Are videogames art?
Can an escapist medium be art in the first place?
If there are times when a game is not fully playable (as in cutscenes, or even loading screens), does it mean that it's not fully using its full potential?
Considering things like "Interior Semiotics" are considered art, does it even matter?
Is "art" an empty word that means nothing anymore?
Discuss.
Everything in a game is deliberately created, and a game is the sum of several separate media arts in collaboration.
I don't see how you could view them otherwise with the amount of creation that goes into any vidya
Anything can be art, but not everything is art.
Super Metroid: Video game art through gameplay and atmosphere
The Last of Us: "Art" that's just shallow aping of techniques from film
>>345322662
>Is "art" an empty word that means nothing anymore
pretty much this. it's a word people use to make a difference between what they like and what they don't
Reminder that video games were already the subject of an exhibit at MOMA:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_games_in_the_Museum_of_Modern_Art
Notice, however, that Tetris is there while Gone Home is not.
The problem is that most developers who want video games to be recognized as art are doing it all wrong. They're putting all the emphasis on the non-interactive elements and claiming that games should be considered art because of this. Sure, you could say an individual game is a work of art because its story is a work of art, or because its music is a work of art, or because its visuals are a work of art... or all three. However, if you can remove the interactive elements from a game without sacrificing any of what makes the game a work of art, then the game isn't doing anything for video games as a medium. If video games as a medium are to be considered an art form then it must be for the features that actually make them games. Developers need to strive for excellence in game design, rather than simply injecting gameplay mechanics into a pretentious short film.
If architecture is an art form, then it's not because architects like to hang paintings on the walls of the buildings they design. It's because the talented architect will bring a unique kind of excellence to the actual design of the building itself, and do things that cannot be done in any other form of art. The same should be true of video games if they are to achieve that same status.
If you think Tetris can't be art because it doesn't have a story, you're the kind of person who is preventing video games from being recognized as a distinct form of art. As long as you have your way, and story-driven games are put forth as the new art form, the video game will not be taken seriously because everyone will continue to think that a video game cannot achieve greatness without taking everything from film and doing it slightly worse.
>>345322662
define art
>>345323161
Tetris is a work of art because it's concept and design does not require words to get across what the objective of the game is. You could show it to an alien and they would be able to understand it.
>>345322662
>things like "Interior Semiotics" are considered art
I hope you don't think that this is the mainstream opinion. If you do, I'd like you to try to prove it.
I've never met anyone who thinks the definition of "art" includes pulling spaghettios out of one's vagina in public. Perhaps the person responsible for the "performance" depicted in that notorious video thought it was a work of art, but part of the reason that the video was so notorious is that everyone else thought it was completely batshit insane.
By calling it art, you're implying that everything can be art if the creator treats it as such. If that's the case, then just find one video game developer who says his work is art, and you've answered your own question.
>>345323128
>aping of techniques from film
you mean great dialogue, character development, real—nuanced conflict.
oh.
>>345323224
would it matter?
A game doesn't need to be called "art" to be preserved, it needs excellent game-design
Something like Tetris where the game design is so simple it would never age could be considered worthy of a museum (and thus, "Art")
Something like the new Doom is not a simple design. It in fact has a few contradictory design choices and probably wont be preserved beyond the fans who recognized it as an excellent reboot when all signs pointed otherwise.
This is just the general public too. You are going to keep the games you enjoy and play and replay them. You'll preserve what you want to, which should be enough for you.
Why would you even care what everyone else decides is worth saving for as long as they could?
art:
San Francisco Rush
Bastion
Codename Gordon
not art:
Cruisin' World
Transistor
Half-Life 2
>>345323161
/thread
When you were a tiny kid, playing your collection of Gameboy games, or whatever, did you really care about art, or whether you were experiencing art?
I didn't, and I still don't. I don't need meaningless labels to reaffirm something I'm interested in.
I don't see any large movements for people who are interested in sports, fishing, hiking, gardening, etc, to be declared as art, so why should I need it for games?
