• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Video games as art controversy/Roger Ebert....

C

crackhead_bob

Member
Okay, I'm not privy to this debate, but have been aware of this in passing over the years. What was this controversy about? Who was trying to perpetuate this? Was it born of noble intentions, and did it get hijacked from the Gamer gaters? It just seems that for a brief moment this hobby had a real shot of gaining respectability.

For the record, I was always apathetic on the whole debate. And I never took umbrage with Mr. Ebert's contention that video games were not art. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that I was aware of his health difficulties, but even if he was healthy, I don't think that it would have affected my opinion. Why did they need Roger Ebert's validation, of all people?
 
U

Ultima_5

Member
Cuz he was one of the most valued critics of his time with a long career despite it being for a different medium
 
M

McDougles

Member
crackhead_bob said:
Why did they need Roger Ebert's validation, of all people?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure, but some people took the lack of validation really hard.

hawBBlA.png
 
D

danm999

Member
Movies/TV were the medium most recently accepted as having artistic merit by society before video games and Ebert was a big deal in criticism. His opinion was thus seen as relevant.

IIRC he later recanted his hard line and admitted he was no expert on games.

Gamergate led to a bunch of wacky contradictions since some of its followers misidentified the push for "games as art" as a cause for what they saw as the politicisation of games. Hence Ebert's quote resurfacing.

Of course the movement was full of contradictions like that; they begun holding up Jack Thompson of all people.
 
J

Jon Carter

Member
I don't know why gamers feel like the medium won't be taken seriously unless it's considered art. I don't think it's art - for basically the same reasons as Roger Ebert - but I love gaming and it's a serious medium. Being or not being art doesn't matter. I play more games than I read books or look at paintings and sculptures, and I find more enjoyment in playing video games, I just don't put gaming in the same category. It's just a label.
 
S

shoelacer

Banned
A lot of the stuff in that article predicates on the idea that if a medium has an end goal, it can't be art, and the subtext I got IIRC was that the subjective experience of games, video or otherwise, negates auteurism, and the strength of the message of a work defined its validity as art. He concedes in it that a lot of the debate lies in definitions, but he also didn't play the games he refutes as art and it detracts from his argument - "braid lets you rewind, and in chess that would be called taking backsies and ruins the game, and so I can't imagine learning anything from being able to get a do over"

It's an interesting article but I think his view on 'art' is a bit narrow, which is surprising cuz he seemed like a relatively grounded, unpretentious guy.


Also Gamergate wasn't a thing when this happened lol, thank christ
 
D

DocSeuss

Member
crackhead_bob said:
and did it get hijacked from the Gamer gaters?
Click to expand...

what the fuck?

It's very simple: nerds have always wanted legitimacy. Nerds get pissed when people don't treat their hobbies as legitimate. One of the few film critics who's still reasonably popular (or was before he passed) answered a question saying games aren't art, because chess isn't art. He was technically correct, but it didn't stop gamers from throwing a hissy fit.

No, this has literally 0 anythings to do with gamergate, which occurred more than a year after Ebert's death.

What is up with people trying to blame all the bad shit in games on gamergate? Are we just trying to find a convenient boogeyman to blame all of gaming's ills on instead of admitting that gaming has had a shitload of problems for years? This shit predates gamergate. Gamers have always been idiots.
 
C

crackhead_bob

Member
Jon Carter said:
I don't know why gamers feel like the medium won't be taken seriously unless it's considered art. I don't think it's art - for basically the same reasons as Roger Ebert - but I love gaming and it's a serious medium. Being or not being art doesn't matter. I play more games than I read books or look at paintings and sculptures, and I find more enjoyment in playing video games, I just don't put gaming in the same category. It's just a label.
Click to expand...

Some good points made. I never considered games as art, but at the same time, I never considered television or film as art for that matter. My skin crawls when people declare a movie as a "masterpiece", even if I happen to like the film.

Could the games as art argument stem from a desire to protect it from what would be equivalent to what were the Hays laws in film? That I can get on board with, but as someone posted above, some of these people have thrown in with Jack Thompson of all people. I'm old enough to remember the days of Joe Lieberman and William Bennet, when they waged their culture was on the industry. Roger Ebert may have never understood or respected the video game medium, but at least I know he would have defended it more rigorously than some of the people who demand that this hobby be branded a more elevated distinction.
 
