Video games as art
-
And I did so on purpose. There are many such examples, and not all were designed to display a middle finger. My point was to simply state that art for some is junk for others, and we each end up being a critic for our own tastes. However, to exclude something as being non artistic is to thumb our noses on all those whose opinion differs from our own. I think discussing games (or programming languages or any other subjective comparison) and stating that something isn't "art" because it doesn't bring something new to the table is like saying that all paintings of a bowl of fruit aren't art because it has been done before. It's an opinion, but not necessarily an accurate one.
DougWills wrote:
My point was to simply state that art for some is junk for others, and we each end up being a critic for our own tastes. However, to exclude something as being non artistic is to thumb our noses on all those whose opinion differs from our own.
I discussed this point earlier on other branches of this thread. I was expressing my opinion. My initial opinion was that it should not be included on that list.
DougWills wrote:
I think discussing games (or programming languages or any other subjective comparison) and stating that something isn't "art" because it doesn't bring something new to the table
I was not using that as a standard to qualify something as art. As mentioned earlier, to me, art should inspire awe; "The definition of art is subjective, obviously. But to me art is supposed to invoke a strong reaction; awe, disgust, self examination, etc." -me. Others brought originality into the mix.
DougWills wrote:
is like saying that all paintings of a bowl of fruit aren't art because it has been done before.
I would say many, possibly most paintings of a bowl of fruit are not art, but not for lack of originality's sake. Many paintings are not art and many painters are not artists. The medium does not make it art, the message does.
-
How so? I think it is an excellent example of great storytelling in a video game and is an amazingly original idea.
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
I'll admit, I went back to play and read some of the game's story last night. Given the list of games that they want to add, I would say it does belong among them. It is a subtly avant-garde (if that can be) game that is different in the modern gaming world of copy cat games. I guess I focused too much on the mechanics and the portals, rather than what really does set it apart. I would like to recommend Earthbound to the list, too.
-
Interesting. I've been an avid gamer for a long time and I've been waiting for games to come along that are truly works of art. I'm still waiting, gaming doesn't have its Citizen Kane yet. Not for lack of quality, games have become really amazing, but the focus is on commercial entertainment rather than art. Most games are like summer blockbuster movies: incredibly well-made and entertaining, but forget about the Oscars. I think that the main problem is the writing, games tend to focus on gameplay (naturally) and writing is often an afterthought, sometimes with comically bad results. Writing is getting better particularly when it comes to dialog (the Uncharted series is a good example), but it's still more like good hack writing for a blockbuster movie, not serious art. Game studios are starting to take the writing and voice acting seriously, so at least we're getting beyond the stage of having a plot thrown together by designers and programmers with no writing background, and voice-acted by whoever is in the office. Pros are starting to be used these days, but it's mostly hack work, because using professional writers and actors is expensive and the safest way to get a return is to make the equivalent of a summer action flick. I think that games are getting there, but the writing needs to evolve before they truly become art. Half-Life (by no means an early game) was revolutionary partly because it actually had a plot, that's how much writing has lagged in gaming. There are some well-written games out there, but not so much on the level of literary art. Many aspects of games such as gameplay, visual art, and music are already often on the level of serious art, but before games as a whole become an art form the writing needs to catch up.
I don't think that I have ever agreed with a statement this long before. Seriously, it's exactly how I feel. I'd love to write for games, yes I can code, too, but I really want to get into game writing. There are only a few people that I currently know of that might be able to write an incredible game, and most of them write comic books or theatre or are dead.
StatementTerminator wrote:
because using professional writers and actors is expensive
This is probably humorous to all but the household names in acting and writing (are there household named writers). I see your point though, and agree, I was just pointing this out, and not at your expense.
-
I'll admit, I went back to play and read some of the game's story last night. Given the list of games that they want to add, I would say it does belong among them. It is a subtly avant-garde (if that can be) game that is different in the modern gaming world of copy cat games. I guess I focused too much on the mechanics and the portals, rather than what really does set it apart. I would like to recommend Earthbound to the list, too.
wizardzz wrote:
I would like to recommend Earthbound to the list, too.
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
-
wizardzz wrote:
I would like to recommend Earthbound to the list, too.
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
-
As the germans say: "Kunst liegt im Auge des Betrachters" means, art lies in the eye of the spectator. There are many many forms of art. I personally think every code we write is a form of art. It all depends of your point of view. What for you is art for others may just be a waste of time and otherwise. I personally would not say that this LINK[^] is art...looks like somebody vomited on it.