>>345323651
If you're trying to use film to create your story you already fucked up
Film needs a cohesive and interesting story to support an entertaining movie. Even comedies need a structure to the universe they establish to set up jokes and deliver punchlines, otherwise the joke feels nonsensical and "cheated".
Games benefit fro ma cohesive World but the story itself is usually dictated by the player through interaction in the world. This allows you to project into the game and feel an immersion without creating a depth-full story or plot.
Even the most tripe story or bland world can be made compelling to revisit through fun gameplay (eg: Mirrors Edge)
>>345323836
>Cruisin' World
>not art
get over yourself that game was golden refined art it the most pure sense.
>>345323224
shitty question but ive heard art described as something a person makes intentionally that people take as art be it unintentionally (tetris) or on purpose (tony smith - die) and critique it as such.
if a wide enough audience agrees that something is art and intellegently judges it as such then it BECOMES art.
>>345322662
Daily reminder that Duchampfags are the worst and literally ruined art in all its forms
>>345323651
>you mean great dialogue, character development, real—nuanced conflict.
I'm not the guy to whom you're replying, but I do think its fair to say the inclusion of these things in video games is an imitation of film and other media. These things do not need to be included in video games. Do we need a reminder that the most fundamentally defining feature of the video game is the "game" part? A video game is a game which uses video to interface with the player.
"Great dialogue" and "character development" and "nuanced conflict" are not features of the video game as a medium, in general.
Furthermore, exactly one of the following is true:
1) These things are not required for video games to be art. In other words, all that is required for a video game to be appreciated and enjoyed as a work of art is simply that which makes it a video game, i.e., the gameplay.
2) The video game is not a truly distinct art form.
>>345322662
>Is "art" an empty word that means nothing anymore?
Yes. By some crazy new definition, anything that you call art, automatically becomes art.
>>345322662
Video games are a recreational activity, like any game (bar some of the greats, like Chess, which have artform to their simplicity.) Video games are also generally overproduced or very thought out to appeal to the widest common denominator.
People that develop walking sims and have the audacity to call it a game need to get the fuck out and make a new medium, "Interactive Movies" or something of the like, so people that like video games don't have to hear about gone homo all the time.
Matter of fact, people that don't play games for the gameplay first and foremost need to just fucking die. God damnit.
>>345323224
>Art is a diverse range of human activities in creating visual, auditory or performing artifacts (artworks), expressing the author's imaginative or technical skill, intended to be appreciated for their beauty or emotional power
took 5 seconds to google
if someone takes a shit and says "this is art" it's not art. anyone can do that as a natural bodily function, no imagination or skill needed
if someone takes a shit and turns it into a burning hula hoop using only toothpicks, it might not be my kind of art, but it shows skill and imagination so it is then art
>>345324106
this.
people's need to validate their lives by putting meaningless labels on things is pathetic.
if you are having fun with vidya who cares if it's """"art"""?
>>345322662
Videogames are not artand that's a good thing
>are video games art
No, because they are games.
>>345322962
None of those separate media arts are games.
>>345323836
No. Either all games art art or no games are art.
>>345322662
>Are videogames art?
No and they never will be because they're a commercial product and so are tied to rules and regulations that would make the product sell the most. As long as vidya is shackled, it can't blossom and express at its fullest.
>>345324329
fair, but my point is that he was implying that the game was worse because of its film-like qualities. which i disagree with because what was done that was similar to film was done much better than a large portion of films, and the mechanics, while not particularly deep, were fun. on top of that the 'semi cutscenes' where it was quiet and you could explore optional dialogue put together with the world that was very believable makes me think it accomplished more than it could have as a film.
maybe not the best representation of videogames as art but i think an artful experience nonetheless
Not all art is good, you dip.
>>345324693
Art is art no matter who pays for it, and no matter how it's intended to be used.
AAA shit and Indy shit are both games.
