.

I don't think that it is impossible so much as that it is just now becoming a reality, so people haven't yet had a chance to explore games as an artistic medium. Everything up to this point has kind of just been trying to demonstrate gaming has the capacity to be art. Who knows? It might totally not work for that exact reason. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Epic Mickey, Drawn to Life, Okami. They were all art games i would say. Eternal Sonata was about music composeres, Music is an art, and yes. All of these games were fun

Those aren't really art games. An art game isn't about art, and their priority isn't to entertain above all. An art game is there to make you think and understand it, sit down and interpret it. Write theses about it. Those games you listed are kind of like the Inception of films... smart compared to what you normally see, but not really art. As I said, there's a difference between artistic and simply being art.

Like I said, if you haven't watched an arthouse film, then you might have a hard time understanding what I am trying to say.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Well, I like some art-house movies, so there's no reason I wouldn't like some art-house games. Generally though, I don't think most art-house games and movies are very good. Not that they're not enjoyable, but that they're kind of banal and nowhere near as deep as their creators would like you to think.

 

[Fenix7]

The Path is one of my favourite games(?) SO I guess that my answer is yeah. I do love me some artsy stuff.

Also Okami IS art.

 

[Stall]

Now take a game like Demon's Souls. It is the furthest thing in the world from being a "fun" game. More often than not, its a game that has even the most dedicated cursing and spewing vile and venom. That is not fun. But the people who persevere and continue playing it, get enjoyment out of the challenge of it.

Demons Souls is probably my favorite game of this generation, and one of my absolute favorites of all time, but I don't think the analogy is particularly useful here. Not only do I find the game incredible amounts of fun. Nor is it even that challenging... above all else, it's just a gloried memory game. It's a game that can certainly be enjoyed rather 'conventionally'.

And that isn't entirely what I am talking about. I'm not talking about an artistic experience, but I am talking about a game being a bona fida work of art. Watch an arthouse film to get an idea of what I am talking about. If you haven't watched one, then you might not have a good grasp upon the topic at hand.

The Path is one of my favourite games(?) SO I guess that my answer is yeah. I do love me some artsy stuff.

Also Okami IS art.

I don't think Okami is art. It contains art, but isn't art itself. I think this is a fundamental flaw a lot of people tend to make when talking about video games and art: they think containing art means it is art. I haven't played The Path, so I don't know if it is just an artistic game, or is an actual art game. There's a difference, like I said.

 

[Double A]

I thought art was subjective. For instance, I consider Portal as a work of art - and no, that's not my inner fanboy talking. I also consider Oedipus to be art, and that was somewhat entertaining.

However, if you mean something like those crazy-ass (typically) black and white indie films that pompously believe that if you don't understand it, you aren't worthy to watch it, then no, I would not play one.

 

[goodchild]

So, you mean something like SHADOW OF THE COLOSSUS, right? I mean, it's this enormous and beautiful world that you have to traverse, with no real direction other than "find the big dudes and end them". These instructions are given to you by a disembodied voice. the only other person in the game besides you is the girl you are, we think, trying to save who is currently in some sort of coma. You and your horse ride around the unfamiliar land, taking this disembodied voice at it's word without a question, and do so silently - there is no music in the game save for when you are facing the giant enemies.
The lack of musical score, and in fact the complete lack of NPCs truly creates a solitary experience for the player - no other game has ever made me feel so alone and helpless as I played through it. As for typical emotions, these are right out the window. Who is this girl I am maybe trying to save? Don't know. Whats her relation to me? Never really told.
And yet, the scale of the world, and indeed the scale of the 16 enemies you face (well, 15, there is that one little dog one that pissed me off) is so massive against your puny size that you cant help but feel emotions - ones that other games try incredibly hard to evoke with cinemas and dialogue, and usually don't come even close to this.
When you see a colossus in front of you, you see the weight of the world and all it's agents trying to get in the way of your life and your goals. Sure, you may only have a sword and a bow, but you're gonna climb up that giant freak and take him down, and nothing is going to stop you. By the end, you're feeling invincible, elated, and ready to get your love back. Did I know the coma girl was a love interest? Did I, as the player, project my own emotions into the game's architecture?
The game provided a truly haunting, lonely, and beautiful adventure unlike any other - it evokes high emotions by abstract means - and though it leaves questions at the end, still manages to be wholly satisfying. A true example of a game as art.
I can't wait to play the next game by Team Ico, THE LAST GUARDIAN - if it ever comes out.

 

[redspud]

Meh I'll play any game once and if I like it then awesome.

If not then I'll trade it in. Simple as that.

 

[Drakmeire]

I believe I have played an art game
One Chance
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/555181
the whole point is that there are no retrys if you attempt to play again, it goes right back to the ending you earned, there are ways around that but the point remains the same. I think that pure art games don't quite have the staying power that fun games do but if they don't overstay their welcome they can be very interesting.
Also I have tons of fun watching art films. EraserHead is one of my favorite movies and watching it with friends to see their reaction is priceless. in art the fun lies in interpreting the meaning behind it, not so much the journey itself. but even things like Psychonauts puts you into worlds that don't quite work on our logic, the Milkman level is a perfect example. starts out fun and clever but slowly the feeling creeps in that maybe this world is much darker than it seems.

 

[viranimus]

Snip

Yes I do understand what your saying. While Demon's Souls may not be the best point of reference it suits the situation well enough to illustrate the point.

As for Art films and Art games, I still assert that your making an incorrect assumption almost as if that everyone has trouble understanding art films, or that things like interpreting symbolism and subtext is a difficult thing to do for everyone.

I also think that the definition your applying to art films is some what off center as well because your line of reasoning states that Art films want to be understood and that is a narrow view of what Art films are. Art Films are more about expanding what the medium is and can be. Sometimes films dont want to be understood. Sometimes they are made purposely vague so that the viewer can make their own interpretation of what they just experienced and not try to force it into pigeonholes for easy digestion. Some of the best ones are those that you will still consider the scenarios even years after seeing it, many times driving you to see it again to see it with a different perspective.In art films often there is no right or wrong way to interpret them as much as it is the viewers job to come to terms with the experience.

This is why I feel the medium has moved beyond the "games" moniker as it no longer accurately reflects what the medium is capable of. But much in the same way art films expand what the medium is by expanding our understanding of it, so too have art games expanded what we consider to be games. I mean yes we can have a game that boils down to a competition of killing, But we can also have games that force the player to consider if they would be able to slay an infant for the survival of themselves and everyone they know and love and how to cope with the decision one makes for good or ill.

Anyway... I think the real problem is not that games are not art, or games are meant to be fun, its that art is a subjective term based on subjective experience in a subjective existence. So trying to force what is art into narrow confines based on personal inability to enjoy and appreciate a different form of art is fairly limiting and the problem is not the medium as much as it seeing it down a narrow reticle.

 

[NoeL]

I've played one - it's called Mondo Medicals (Google is your friend). I enjoyed it, but I don't think I'll bother to play through it again.

EDIT: I also enjoyed The Path.

Epic Mickey, Drawn to Life, Okami. They were all art games i would say.

Lol, I hope you were being ironic Having a draw function doesn't make something art - by that logic the MSPaint program is art.