Hmm i wonder why its doing that......ARGHS NO STOP, ROLLBACK ROLLBACK...F*** That's how i learned to "Always Backup"!! Dogs are man's best Friend, Cats are man's adorable little serial killer
Art is not a subjective thing, it is absolute and universal. In fact universality is part of what defines art. That art is in the eye of the beholder is a common and tiresome misconception, aesthetics or more generally beauty is in the eye of the beholder, art is not. When you see a sufficiently complex mathematical algorithm, one that escapes your comprehension, you don't say that it is not mathematics, you just accept that you don't have a thorough enough understanding to appreciate its function. Strange how people can't accept their lack of understanding when it comes to painting ,sculpture, music etc. While its true that some art is vastly overrated due to cultural and other influences, any piece of art's merit can be determined in an almost finite manner. There is also the issue of taste, art does exist that I do not 'like' but I still recognise its artistic merit. Anyway, computer games can definitely be considered art but that definition goes way beyond simple (and often hackneyed) aesthetics. Tetris is definitely a work of art, quake also, just as examples. But derivatives that add nothing to the form are as 'none art' when it comes to games as they are in any other discipline.
-
Art is not a subjective thing, it is absolute and universal. In fact universality is part of what defines art. That art is in the eye of the beholder is a common and tiresome misconception, aesthetics or more generally beauty is in the eye of the beholder, art is not. When you see a sufficiently complex mathematical algorithm, one that escapes your comprehension, you don't say that it is not mathematics, you just accept that you don't have a thorough enough understanding to appreciate its function. Strange how people can't accept their lack of understanding when it comes to painting ,sculpture, music etc. While its true that some art is vastly overrated due to cultural and other influences, any piece of art's merit can be determined in an almost finite manner. There is also the issue of taste, art does exist that I do not 'like' but I still recognise its artistic merit. Anyway, computer games can definitely be considered art but that definition goes way beyond simple (and often hackneyed) aesthetics. Tetris is definitely a work of art, quake also, just as examples. But derivatives that add nothing to the form are as 'none art' when it comes to games as they are in any other discipline.
Art is not a subjective thing
I think your wrong there, i don't mean to troll but in my opinion art is mostly subjective. For me art has something to do with talent. I agree that art has many many forms but also there are many many things called art that are just rubbish and are only hanging in museums because somebody had connections to somebody who has influence. I bet you that if i took a picture of my breakfast every morning, frame it and say to (hypothetically speaking) a friend of mine, who has connection in the art world, that this is how my inner feelings are manifested he would talk to his connections and he would sell it, that doesn't make me an artist. so yes Art is very very subjective and defined by society much more as we think. By your definition every picture in instagram could be defined by art even if not every person using who uses instagram isn't a professional or artist. It very hard to define art i know but there has to be a line between what is art and what is not, that line has to be drawn by ourselves and our point of view
Hmm i wonder why its doing that......ARGHS NO STOP, ROLLBACK ROLLBACK...F*** That's how i learned to "Always Backup"!! Dogs are man's best Friend, Cats are man's adorable little serial killer
-
MoMA (The Museum of Modern Art) in New York City has decided that video games are art, and they are opening an exhibit this spring dedicated to this newly declared art. So far they have acquired 14 games for the exhibit. What say you CP? Clickety[^]
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
MoMA wrote:
Are video games art? They sure are, but they are also design, and a design approach is what we chose for this new foray into this universe. The games are selected as outstanding examples of interaction design—a field that MoMA has already explored and collected extensively, and one of the most important and oft-discussed expressions of contemporary design creativity. Our criteria, therefore, emphasize not only the visual quality and aesthetic experience of each game, but also the many other aspects—from the elegance of the code to the design of the player’s behavior—that pertain to interaction design
-
MoMA wrote:
Are video games art? They sure are, but they are also design, and a design approach is what we chose for this new foray into this universe. The games are selected as outstanding examples of interaction design—a field that MoMA has already explored and collected extensively, and one of the most important and oft-discussed expressions of contemporary design creativity. Our criteria, therefore, emphasize not only the visual quality and aesthetic experience of each game, but also the many other aspects—from the elegance of the code to the design of the player’s behavior—that pertain to interaction design
I fail to see what you just contributed to this conversation... :doh:
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
-
I fail to see what you just contributed to this conversation... :doh:
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
I was trying to correct your mis-conception of
Colin Mullikin wrote:
MoMA (The Museum of Modern Art) in New York City has decided that video games are art
No - They have not decided any such thing as such (hence my change of title) What they *have* done is consider games in the context of DESIGN. And I quoted the relevant bit mentioning their selection criteria (as some apparently have missed that bit entirely) - and provided the link once more for those wishing to dig deeper. The games are not selected based on how "artful" they are or not - It's based on their design (with specific definition given by MoMA for what "design" is in this context)
-
I was trying to correct your mis-conception of
Colin Mullikin wrote:
MoMA (The Museum of Modern Art) in New York City has decided that video games are art
No - They have not decided any such thing as such (hence my change of title) What they *have* done is consider games in the context of DESIGN. And I quoted the relevant bit mentioning their selection criteria (as some apparently have missed that bit entirely) - and provided the link once more for those wishing to dig deeper. The games are not selected based on how "artful" they are or not - It's based on their design (with specific definition given by MoMA for what "design" is in this context)
mgkr wrote:
No - They have not decided any such thing as such
Except they did decide that. Read the first part of the quote that you yourself took from the article. :doh:
MoMA wrote:
Are video games art? They sure are...
