›
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE

Gamers.

24

Comments

  • MadassAlexMadassAlex
    One foot in front of the other, every day.
    I'd consider board games art, including the design of the mechanics and pieces.
  • CrimsonCrimson
    edited 2011-12-08 21:28:41
    Give us fire! Give us ruin! Give us our glory!
    @Abyss: Mainly because for a lot of people "art" means an inalienable measure of quality. When you imply that it isn't art and CAN'T be art, you basically say "video games suck and you're an uneducated plebian for liking them".

    Personally, I think it's silly to label an entire medium art or not art. Ulysses is art, but Twilight is not. Citizen Kane is art, but Parent Trap is not. Similarly, Call of Duty definitely isn't art, but Braid can be considered art.

    EDIT: NInja'd to hell and back.
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    Admittedly, the reason I tend to be wary of labelling video games "art" is because a lot of time, I tend to not consider "narrative" as part of the "game" and believe that the more emphasis that is placed on story, the more "game" becomes a misnomer.

    As long as you have to beat the obstacles yourselves, it is a game. As simple as that. Because that's really what gaming is all about, in any shape or form. You're presented a challenge and you surpass it or fail.
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    Personally, I think it's silly to label an entire medium art or not art. Ulysses is art, but Twilight is not. Citizen Kane is art, but Parent Trap is not. Similarly, Call of Duty definitely isn't art, but Braid can be considered art.

    I'd argue against many of these being or not being art. 

    Mostly because art is not an indication of quality.
  • ClockworkUniverseClockworkUniverse
    OOOooooOoOoOOoo, I'm a ghoOooOooOOOost!
    My view of art is that it isn't universally definable. Art, to me, is a thing created by a human that evokes emotion in another human. Thus, if something emotionally affects a person, it is art to that person. And possibly only to that person, but to say it didn't have the effect it had seems dishonest.
  • DYREDYRE
    edited 2011-12-08 21:31:12

    I don't see why "art" is being associated with "narrative" in the first place...

    A narrative can be one way in which something is art, but there are certainly other ways.  See:paintings.

    Although, I also don't see why "narrative" should imply that something isn't a game.  It's not something I particularly care about in games, but it's still an element of them I think.

    That said, this post contains no justifications whatsoever, so disregard it as you see fit.

  • CrimsonCrimson
    edited 2011-12-08 21:32:17
    Give us fire! Give us ruin! Give us our glory!
    ^^^I suppose I should've put "considered art" in front of those. As in "conventionally considered works of art within their mediums".
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    edited 2011-12-08 21:34:12
    You can change. You can.
    I think art is anything that allows for a human to convey something. it doesn't even have to be an emotion. It can be a story. Of course, this means documentaries and newscasts are art. I wouldn't be against the first one being called art. The second one is a lot murkier.

    ^^ Yeah, agreed. Shadow of the Colossus is one of the most artsy-fartsy games out there and that doesn't have much of a story.
  • ClockworkUniverseClockworkUniverse
    edited 2011-12-08 21:34:23
    OOOooooOoOoOOoo, I'm a ghoOooOooOOOost!
    Although, I also don't see why "narrative" should imply that something isn't a game. It's not something I particularly care about in games, but it's still an element of them I think. 
    I don't think narrative disqualifies something as a game either. I just think a lot of video games them are less quantifiable in their goals than something could be called a game. After all, a lot of them don't have goals, or have goals that their players ignore.

    ^Hmm...a fair point. Basically, "art" is one of the least well-defined terms in linguistic history.
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    I suppose I should've put "considered art" in front of those. As in "conventionally considered works of art within their mediums".

    Again, art doesn't mean quality. Any critic can dislike Twilight and point to the reasons it fails as a consistent narrative, but the fact of the matter is that it has something to convey and it tries to convey it. It just fails at doing this.