>>345322662
no, they just have artistic elements in them
>>345324330
>anything you call automatically becomes art
It certainly feels this way
I think the issue is the environment in which "art" is developed. Usually those making fine-arts or creative works are told to use their imagination and create anything. While I thinks it's good to create anything I think understanding what we wish to see more of is also important.
If you approach critique objectively the radical end proposed is that every creative work will have to meet a spreadsheet of requirements before it is held on a pedestal.
If you go the opposing radical end everything is worthy of praise, free of a standard (which seems a bit closer to where we are).
Like all things in life I think it's a balance of both. We need to articulate what we appreciate and think detracts while still allowing an air of mystique to keep an open mind to other creative works.
I'm sure there are artists that take criticism well but we will only hear of those that took it poorly (Suck his dick, choke on it). You might get the false impression that all artists are so immature but remember that art is an economy dependent on popularity; if an artist refuses criticism and never improves their work fades to obscurity and their income suffers as a result.
>>345324693
>they're a commercial product
So what? Somebody paid renaissance artists and classical musicians to make their shit. It didn't happen out of nowhere. Money is essential in art.
>>345324617
>None of those separate media arts are games
Paints are not paintings, I don't understand what you're arguing you're right, a component of games is not the full game itself but that has nothing to do with art
>>345324398
you didnt address whether you think games are art, you just whined about """"forward"""" thinkers.
>literally no content in your post, why respond
if a)
>you think games are art
how are games that explore different mechanics less of art?
b)
>games are not art.
>what is music
because all you said about games
>recreational
>oversaturated
>lazily made
apply to contemporary music as well but its hard to say that music is not art.
so i ask how come those things prevent games from being art but not music?
>>345322662
No. The better question is, what are some ludic video games? That is, a game so refined in its gameplay and deserved to be called a ludo.
>>345324617
>Either all games art art or no games are art.
again i argure this with
>what is music?
Nobody can tell me Super Mario Galaxy isn't art
>>345325231
You clearly don't understand the difference between a commission, and a product created for mass consumption.
>>345322662
>old and stale bait on /v/
>watch it get max replies
>>345325510
Nothing on /v/ except bait gets max replies.
>>345324106
>I don't see any large movements for people who are interested in sports, fishing, hiking, gardening, etc, to be declared as art, so why should I need it for games?
The "movement" to treat video games as an art was started and is still perpetuated by shallow normies who are ashamed of their love for video games and want to feel less pathetic. These people primarily include "video game journalists" who regret their career decision and would rather attempt to make the subject of their writing more respectable than simply get another job.
Unfortunately for us, they don't mind ruining the industry in order to accomplish this. They will shill anything with an "emotional" story even if it's not fun; they will shill anything with progressive undertones and diversity even if it's not fun (not that there's anything wrong with diversity per se); meanwhile, they will absolutely shit on anything they perceive as not being "grown-up" and "mature" regardless of who good it is. That's the game journalist's number-one objective -- to appear "grown up" and "mature" -- and, with that goal in mind, they usually feel the need to distance themselves from actual fans of actual video games.
If videogames not being art keeps the artfags away then I welcome videogames' non-art status.
>>345325510
>thoughtful discussion about art on MY /v/ NORMIES OUT REEE
thats how you sound faggot.
Try making a videogame for yourself then and then ask yoursel if it isn't an art/craft.
Thats all there is too it, don't let other people define you, live on your own terms.
>>345325690
In his defense, this is a common subject for bait threads.
For example, see this one (although it failed to get many replies): >>345290837
>>345325485
Tons of commissions are created for mass consumption, you dumbass. Mozart operas, architecture, Shakespeare plays, etc, weren't created for like 5 people. The whole world works on money. Once you're older than 25 you might realize this.
>>345322662
>le toilet XD
Wasn't that done by a guy who was so talentless he decided to basically make a giant shitpost since he couldn't do anything actually worthwhile?