M

More_Badass

Member
crackhead_bob said:
Some good points made. I never considered games as art, but at the same time, I never considered television or film as art for that matter. My skin crawls when people declare a movie as a "masterpiece", even if I happen to like the film.
Click to expand...
That seems like an odd position. So what qualifies as an artistic work? Do you consider books or music art?
 
C

crackhead_bob

Member
More_Badass said:
That seems like an odd position. So what qualifies as an artistic work? Do you consider books or music art?
Click to expand...

I'm always hesitant to declare anything art when describing its qualities or lack thereof. Oftentimes when I see people appropriating the "art" label, it's done with the tacit purpose of patting themselves on the back. I think it's been abused, quite frankly.
 
B

brianmcdoogle

Member
Shauni said:
I don't think it was that. I don't...think. I'm really not that sure, though, it could be interpreted several ways.
Click to expand...

Someone should post his Macklemore tweet just to get all the idiocy from him out of the way. (well, the iceberg of it)

Anyway...

If I remember correctly, Ebert came at it from the side that games contain artistry (music and so on) but on the whole it is hard to label them as art and not just games because of the interactivity of it all and lack of auteurism. If I'm remembering correctly, his supposition was something akin to "If games are art, then chess is art because craft and artistry goes into making chess pieces, and no one would really consider the game of chess to be art in and of itself", or at least "high art". I very much may be misremembering. Lots of endless debates on definitions and whatnot that never went anywhere of substance.

The Gamergate stuff that someone mentioned makes this a bit thornier. People who play games don't want to admit they are playing games (usually targeted to children), and instead want to be partaking in serious art along the likes of film, books, poetry, and paintings. The problem is that if you then treat games as art, and dissect them, their culture, influence, and so on, you run into a giant mess of racism, misogyny, and other political issues. So then you have two camps: those that want to bury their heads in the sand and those that go "wow, games and gamers are kind of terrible and we should point them out and improve on them!". But, both groups want games to be taken seriously because it is their hobby of choice.

There's also a rush to get gaming going as an artistic form despite how young it is. Not to say that film criticism and artistic criticism didn't exist in its infancy, but a lot of it blew up post war. And, because it is still young, a lot of the dialogue and discussion is driven by young white men who either didn't go to college to study this type of stuff, or didn't go to college at all. (i.e., a lot lack what the general idea of criticism is supposed to be which is something you really really see in popular youtubers)

At least we moved on from the incredibly stupid argument of "where's the Lester Bangs of game reviewers".

Lastly, here's my ridiculously stupid hot take: We as of yet don't have a "Citizen Kane" of gaming, but we have something... The Birth of a Nation of gaming:
Super Mario Bros.
! And I'm serious in this nutty comparison.
 
J

Jintor

Member
Yeah Ebert's basic POV was that since the authors ceded authorial control to the players, he didn't consider that games could be art.
 
G

GiantBreadbug

Member
DocSeuss said:
what the fuck?

It's very simple: nerds have always wanted legitimacy. Nerds get pissed when people don't treat their hobbies as legitimate. One of the few film critics who's still reasonably popular (or was before he passed) answered a question saying games aren't art, because chess isn't art. He was technically correct, but it didn't stop gamers from throwing a hissy fit.

No, this has literally 0 anythings to do with gamergate, which occurred more than a year after Ebert's death.

What is up with people trying to blame all the bad shit in games on gamergate? Are we just trying to find a convenient boogeyman to blame all of gaming's ills on instead of admitting that gaming has had a shitload of problems for years? This shit predates gamergate. Gamers have always been idiots.
Click to expand...

I'm not particularly invested in this debate (games are art tho), but the chess thing is probably some of the dumbest shit I've ever heard.
 
M

More_Badass

Member
crackhead_bob said:
I'm always hesitant to declare anything art when describing its qualities or lack thereof. Oftentimes when I see people appropriating the "art" label, it's done with the tacit purpose of patting themselves on the back. I think it's been abused, quite frankly.
Click to expand...
I’m not talking about “look at how important this is, it’s art”. I’m talking something literally being an artistic work, ie a work of creativity, often expressing ideas or themes or reflecting the creator’s values and perspective
 
C

crackhead_bob

Member
More_Badass said:
I'm not talking about ”look at how important this is, it's art". I'm talking something literally being an artistic work, ie a work of creativity, often expressing ideas or themes or reflecting the creator's values and perspective
Click to expand...

