Support NeoGAF

[Gart]

Who cares, videogames are challenging entertainment, they aren't supposed to be art nor should they try to be

Why not hold videogames to the standards of artistic merit and also demand it to be so? We'll still see the same level of crap like in film but we'd also get better games at the same time.

It's been asked why videogames have to be viewed as art. I want to know why some people are so against it, or for the potential for it to be?

This discussion is going on on CGtalk for anyone that's interested. Less overall cynic tone i think.

 

[MoxManiac]

Why not hold videogames to the standards of artistic merit and also demand it to be so? We'll still see the same level of crap like in film but we'd also get better games at the same time.

It's been asked why videogames have to be viewed as art. I want to know why some people are so against it, or for the potential for it to be?

This discussion is going on on CGtalk for anyone that's interested. Less overall cynic tone i think.

Because the important thing for games to focus on is gameplay mechanics and fun/entertainment.

The desire for videogames to become more artsy screams to me as a request to focus on graphics/art and atomsphere and I think in doing so, core gameplay mechanics will suffer.

 

[Musashi Wins!]

I've become more sympathetic to Campster's postition, but not to it's particulars. Games to me seem important because they reflect our capacity and joy and struggle within play. Which is important. Perhaps as important as any form of art, from cave wall to cinema screen. But narrative is just one (poor) genre of game design, and as far as games ability to employ our need to play and compete, we already have masterpieces, we even have games that are able to refer to other sides of our being, if that is some sort of cultural barrier. The race between film and games is pointless, except to illustrate that genre needs better design.

The real problem, as I see it, is that game designers / players want to be respected for their particular skills and achievements culturally. And to benefit from the freedoms and respect socially. Our culture is a long way from that point, but perhaps closer since so many older gamers continue to play electronic games. And think about their ability to play more profoundly. Our culture needs to change away from it's bias against play and constant refrain of productivity. History shows that this happens sometimes.

If games aren't art, then those poor saps who sacrificed so much blood, sweat, and tears to produce a game are just stupid wage slaves. If games aren't art, all the people on this forum who play for 15+ hours a week aren't increasing their media literacy and spending money on works that enrich their lives; they're wasting away in front of a screen while engaged in the idle passage of time. If games aren't art, I don't see why they deserve constitutional protection as free speech.

I think this statement is as shortsighted as Pascal's Wager, as it assumes something subjective about the bet itself before we begin. It takes the cultural norm fought against as it's starting point. Games don't need to be accepted as art. Play needs to be as respectable as art.

 

[Gart]

Because the important thing for games to focus on is gameplay mechanics and fun/entertainment.

The desire for videogames to become more artsy screams to me as a request to focus on graphics/art and atomsphere and I think in doing so, core gameplay mechanics will suffer.

I guess that goes back to the discussion on the gameplay aspects as art which was probably already discussed. Didn't read this giant thread.

For people that share your view, I think they can rest easy. If I was a designer, I'd hold just just at much value in the gameplay mechanics and fun factor as I would the the visuals, atmosphere, immersion aspects. And I'm pretty damn sure that's how the people working on games, and the up and coming generation that will work on games that view games as art, feel the same way also. Yeah, you'll get varying degrees. Some will emphasis immersion, some gameplay. But overall the standard will go up, or at least the amount of good games will go up. I think people that detract from that viewpoint slow the progression down and do videogames a disservice.

Another thing to remember is that those gaming elements aren't mutually exclusive from one another, so it's hard to talk about one aspect of videogames without talking about the other. The elements are mixed and are intertwined together in different ways depending on the game.

 

[revolverjgw]

Although fun and fine to debate, whether or not this or that is art is of no real consequence, the concept of ''art'' doesn't really have a satisfying definition despite everybody being so enlightened about it. But I do get a little disturbed for some reason when someone says, for example, ''games don't do _____ GOOD enough to be considered art''.

 

[Bowen_B]

DON'T MENTION MODERN ART!
IT MIGHT BLOW EBERT'S CLOSED LITTLE MIND!

 

[DCharlie]

what Ebert fails to realise is most art make awful games.

I stood looking at "Sunflowers" in Amsterdam for hours and there is simply no replay value and the lack of a two player mode really hurts it. One credited it, saw the whole thing in about 2 minutes. Lame.

 

[Helzown]

I love how many of the people in this thread wondering why anyone would care, are so obviously annoyed by it too. "Who cares what this piece of garbage thinks, he's just a piece of garbage who doesn't like video games. It's not like this tool is respected!"

Seriously, who cares. I don't ****ing like grape Kool-Aid. Gonna PM me about it? :lol