>>345325620
i agree but would prefer it be people understand what makes the art of a videogame different than that of an album, painting, or film.
>>345325580
i think people arent vying for sports, fishing, hiking, gardening, etc. to be considered art because while there may be art in some of them (tying flys, arranging flowers, refined excercise and formation planning) the hobby in question is not considered a medium in parallel with music, film, liturature, sculpture, and painting.
games are being lumped with that group but still not considered art which begs the question as to why isnt it art and how is it less that its counterpart?
>>345324693
>>Are videogames art?
>No and they never will be because they're a commercial product and so are tied to rules and regulations that would make the product sell the most. As long as vidya is shackled, it can't blossom and express at its fullest.
This is a stupid meme.
No one outside of /v/, and certainly no dictionary, claims that the definition of "art" precludes commercial interests.
Furthermore, and more importantly, what you've described does not apply to all video games.
>>345323161
Well said dude
>>345325620
not artfags. pretentious hipsters. call them what they are.
>>345322662
A better question is: how does it matter?
>>345326109
>Fountain is perhaps the best known because the symbolic meaning of the toilet takes the conceptual challenge posed by the readymades to their most visceral extreme.
>Tomkins notes that "it does not take much stretching of the imagination to see in the upside-down urinal's gently flowing curves the veiled head of a classic Renaissance madonna or a seated Buddha or, perhaps more to the point, one of Brâncuși's polished erotic forms."
he was shitposting ahead of his time
>>345326109
>he couldn't do anything actually worthwhile?
But he did
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89tant_donn%C3%A9s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bride_Stripped_Bare_by_Her_Bachelors,_Even
>>345326603
Nothing I love more than nonsense written as if it were serious.
>>345326109
No, it's a pisstake. People take that shit way too seriously in both directions. It's not a masterpiece, it's a joke not enough people realized was a joke. If you think "modern art is shit," you should love Fountain, because that's what it is implying.
And Duchamp has some pretty awesome paintings.
This discussion is retarded. ANYTHING can be considered art. If I think that a piece of dog shit smeared across cardboard evokes an emotional response, I am allowed to claim that it is my art.
If shit-covered cardboard and movies can be considered art, why the fuck can't videogames? I would argue that video games are the coolest form of art invented by humans so far. Keep in mind, there is still bad art. If a painting sucks, there's nothing stopping you from telling the artist that they're a faggot (unless they're dead)
>>345325993
fair, but the thread is a lot better so far. a lot less shitflinging.
>>345326109
well, no. his sculptures are about the art in everyday things particularly manufactured goods. read about conceptual art and figure for youself if it has cultural significance.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conceptual_art
>>345326568
see >>345326178
>i think people arent vying for sports, fishing, hiking, gardening, etc. to be considered art because while there may be art in some of them (tying flys, arranging flowers, refined excercise and formation planning) the hobby in question is not considered a medium in parallel with music, film, liturature, sculpture, and painting.
>games are being lumped with that group but still not considered art which begs the question as to why isnt it art and how is it less that its counterpart?
it matters the same way a lot of art matters in the sense that people WANT it to matter. if something is culturally significant then it IS significant and its hard to deny that videogames are not impactful and significant. therefore i think that it is at a point where people should be considering whether it is art. and that (in my opinion) makes video games art in the sense that they are being judged as such. (see>>345324218)
Art is all about freedom of expression, so games that hinder that quality cannot be artisitc
>>345326341
No, he's right. All those legendary Renaissance painters and sculptors? Total capitalist hacks, working for commission.
>>345326686
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bride_Stripped_Bare_by_Her_Bachelors,_Even
Holy fuck.
>>345327134
>>345327079
we are talking about the creation of games not what is possible within an individual game.
>>345326917
no. art is considered art when most people have that it may be art in their mind and judge it as such.
>>345327134
je ne vois pas le problème
>2016
>ne parlant pas français
honhonhon.jpg
nigga you what
the arist is expressing, not the audience
I can't scribble on the mona lisa, is it not art
>>345324106
I played Super Fucking Metroid and it clicked in ways i couldn't describe back then.
