Are games art ?

richymcdermott

We have heard this debate being made for years , some developers say yes games are art others say no , my personal opinion i think someday we can call games art but not right now. Yes games like shadow of the colossus and ico and others are great experience i dont think they are art but they are a stepping stone of possibility. Those are my thoughts, what are your opinions

Grumpypants

Retr0gamer

o1s1n

See this? This is Fountain by Duchamp.



Yes, games can be considered art.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

if piss christ is art then everything is art, so yes video games are art

krudler

of course they are, is that even up for debate?

deathrider

Personally, I can't stand the fact that even time people have this coversation they have to mention Ico and Shadow Of The Collosus. Just because there is (and I'll say this at my own risk) and artsy fartsy approach to these games, doesn't make them any more art than the next game. That always feels a little pretentious to me.

Magill

deathrider wrote: »

Personally, I can't stand the fact that even time people have this coversation they have to mention Ico and Shadow Of The Collosus. Just because there is (and I'll say this at my own risk) and artsy fartsy approach to these games, doesn't make them any more art than the next game. That always feels a little pretentious to me.

I guess when people think of art, they think of something that moves them emotionally(I don't get how a urinal does this for anyone but... yeah..). There are a lot of games that pull the ole emotion strings, but Ico and SOTC are 2 of the best imo. They're just the best examples i guess. You could compare it to film... If someone said that movies are an art form and used say The Expendables as the example, would you take him seriously ?

Who cares anyway, most of these art experts are up their own hole. Games are games, i couldn't give a fook what else people want to label them as.

deathrider

Magill wrote: »

I guess when people think of art, they think of something that moves them emotionally(I don't get how a urinal does this for anyone but... yeah..). There are a lot of games that pull the ole emotion strings, but Ico and SOTC are 2 of the best imo. They're just the best examples i guess. You could compare it to film... If someone said that movies are an art form and used say The Expendables as the example, would you take him seriously ?

Who cares anyway, most of these art experts are up their own hole. Games are games, i couldn't give a fook what else people want to label them as.

I see your point, and I'm not dissing (well, I guess I am a little, but I'm trying not to), but seeing these two titles pop up each and every time as if they hold more weight in the debate than any other title does, just really bugs me.

dead one

Games a never ending art.....

humanji

Personally, I'd side with the "no" side of the argument, mainly because I always think of art as something that is made as art, and that's the reason they exist. Games are made as games. There'll always be exceptions of course, but in general terms that's how I'd see it. It doesn't mean one is better than the other. There's good and bad art, and good and bad games.

Mr.Saturn

Aren't the ones that don't actively pursue the title of 'art' generally the ones that come closest to it? Take say, Mother 3, versus say, Grand Theft Auto 4.
The former's story just evolving organically, whilst the latter's intent is signposted immediately and just rings out as forced.

hooradiation

I have to agree with Roger Ebert on this. I will be long in the cold, hard ground before a video game ever comes close to being art.

In fact, it might never happen. And that doesn't bother me in the slightest.

Grumpypants

If film is considered art
If music is considered art
If drawings are considered art
If story telling is considered art

Then a medium made up of all the above surely is art.

Anyway the term art is subjective lots of people consider art anything that makes you stop and debate whether its art or not. For one person a spot on a blank page isn't art to another it is.

To say games are not art is missing the point of art in the first place.

Retr0gamer

humanji wrote: »

Personally, I'd side with the "no" side of the argument, mainly because I always think of art as something that is made as art, and that's the reason they exist. Games are made as games. There'll always be exceptions of course, but in general terms that's how I'd see it. It doesn't mean one is better than the other. There's good and bad art, and good and bad games.

Can't a game be made as a game and art? You've got stuff out there like the Mother/Earthbound series. They work excellently as JRPGs. However the creator shigesato itoi set out to illicit a very specific emotional response in the player by the end of the game and this was his goal which he succeeded in. And then you have stuff like LSD on the PS1 and Yume Nikki which don't even try to be games. People are think about games as art by their experiences with mainstream games. I wouldn't look at literature and look at the best sellers list or film and look at what's the biggest films in the box office to find something with artistic merit. And I certainly wouldn't look at the music charts for it either! It's the same with games.

hooradiation

Grumpypants wrote: »

If film is considered art
If music is considered art
If drawings are considered art
If story telling is considered art

Then a medium made up of all the above surely is art.

To turn that on it's head:

If a game of chess art?
Is a football match art?
Is Magic: The gathering art?
Is Solitaire art?

Elements of the above also make up the medium of games, in the same way as music, story telling and drawings do.
So how is it that games inherit their definition of being art only from the elements you listed? Does the fact that games, by their very definition, borrow heavily from things that are not art not factor into this at all?

(Disclaimer: i'm not that pushed about the whole games are art thang - i just find the insistence that games simply must be art by many self identifying gamers to be fascinating)

folan

I wouldnt say games are art. However, the potential to be considered art is there.

similarly to film, not all films are art.

then again, its rare enough that 2 people agree on art.

or what it is to be artistic.

Retr0gamer

Is waking up in the morning and not bothering to tidy up your room art?... oh wait it is:

http://www.saatchi-gallery.co.uk/artists/artpages/tracey_emin_my_bed.htm

Magill

hooradiation wrote: »

To turn that on it's head:

If a game of chess art?
Is a football match art?
Is Magic: The gathering art?
Is Solitaire art?