I usually acknowledge the craftsmanship in making a game, but I never really put any further thought than the effort tbh. I guess I'm more interested in the divergent, volatile path the debate has taken in recent years. Does it deserve respectability as many contend, or have we as consumers squandered that good will for a variety of reasons?

I really think the heat that Roger Ebert took was unfortunate. And I speak as a long time game enthusiast.
 
redfox088

redfox088

Banned
I just wish he came with a better example if he was going to regret saying it. Great game. Better examples exists.
 
M

More_Badass

Member
Conkerkid11 said:
A video game is like the culmination of every type of art though. Dunno how people could see it any differently.
Click to expand...
That’s pretty much how I see it. Video games collect the elements of every other non-painting/sculpture art form - film, music, literature, drawing/graphic arts, etc - under its own unique umbrella
 
Y

Yoshimitsu126

Member
I think critically acclaimed games that critic and consumers enjoy that makes non-enthusiasts stop and go "wow" when seeing it action are a work of high art. Such games include Resident Evil 4 (the beginning), Breath of the Wild (almost anything in the world map), and more.

I think some video game soundtracks are a work of high art too like Mega Man 2. Listening to that for the first time in 2015 was weird since it sounded so retro yet modern.
 
D

danm999

Member
Conkerkid11 said:
A video game is like the culmination of every type of art though. Dunno how people could see it any differently.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree. Basic and common definitions of art all centre around it being an expression of creativity into a medium, whether written, visual, audio, etc.

How that excludes video games is a mystery to me. They very often have cinematography, performances, music, dialogue, character, plot, sound design, visuals, etc.
 
B

Brandon F

Well congratulations! You got yourself caught!
Smellycat said:
How am I supposed to interpret this tweet?

"Good riddance"? Cause that is what it reads like
Click to expand...

I only view the tweet as meaning, “Shame he passed just as yet another example of the medium’s further foray into art acceptance releases, this is the one that would have convinced him surely!!”

Which is kind of horseshit anyway, but Bio Infinite hype turned everyone into lunatics at the time.
 
B

brianmcdoogle

Member
More_Badass said:
That’s pretty much how I see it. Video games collect the elements of every other non-painting/sculpture art form - film, music, literature, drawing/graphic arts, etc - under its own unique umbrella
Click to expand...
Is Tetris art? That has no narrative, no “film, literature,drawing/graphics”. What about the board game checkers? Also, video games can and have taken place in real space, so why discount painting/sculpture?
 
A

AmayaPapaya

Banned
Video Games are art, IMO. Even the run of the mill COD is art, cause it's someone's interpretation of how something should look given some design goals. Someone has to make it, and make it with a vision. Even if it is just a twist on another idea, it's still that interpretation. Ofc, the meaning behind that art is kinda pointless, but it is there.

I've always thought MGS2 was pure video game art, though. The way it considers the player in every aspect is just so unique. The Witness is also great in the way it portrays itself.
 
C

Conkerkid11

Member
Brakke said:
So is a McDonald's commercial.
Click to expand...
What's this post supposed to mean?

PatThePassive said:
The themes and ideas in games are a lot weaker then films (although there's plenty of shit films)



GOD DAMN
Click to expand...
You can't just clump all video games together like that and say that video games as a whole have themes and ideas weaker than those in movies. That doesn't make any sense.

And how does that reaction to what that poster said make sense? How is film an art form, but advertisements not?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Poll
Haiyaaaa! - Nigel Ng (Uncle Roger)'s social media accounts suspended in China, probably due to commentary in upcoming comedy special
News
17
2K
violence replied
Tomb Raider I-III Remastered – features detailed, new key art Revealed
News 2 3
112
8K
MonkeyClaw36 replied
What is your definition of a perfect, timeless video game?
2 3
134
4K
Vol5 replied
Are Japan’s console and mobile game markets shrinking in favor of PC games? Developers discuss
Opinion Game Dev
39
2K
Randall365 replied
  • Locked
How The Last of Us became 'the greatest story' ever told in video games
Opinion Analysis 2 3 4 5
203
17K
Elysium44 replied
Top Bottom