Do you consider video games as art?

[Lancer]

Though there is that "recognized artistic value."

 

Based on who's recognition?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If you are going down that route, it all belongs to the eye of the beholder again.

 

There is much art and literature that people consider so, although my tastes preclude my recognizing them as such. i.e. How many times have you hated a critically-acclaimed movie or novel? I know it has happened to me *lots.* To me it may not be art, although to the rest of the world, it is.

 

So in a sense, what one considers art can be a bit on the subjective side and can vary from person to person.

Edited February 7, 2006 by Lancer

[Joseph Bulock]

Art is only subjective. If art was not subjective, people wouldn't have been arguing about what art is for the last couple thousand years.

[Magnum Opus]

Currently, I see video games as art in much the same way as I see that last Schwarzenegger action film as art.

[Lancer]

Art is only subjective.  If art was not subjective, people wouldn't have been arguing about what art is for the last couple thousand years.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Video games as a media is an art. Now whether "specific" video games are art or not is contingent upon a person's subjective tastes.

[Joseph Bulock]

Art is only subjective.  If art was not subjective, people wouldn't have been arguing about what art is for the last couple thousand years.

 

Video games as a media is an art. Now whether "specific" video games are art or not is contingent upon a person's subjective tastes.

 

My point is that even your claim that the media is an art is subjective, as what defines a media as an art is subjective.

[Lancer]

Art is only subjective.  If art was not subjective, people wouldn't have been arguing about what art is for the last couple thousand years.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Video games as a media is an art. Now whether "specific" video games are art or not is contingent upon a person's subjective tastes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

My point is that even your claim that the media is an art is subjective, as what defines a media as an art is subjective.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Then whether the concept of the existence of art itself is subjective, according to you. You are saying that:

whether literature is art or not is subjective

whether dancing, music, painting are forms of art is also subjective.

 

I don't know if that is being subjective or just being pessimistic. If one starts nitpicking like this then whether or not we actually exist is also subjective.

 

Regardless, I don't agree because I am sure nearly everyone can find at least one example in each of those categories that they would deem as art.

Edited February 7, 2006 by Lancer

[SteveThaiBinh]

I haven't yet played a computer game that I considered to be 'great art', or 'high art', with the complexity and originality that would entail. The medium may have the potential to produce works of great art, but that will take time - decades, I suppose. Are games examples of 'craft', then? Chippendale and Stradivarius are usually considered fine artisans rather than artists. Games have been, up to now, well-crafted products with genuine creativity behind them, but without the kind of artistic vision they would need to be considered as works of art. A few have pushed higher than this, though - suggesting there is the potential to go further. I hope they succeed.

[Lancer]

I haven't yet played a computer game that I considered to be 'great art', or 'high art', with the complexity and originality that would entail.  The medium may have the potential to produce works of great art, but that will take time - decades, I suppose.  Are games examples of 'craft', then?  Chippendale and Stradivarius are usually considered fine artisans rather than artists.  Games have been, up to now, well-crafted products with genuine creativity behind them, but without the kind of artistic vision they would need to be considered as works of art.  A few have pushed higher than this, though - suggesting there is the potential to go further.  I hope they succeed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think Planescape: Torment is a true example of a modern work of art ... particularly from a story/literature standpoint.

 

Heck, I thought the story was on par (or even more profound) than other works of art such as the Odyssey or 1984. When one considers the extra level of IMMERSION and INTERACTION that a classic novel obviously lacks, it transcends the so-called "works of art" IMHO.

 

Nothing beats RPGs as a media for storytelling because not only do they tell a story but the player's actions guide the plot. The player is not a passive bystander but an active, interactive presence in the story. In this sense RPGS done right are the pinnacle of literature-storytelling and this by itself makes games like Torment a true work of art.

Edited February 7, 2006 by Lancer

[Joseph Bulock]

Regardless, I don't agree because I am sure nearly everyone can find at least one example in each of those categories that they would deem as art.

 

If that were true, that could only be because we had all excepted a standard definition of art, one that either was comprised of the overlap between subjectivities of the members in agreement, or perhaps a definition propagated through the establishment of a discourse and excepted by a larger mass of people.

 

By the way, I had no intention of diverting this topic to a philosophical discussion of the nature of art, only to point out the inherent difficulty in answering the original question.

[Lancer]

If that were true, that could only be because we had all excepted a standard definition of art, one that either was comprised of the overlap between subjectivities of the members in agreement, or perhaps a definition propagated through the establishment of a discourse and excepted by a larger mass of people.

 

I mean you have to start somewhere and have some basic assumptions. If you don't start with some basic "standard" then it makes no sense to ever discuss anything.

[Weiser_Cain]

Is design an art? Yes.

Is art an art? Duh.

Is writing an art? Yes.

Is programing an art? Good programing is, yes.

[alanschu]

Why just good programming?

 

Is bad design no longer art? Is bad writing no longer art?

[Lancer]

Why just good programming?

 

Is bad design no longer art?  Is bad writing no longer art?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

With something being called "art" comes a connotation of "high quality".. The problem is that what one deems as high or low quality is subjective.

Edited February 7, 2006 by Lancer

[Llyranor]

Nothing beats RPGs as a media for storytelling because not only do they tell a story but the player's actions guide the plot. The player is not a passive bystander but an active, interactive presence in the story. In this sense RPGS done right are the pinnacle of literature-storytelling and this by itself makes games like Torment a true work of art.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Winner.