Yes, they have chosen to focus more on the interaction design aspect of the games, but they are considering them art. After all, they are an art museum, not a design museum.
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
-
mgkr wrote:
No - They have not decided any such thing as such
Except they did decide that. Read the first part of the quote that you yourself took from the article. :doh:
MoMA wrote:
Are video games art? They sure are...
Yes, they have chosen to focus more on the interaction design aspect of the games, but they are considering them art. After all, they are an art museum, not a design museum.
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
Discussing whether games are art or not is all well and good. But doing so with reference to a MoMA exhibition who goes to some pain to explain that the games are *not* chosen based on how "art'sy" they are or not, is mis-representing what that particular MoMA exhibition is about in my opinion. Hence my post to try and rectify that - As reading the responses here seems to indicate most didn't get/read/understand that (in my opinion only of course) And thus could be (mis)lead to believe that those games selected are somehow more "art'sy" than those not selected - In which case they'd make fools of themself... Which could be embarrassing...
-
Discussing whether games are art or not is all well and good. But doing so with reference to a MoMA exhibition who goes to some pain to explain that the games are *not* chosen based on how "art'sy" they are or not, is mis-representing what that particular MoMA exhibition is about in my opinion. Hence my post to try and rectify that - As reading the responses here seems to indicate most didn't get/read/understand that (in my opinion only of course) And thus could be (mis)lead to believe that those games selected are somehow more "art'sy" than those not selected - In which case they'd make fools of themself... Which could be embarrassing...
As a rule, I try not to compare different mediums of "art" to one another. Comparing a painting to a piece of music makes no sense, so why should we try to compare video games to movies? I think, in this aspect, we agree with one another. Judging games in an "art" sense is an impossible task, because video games are not meant to be a piece of physical art. They are meant to be interacted with, which is where the design aspect comes in.
The United States invariably does the right thing, after having exhausted every other alternative. -Winston Churchill America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between. -Oscar Wilde Wow, even the French showed a little more spine than that before they got their sh*t pushed in.[^] -Colin Mullikin
-
Art is not a subjective thing
I think your wrong there, i don't mean to troll but in my opinion art is mostly subjective. For me art has something to do with talent. I agree that art has many many forms but also there are many many things called art that are just rubbish and are only hanging in museums because somebody had connections to somebody who has influence. I bet you that if i took a picture of my breakfast every morning, frame it and say to (hypothetically speaking) a friend of mine, who has connection in the art world, that this is how my inner feelings are manifested he would talk to his connections and he would sell it, that doesn't make me an artist. so yes Art is very very subjective and defined by society much more as we think. By your definition every picture in instagram could be defined by art even if not every person using who uses instagram isn't a professional or artist. It very hard to define art i know but there has to be a line between what is art and what is not, that line has to be drawn by ourselves and our point of view
Hmm i wonder why its doing that......ARGHS NO STOP, ROLLBACK ROLLBACK...F*** That's how i learned to "Always Backup"!! Dogs are man's best Friend, Cats are man's adorable little serial killer
Hi Mendor81, Could nor agree more, and not... Yes, there is a lot of crap in galleries that is not art and is there simply because of the 'artist's' connections. Unfortunately art has become a commodity and therefore there is a need for a constant supply of new product. This leads to people, who should really know better, giving merit to content that clearly has none. By my definition no picture on instagram could automatically be considered art, I have yet to see a work of art on instagram. Photographs are not inherently art. In order for an object to be considered art it would have to meet a set of absolute criteria. This is what I mean by not being subjective, it is not art just because you like it, or think it is pretty or whatever. It is art because it succeeds in a predefined set of objectives which we use to define what is art and what is not art. These objectives can vary from one discipline to another, some are universal, but whatever they are they must be met for a work to be considered art and not simply decoration or information or something other. Talent is no prerequisite either, though it can help, intelligence, knowledge and skill are far more important. If you simply draw the line between art and not art yourself by some arbitrary measure then the terms become meaningless. You would just be expressing an abstract opinion relating to your personal likes and dislikes, so why even call it art. Taste is subjective, art is not.