Elements of the above also make up the medium of games, in the same way as music, story telling and drawings do.
So how is it that games inherit their definition of being art only from the elements you listed? Does the fact that games, by their very definition, borrow heavily from things that are not art not factor into this at all?

(Disclaimer: i'm not that pushed about the whole games are art thang - i just find the insistence that games simply must be art by many self identifying gamers to be fascinating)

What ??? What exactly does a game like SOTC borrow from any of those ?

Those are specific to a very small number of games... you could say the same about piece of "real" art... or you could just look at this and realise that if this is what "ART" is then im glad games aren't an art form !




Yes.... this is a $140,000,000 piece of art....

sarumite

The discussion I think shoudl be broader to include books and movies to be honest, as all three are forms of entertainment. I think the sweeping statements of "are games art" is similar to saying 'is music always artful'. I personally think the answer to both questions is a no. However there are games that are art (or have artistic merit) as with books, films etc. Ultimately the argument is very subjective. Personally I have taken some snapshots of games and in many cases are imo as artistic as many paintings I have seen in art gallerys (and more so in many cases).

Jazzy

it can be

o1s1n

Magill wrote: »

if this is what "ART" is then im glad games aren't an art form !

Hey now, Pollocks paintings are cool! Not exactly worth $140million, but cool nonetheless. He gets too much flack from people. You should be linking things like this instead. Yes, it is exactly what it says on the tin.

ghostchant

Magill wrote: »

What ??? What exactly does a game like SOTC borrow from any of those ?

A predefined win/loss criterion.

I'm more on the 'no' side of the fence in this debate, but then again stuff like 'Train' by Brenda Brathwaite might be considered art (along with the other games in her 'The Mechanic is the Message' series):

http://blogs.howstuffworks.com/2010/03/09/brenda-brathwaites-train-when-knowing-the-game-changes-the-game/

http://mechanicmessage.wordpress.com/

johnny_ultimate

Posted this up in another thread last night, but this guy makes great 'art' games: http://hcsoftware.sourceforge.net/jason-rohrer/

I'm firmly on the yes, because I think it all just boils down to nitpicking semantics. Art shouldn't be restricted to mere 'art' games, like there are many writers who are artists even within the confines of mainstream, populist literature. It isn't an argument that helps gaming IMO. I find it hard to imagine anyone who has felt a profound sense of lonliness in Shadow of the Colossus could still write games off as mere entertainment!

Grumpypants

You need artist to draw the characters and background ffs. Of course its art.

Mark Hamill

ghostchant wrote: »

A predefined win/loss criterion.

I've heard this before as a reason why you cant consider games as art, but in what way does this actually prevent games from being art?

hooradiation

Magill wrote: »

What ??? What exactly does a game like SOTC borrow from any of those ?

Those are specific to a very small number of games... you could say the same about piece of "real" art... or you could just look at this and realise that if this is what "ART" is then im glad games aren't an art form !

Think about it for a second. SOTC is a game because it has rules, set parameters for what you can and cannot do , is competitive and and has clearly defined win&loss conditions - all of which apply to football, chess, M:TG and solitaire.

Contrary to what you've said they are specific to every game, simply because games are just that. Games.
If Football, Chess and card games are not art then why are video games?

It's a genuine question and nothing more, before people get all butthurt.



And as an aside, I do like how these conversations always have people linking to pictures of works of art they don't 'get' and going "well if this is art then so are games" and same time maintaining the position that games are art and if you disagree you just don't get it.

johnny_ultimate

I think many video games have moved well on from basic game comparisons. Like any book or film, they have to end eventually, which is another way of looking at a win/loss criteria. Many games are strictly games, but that doesn't mean the medium is restrictive on the artists who make it.

And after all, a good game of chess or poker or rugby can be a thing of great beauty - and I'm far from a sports fan :pac:. Does it really matter whether we call it art or not?

Aldebaran

It's an interesting question and I'm not sure if there's a straight yes or no answer to it. It could be argued that any sort of creative endeavor can be classified as art, and video games would be no exception to that.

But it's interesting to note that Game Studies are beginning to receive more attention within the humanities, and I'm convinced that in the future certain games will be read as 'texts' and games in general will become an important focus of study when examining late 20th or early 21st Century culture, they are important cultural objects imo.

o1s1n

hooradiation wrote: »

And as an aside, I do like how these conversations always have people linking to pictures of works of art they don't 'get' and going "well if this is art then so are games" and same time maintaining the position that games are art and if you disagree you just don't get it.

You completely misunderstood why I posted images. What I was getting at is that if Duchamp's ready mades and Manzoni's Artist's sh1t are considered art when put in a specific setting, then anything can be. Including games.

A friend of mine made a videogame as part of his end of year show in Fine Art Media a few years ago.

My own show, which was mainly drawing, also featured video and sound. At one point I was going to use an arcade cabinet too but I didn't fancy leaving it on site unattended.

Whether they are art by default is another thing completely.

Then again, wtf is art by default?

...

You've just reminded me how much I hated these conversations in college.

ghostchant

Mark Hamill wrote: »

I've heard this before as a reason why you cant consider games as art, but in what way does this actually prevent games from being art?

I'm not saying it does, I'm just saying that SOTC is similar to the other games mentioned due to it.

I suppose art is very subjective, one of those "I'll know it when I see it" kind of things. Personally I haven't played or seen a video game that I'd consider to be art yet. I'm not in any rush to either.