I label it as art. It's a great piece of discussion.
The pink depths music was beautiful and eerie, setting the tone perfectly.
Norfair depths OST made me cum buckets before cum was produced in my body.
>>345326917
>ANYTHING can be considered art.
I am crying. You are not ironic, you are serious. This is the average internet poster in the XXI century.
>>345325275
>>345325463
Music is not a game.
>>345327517
He isn't wrong. You're just pretentious.
>>345322662
>"Interior Semiotics"
Already off the rails with the OP, OP?
Neat.
>>345327321
>most people
Art is not a democracy. Art is subjective.
>>345327517
How is he wrong?
>>345327523
but they are both mediums which was what i was trying to get across.
>>345327517
He's right. Art is one of those weird subjective things that you can't place an overall metric on.
almost anything is art. this post is art, u stupid faggot
>>345322662
I recently had the chance to view that piece of art you posted in reality, on a trip to Paris.
Needless to say I was blown away by it's sheer impact on my aesthetic sense.
Videogames can NEVER accomplish something like this. Duchamp is a genius.
>>345327792
>Art is subjective.
whether a piece of art appeals to you is subjective yes but whether a medium is considered an artform is dependant on culture and so yes, it does base it self on the popular opinions.
>How is he wrong?
he is not.
>>345322662
Art is in the eye of the beholder. Some people consider a painting of a can of Campbells soup to be art. Others consider it to be a fucking waste of time and paint.
Noël Carroll, one of the most based philosophers on aesthetics, argues that not everything is art but, under the right conditions and presentation, everything can potentially be art. With the amount of conceptual anxious objects and dadaism in galleries (the OP pic is still possibly the greatest example of a ready-made), it's pretty obvious that the ability of something being art transcends its medium, therefore, at least according to academics, there's nothing stopping a video game from being art. That, however, doesn't imply all vidya is necessarily art as a whole.
This is just my personal opinion on the subject, but I think a video game becomes art when it reaches either the sublime or transcends its own medium to the point of self-reflection. The former could be represented by video games that try to engage the player in the most meaningful and ethereal experience they possibly can, whether by providing an aesthetically unique setting (for example, the remarkable world building in some triple A vidya like Grand Theft Auto or Bioshock, or the fantastic art direction in something like Catherine or Mother) or by presenting a storyline surrounding strong characters and themes (say, Spec Ops: The Line when it comes to exploring existentialist themes, or Modern Warfare and its parallels to the war on terror, or even Firewatch for a somewhat some personal arch following self-reflection), or even by simply providing a unique gameplay that works with a minimalist or even nonexistent narrative, like Dear Esther or LSD Dream Emulator. On the other end, something like The Sims or Stanley Parable, which directly or implicit comments on the values of the medium, would better fit into the latter as self-reflection.
>>345328019
>almost anything is art. this post is art, u stupid faggot
what did he mean by this?
>>345328085
nice irony. Duchamp actually does have a quality about him that does evoke thought when viewing his pieces, but his art is not to appeal to your aesthetic but rather pose questions on what makes an aesthetic good (i think) and that piece in particular questions whether art—or at least appealing aesthetics—can and shiuld be found in manufactured objects. its kind of the point of conceptual art.
best post in the thread
it's already been said but you articulated it the best
>A cult hit that still gets discussions
>Excellent story writing
>Excellent gameplay and controls on the entire saga
>Music is toppest of notches
>Morally grey characters with motivations all around
>Illusion of choice or reality bending will
People just haven't played much videogames to judge. Millenials are taking over right now, and they can't know.
>>345328363
1) its not a painting its silkscreen
2) its not about the soup its about the IDEA
warhol made hundreds of those campbells soup cans, and he made (not each individual one) them for a reason, and that is why it is art. fuc head
>>345328423
i agree with Noël, if thats actually what he believed, and see where your coming from but i think that games that are artful in ways that other mediums cannot achieve are the best representations of what games are art in a.more pure sense.
