Why does /v/ hate the concept of art in video games so much? Is there really something wrong about wanting to aspire to something higher than just "fun"? Or I suppose that most of you just aren't old enough to understand these kind of things...
Who is this sperm worm?
What's to hate is the discussion itself, because eventually the only logical conclusion to make is that literally everything is art.
Therefore, there is nothing else to be said.
>>341781358
Who is this jizz wiz?
>>341781358
"art" it too difficult to understand for the seventeen-year-olds of /v/. They feel threatened by what they don't understand.
who is this fluid druid
>>341781358
Is that Dodger?
>>341781358
art is subjective and is just a fancy way for snobs to say that something is compelling
>>341781358
I don't like the idea of someone thinking
'I'm going make a really arty game'
And not
'I'm going to make a really good game'
That being said an interactive piece of installation art could very well have major cross over with a video game.
Also the other anon was right when he said that everything can be art so long as you designate it as art so, maybe just ignore everything I've said, I guess?
I think art's fine if it's done right since the medium is evolving to a direction where consumers want experiences and not just simply fun. It's just that the "art" people have their heads so far up their ass where their "games" have absolutely no gameplay at all and do nothing to actually integrate or expand on the medium and just use it as an excuse to make some sort of film. I mean, you could use gameplay mechanics to get the player to feel sad, happy, or simply just to have a good fucking time, etc. but if you simply have them walk around from point A to B so that the cutscene could fucking play or to exposit some dialogue then you might as well make a fucking film because you're not using the medium to its advantage.
>>341781358
The "discussions" of this subject are what's hated, not the concept of art itself. I don't care enough about whether or not they are considered art to argue about it, especially since the classification doesn't actually matter.
Just to summarize, the commonly accepted notion is that IN PRINCIPLE it is impossible for video games to ever be art. If you take a film (art) and add any gameplay, it is no longer art. If you take a painting (art) and put it in a game, it is no longer art. If you take a book (art) and add any gameplay, it is no longer art. Even hundreds of years from now when video games have advanced far beyond the current day, video games can never be art. There is no way to refute this, because this is an inherent property of video games that cannot be changed.