[Weiser_Cain]

Bad design is just bad art it takes an artists touch and a creative mind to breath life into code.

[Joseph Bulock]

Why just good programming?

 

Is bad design no longer art?  Is bad writing no longer art?

 

 

With something being called "art" comes a connotation of "high quality".. The problem is that what one deems as high or low quality is subjective.

 

 

What about the famous sculpture "fountain." This was of course nothing more than a toilet turned upside down and entered into an art exhibit. Many artists recognize it as a ground breaking piece, while many people find it to be a primary example of "dumb" art. If it was art, it definitely wasn't high quality, in that all of its ingredients were of low quality. Also, can we not find art in those things that are of low quality, which then makes them art?

 

For example, Starship Troopers, most would agree, is a low quality movie. However, a very strong argument can be made for its value as art, despite its quality.

[metadigital]

I'll pose these questions.  Are two drunkards fighting in an alley performance artists?  Is Pro Wrestling art? Are professional sporting events art?  Is news coverage of a battlefield art? 

...

Which side of the fence does a game that attempts to create an interactive cinematic experience of any of these events fall on?  Once again, is it art because it existed, or is it art because it did something artfully?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As I don't consider myself an artist, I'll defer to the opinions of two I saw being interviewed about such things. They were performance artists (this is important because, just as we are arguing, so too artists do not agree: "traditional" artists like sculpters and painters generally have issues with performance art), and their adjudication rested on the intention of the creator. If it was created by an "artist", i.e. someone who was deliberately creating ART, then it is art (whatever the format: there was a recent peice that consisted of several tons of bananas piled high, for the public to pick up and intereact with and, yes, even eat).

 

So, just like the definition of good and evil, it all depends on the motivations of the person(s) who instigate the work.

And finally, just to be pretentious, it has been argued that art cannot exist in the commercial realm.  Once art becomes commodity, it looses the "essence" of art.  How does this effect video games, which never have an original, which are instead, only designed for mass consumption?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It doesn't. It's a pretentious notion, much like "if it's popular then it can't be culture". Ignore it and move along: nothing to see here.

[Volourn]

Seems to be that one of the definitions of 'art' that Lancer likes to use is 'what are his favorite x'.

 

As for me, no game is art. No book is art. To me, art is paintings, drawings, etc.

 

To me, art has nothing to do with quality. Even the worst painting is art. Even the best novel isn't art.

 

Afterall, writing/movie making/games were not taught in my Art Class. LOL

Edited February 8, 2006 by Volourn

[alanschu]

A different interpretation of the term, no doubt

[Joseph Bulock]

Can art be created accidentally then? If I make a painting better than the Mona Lisa, but I create it by accidentally dropping a case full of paint on a canvas, is it still art. It's easy to say that I am not an artist because I couldn't do it again, but is the painting that resulted not still art?

[Kaftan Barlast]

(most) games are entertainment, not art.

 

 

 

For a an item (movie, book, picture, sculpture) to be considered art is must have been made with the intention of creating a piece of art that has some deeper meaning(could be an abstract meaning like to induce a certain state of mind aswell as a conrete one like making a comment o the vietnam war). If you draw a picture with the sole intention of making a goodlooking drawing, its not art. If you make a game with the primary goal of entertaining people, its not art either.

 

 

Art within a game or film isnt really art either, its graphics. Its very strange that you anglians dont have separate words for a person who paints fine art in a studio and a guy making orcs in 3DsMAX or working out the concept of what NPC X is going to look like

[Lancer]

Seems to be that one of the definitions of 'art' that Lancer likes to use is 'what are his favorite x'.

 

As for me, no game is art. No book is art. To me, art is paintings, drawings, etc.

 

To me, art has nothing to do with quality. Even the worst painting is art. Even the best novel isn't art.

 

Afterall, writing/movie making/games were not taught in my Art Class. LOL

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Art is more than just what is taught in your art class. I think most would agree that art in its most general sense is a more broad all-encompassing term.

 

As for liking to use my favorite x.. Art is subjective and revolves around a person's tastes. I have merely given examples of what I personally deem as art.. No doubt that my list of examples will be different from someone else's.

Edited February 8, 2006 by Lancer

[metadigital]

It's very strange that you anglians don't have seperate words for a person who paints fine art in a studio and a guy making orcs in 3DsMAX, or working out the concept of what NPC X is going to look like.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, because we use English (the mother of all whores wrt language) we are happy to borrow any words from Swedish, if you have one.

 

Normally it is differentiated by the adjectives "high" or "fine": high art is opera, low (brow) art is soap opera; fine art is a classical bronze statue, etc.

[Gabrielle]

Video games are great works of art. You have a combination of music, voice and images that create a complex form of artwork.

[Lancer]

If you make a game with the primary goal of entertaining people, its not art either.

 

Some people make paintings just to make a living or entertain people.. Their work is not art either? Or is it art just because it is not on a computer screen? What does intent have anything to do with it?

 

Art within a game or film isnt really art either, its graphics.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

So...Art on a canvass isn't really art either, it's brush strokes.

 

So just because you decide to reproduce something on a computer screen instead of a canvass automatically disqualifies it from being art? Even though it is the same exact piece of work? What if you draw something on a computer screen with the expressed intent of entertaining people, it ceases to be art now just because it is on a computer screen?

 

Why does the type of paper or pencil you decide to draw something with dictate if what you drew is art or not?

Edited February 8, 2006 by Lancer