It is a functional art. Like Architecture or Engineering.
Most literal statement: Anything that is not farming, is art, ergo, Video Games, and how you play them, are art.
Counter Point: No other type of media NEEDS input like Video Games do, so they cannot be art.
All I could think about on the subject.
>>345329000
Forgot the fucking VOICE ACTING
Michael Bell and Simon Templeman discussing philosophy with such a sexy voice. RIP Tony Jay, his voice forever buried in my mind.
>>345328989
that frame is tacky
>>345328720
Ty anon, I tried my best at an alright exposition.
These threads are actually pretty interesting, a pity there still isn't any cohesive work written on the aesthetics of video games. IMHO, it's actually kinda fascinating to think about the future of interactive art.
No, fuck you, it's time to stop this madness. EVERYTHING is not art. No, saying NOTHING is art is also dumb.
Please, PLEASE, if you didn't study art after high school, you have no idea, zero, of how art works, especially modern art.
No artist ever in the story of humanity ever thought to say something as dumb as "everything is art". Because it doesn't work like that. No, your scribble made while listening to a phone call is not art. No, if you right now put your poop in a jar is not art. There is more to it, there is more in the path every artist took. Study, research, life phylosophy, materialapplication of that knowledge. You, dumb poster of an anonymous imageboard with no artistic background whatsoever, are not an artist and have no say in what art is.
Men upon men studied art and artists' lifes. Those are the one that decide what's art or not. Not your silly qualunquist and vague idea of art.
No, everything is not art. Yes, videogames can be art. No, not all videogames, drawings, books, movies, paintings and so on are art.
And it's not being pretentious. It's having artistic knowledge. Something half of you fucks completely lack.
Yes, I am fucking mad. Now I know why mods delete art threads. It's painful looking at ignorant fucks arguing about art. It's heart-shattering knowing out there someone reads your shitty opinions and actually trusts them.
Labeling things is something that americans do, ja?
Videogames are the highest form of art since it pretty much requires everything to craft. Art, Design, Music, Engineering.
Games are also the highest form of human autonomy, since you can decide what to do and not someone else.
Like Facebook and other social media, it can also be a subsititue for escapisism.
>>345328085
How bout this?
>>345328495
"It is our role as artists to make the spectator see the world our way, not his way" - some shmuck, but it sounds pretty adequate.
>>345329163
>herding is art
>farming isnt
faschist pig.
but to be serious i disagree all three of those points.
>It is a functional art. Like Architecture or Engineering.
no it is not. there arent problems being solved by art or videogames. art is for A) money and B) arts sake (be it a message or pure art)
>Most literal statement: Anything that is not farming, is art, ergo, Video Games, and how you play them, are art.
again no. pencils are not art, dishwashers are not art. theu may be used to make art, there may be artful things within them but they alone are not art, as are many things. which it why asking whether something is art is important.
>Counter Point: No other type of media NEEDS input like Video Games do, so they cannot be art.
input is not indicative of art so again no.
Is art video games?
>>345329275
>not liking kitsch
>>345329498
who is that meant for? most people are arguing that not everything is/can be art. most people agree that its about the expression.
>>345329626
ja. well its actuallu a western idea so it includes europe too but ja
>>345329915
not as a whole no.
>>345329798
I would say art solves the problem of the artist needing to communicate.
>>345329498
>You, dumb poster of an anonymous imageboard with no artistic background whatsoever, are not an artist and have no say in what art is.
>No, if you right now put your poop in a jar is not art. There is more to it, there is more in the path every artist took.
if I shit in a jar and presented in a gallery and it was accepted then it's technically art
fuck off wario you don't make the rules either
>>345325463
Music is a sound lmao
How can it be art?
>>345329498
tldr (You)r post
>>345329498
>letting people with ""art"" degrees have the final say in what counts as art
Haha no
I still don't see this boundary between art and not art that so many other people claim to do. The only difference I care about is good art vs bad art
>>345323161
>Modern Art
LOL, video games confirmed not art
>>345331247
and thats why exactly he is mad. not knowing anything abiut the history of art and the what art is academically is exactly what he is frustrated about. you dint need an art degree, just the ability to think abstractly and take a single art history class.
>>345330646
lmao its just non lol who even cares?!?? XD
>>345330719
its kinda a good one, it gets less retarded in paragraph 2.
>>345331435
>look, i know notheng about art and representative art has no meaning or value
>>345322662
Who the fuck cares wether or not it's art? Only people who do have shit taste in games, I'm just here to play vidya.
>>345322662
>Can an escapist medium be art in the first place?
All art is escapist.
>>345331667
literally no content in your post, why respond?
>>345324585
That guy made that piece after critics called his art "shit". So his reply this was basically "If you think I'm selling shit than I will."
>>345331765
Literally no content in your post, why respond? :^)
>>345331664
Modern Art, as in the genre of Modern Art, is 100% shit. Contemporary art can be good, but not if it is Modern Art.
>>345331690
No, it's fucking not, holy shit. There is also art about politics and society. Stop talking in absolutes, goddamn it.
>>345322662
In general, absolutely not but some games can and should be considered art since the job done on the atmosphere and back ground scenery is excellent.
I'm thinking about Portal series on it's narrative and scenery, however, that alone make worth the check.
What I think the issue here is, can GAME DESIGN be considered art ? If we rely on the background, the narrative, the scenery or the music, we will still miss the point of what makes a game. It's the game mechanic that makes it a video game.
The portal mechanic give a whole new dimension of thinking, but is it art ?
I think what we need to do is to discover which game /v/ would consider art, pill up them then find common theme on what makes them feels like 'art' then maybe we will be on to something.
video games are art in the same way cave paintings are art.
>>345331981
>impressionism, cubism, and minimalism are 100% shit
do you kniw what you talkeng about? do you? the age of modern art is over. contemporary art that mimics modern art is often celebrated but what your thinking of is art as a commentary of what art is and has become and is intentionally shit AS A COMMENTARY THAT CRITICS WILL EAT ANYTHING UP AND MASS AUDIENCES WILL PARROT THE CRITICS.
this new movement of art AGREES with you you fucking idiot.
open a fucking book.
>>345332326
some games. cave painting was to tell stories if im not mistaken so sometimes yes. but not all games. (see tetris)
Art is a word so versatile, it means nothing. Whatever you take away from the experience of playing a game (or anything else) is yours, don't concern yourself with how significant the work is on a greater cultural level. Sometimes you'll take away nothing, other times you'll discover something a bit more profound, but what you do with it is up to you and nobody else.
![00173721[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/u4MNVkM.jpg "00173721[1].jpg")
>>345323161
There's a really cool exhibit at the MoMA that's part video game, part art exhibit. It's by an artist named Feng Mengbo and called Long March Restart.
The game spans two walls in a darkened exhibit hall. Players use a wireless xbox controller to move a Red Army soldier through 14 different levels comprised of sprites ripped from many different games. The soldier throws exploding coke cans to defeat a diverse cast of enemies including Mario, Ryu from Street Fighter, and an Alien from Aliens.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yBZl4g872uw
>>345332862
ahahaha.
That's an adorable exhibit.
Videogames are already art, no matter if you like it or not.
If you have never heard of CoryArchangel you shouldn't even be allowed to post in this thread.
>>345323161
Saved to my Wise Anons folder
>>345323161
pretty good, only 'Passage' was also in the MOMA and it's exactly the same shit
>>345322662
you can make music just by singing
you can make image or composition from nature
video game developers can't even relate properly yet their work with the nature of physical games and sports, not to mention reproduce it beyond the medium of PC
>I had to debate this in university
>>345323224
artist makes art work enjoyed by an audience (but hurr durr art can be made for it's own sake - the artist is merely creating art for him to look at, in a sense he is his own audience)
the process, it's parts and the product make up the definition of art, which is why people confuse the importance of the individual parts
>>345334883
Are you trying to say that anything that requires technology is not art?
>>345335481
no but what we traditionally consider art is something that man can reproduce beyond the means of his medium
and video games are also self contained within the medium they are created which relies not only on technology but on the socio-economical (whether you're well enough off to afford video games) factors for it's access and function
If the author makes a game with an artistic intention, then it's art. Whether you like it or not.
Simple as that.
>>345335481
he debated in school. his point is to dodge your point/questions to make himself seem more correct.
>>345335927
youre gonna make a great politician one day.
>>345335927
That didn't stop artists from employing technology in order to create more art to the point that digitalization is common across all traditional art disciplines. Going back 7000 years isn't going to make art better and I don't think that requiring technology invalidates cinema, photography, cooking or videogames.
>relies not only on technology but on the socio-economical (whether you're well enough off to afford video games) factors for it's access and function.
Also, saying that video games can't be art because they require money is complete and total bullshit and contradics what you've just said because money is a human abstaction and thus technology and you are saying that technology isn't important for art.
>art is hard to define
>therefore, everything is art!
I don't get this sort of thinking. So because it's hard to define with exact boundaries what art is and isn't, we should give up and just label everything as art? Instead of studying, thinking, pondering, and growing intellectually as we continue to debate the artistic merits of some work or another, we should just go for the simplistic, and intellectually undeveloped view that everything is art, just because?
>>345339289
Art is a pretty broad term for starters.
video games are art, because they convey a narrative and meaning can be derived from the mechanics
>>345340151
but that same meaning can be derived from film so its useless to convey it as a game when it would be easier as cinema.
>>345329275
It is SUPPOSED to be
>>345322662
er, I wouldnt call it art exactly but yes you can measure the quality of a videogame for sure
compare rogue warrior to another shooter like halo or cod or what have you
one is a piece of shit and the other is a "masterpiece"
similar to how one piece of art is shite and another is a masterpiece
most people can look at the mona lisa and understand why it is great but for a videogame you have to play it to understand why its great
>>345322662
that is from 1917. could you imagine ironic shitposting in 1917? that's what it is
>>345340323
not always
you could not transfer Antichamber into film, because it's dependent on 3d geometry.
Things such as agency (a popular topic in games) and metacognition are suited to the toolset that games have, even if hey haven't been taken advantage of.
Also It being easier doesn't matter at all.
>>345340323
>but that same meaning can be derived from film
That same meaning can also be derived from 96pt Helvetica written on a billboard, which would be a lot easier. Art isn't only about communicating a prescribed meaning.
A video game has (two of these may be occasionally omitted):
-Visuals, which in its many forms are considered art.
-Sound design, which in its many forms are considered art
-A story, which in its many forms are considered art.
Why does interactivity ruin its place as art?
>>345342378
You completely missed the point.
>>345322662
>>345340894
i missed the "derived from mechanics" i was focused more on the 'narrative' point. my bad.
>>345341207
again. i was talking about narrative which is used to indirectly convey and symbolically represent. in the sense that a narrative is easier to achieve with film than a game.
>>345323161
well put.I still think Gone Home takes nearly full advantage of it being an interactive medium, though, hence the way the story is told through the environment for the majority of the game rather than just Dear Esthering the whole thing
>>345323224
money laundering
>>345343970
>a narrative is easier to achieve with film than a game.
[citation needed]
But seriously: Videogames are still in their infancy as a medium. Like film was considered a fairground spectacle in the early days, Videogames have yet to find their cultural footing.
It's not that film can do narrative better. It's just that some narratives are more suited to one medium over another. We just need to look at the videogame-adaptation movies that Hollywood spews out for proof of that.