    I think art is something that conveys something, but if it fails at conveying the intended something, it doesn't stop being art. It just is flawed art. But it's still art.
  • GelzoGelzo
    Pony Sleuth
    >games as art debate

    brb suicide
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    yay~
  • ForzareForzare
    Till shade is gone, till water is gone, into the Shadow with teeth bared, screaming defiance with the last breath, to spit in Sightblinder’s eye on the last Day.
    ^^ wait up, I think I'll join you
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    more yay~
  • glennmagusharveyglennmagusharvey
    Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    I think people tend to classify as "art" games those games that don't necessarily have a clear "point" to them, or at least a clear constituency genre that they serve, or that are in a recognized genre but have lots of unusual features or surprisingly good side-features.

    For example, run-and-gun action platformers are a well-recognized genre.  They normally involve shooting and blasting opponents/obstacles to smithereens left and right, all the time.  Daniel Remar creates Iji.  Fans of Iji start playing the game as pacifists.  Remar then intentionally designs a pacifist path through the game.  Suddenly, you have a run-and-gun action platformer that subverts the normal prevalence of violence in the genre.  This gets people to notice it.
  • ScythemantisScythemantis
    edited 2011-12-08 23:38:36
    Roger Ebert saying that games weren't art wasn't even necessarily a put-down. Things that aren't art can still be great. The gaming community took it ridiculously personal and harassed and threatened and argued with him to disturbing levels. What, do games need to be taken seriously as "art" for them to feel like their hundreds of gaming hours are validated?

    And yeah, while Jack Thompson was an extreme dickhead about it, the basic principle of his argument was really just that the ratings should be strictly enforced and little children don't need to be playing GTA. While many gamers agreed with him, I witnessed far more who exploded with rage over the very suggestion that games might EVER be unhealthy for kids of any young age. I like to assume that people who think all games are okay for all children are just in denial that games probably fucked up their social development irreversibly.
  • ClockworkUniverseClockworkUniverse
    OOOooooOoOoOOoo, I'm a ghoOooOooOOOost!
    Honestly, I never got what Roger Ebert even has to do with anything.
  • MalkavianMalkavian
    MORONS! I'VE GOT MORONS ON MY PAYROLL!
    ^^WRONG. WRONG. WRONG.

    Thompson accused The Sims of being Child Porn and crusaded for outright bans of the games Bully (for having 'homosexual content') and GTA (for... well, being GTA)
  • ForzareForzare
    edited 2011-12-08 23:52:03
    Till shade is gone, till water is gone, into the Shadow with teeth bared, screaming defiance with the last breath, to spit in Sightblinder’s eye on the last Day.
    I don't know anyone who thinks little kids should be playing GTA. And I'm pretty sure his goals went a bit further than that.

  • MalkavianMalkavian
    MORONS! I'VE GOT MORONS ON MY PAYROLL!
    Also, Jack Thompson himself was an unrepentant ass that ignored logic and threw lawsuits around like they were candy on the day after Halloween. While there were some ridiculous people (the guy who called him and cussed him out) they were isolated incidents and the gaming community had every right to mock him.
  • CrimsonCrimson
    Give us fire! Give us ruin! Give us our glory!
    >What, do games need to be taken seriously as "art" for them to feel like their hundreds of gaming hours are validated?

    Like I said, people apply artistic merit as a seal of quality, and being told that something they like isn't art as an insult to their intelligence.

    This is in no way exclusive to gamers. Just look at how ridiculously defensive cartoon and anime fans get when people call what they like childish or whatever.
  • MalkavianMalkavian
    MORONS! I'VE GOT MORONS ON MY PAYROLL!
    Or fans of dadaist or modernist art.
  • InsanityAddictInsanityAddict
    Diet NEET

    Many games hyped as art really aren't, unless you want to call something art based purely on aesthetics without taking underlying philosophy into account, but that does not exclude the medium from being used that way.

  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    edited 2011-12-09 06:06:40
    You can change. You can.
    Many games hyped as art really aren't, unless you want to call something art based purely on aesthetics without taking underlying philosophy into account

    Under this logic, Un Chien Andalou is not art.

    Honestly, I never got what Roger Ebert even has to do with anything.

    Best example of gamer controversy and persecution complex, really.

    Roger Ebert saying that games weren't art wasn't even necessarily a put-down. Things that aren't art can still be great. The gaming community took it ridiculously personal and harassed and threatened and argued with him to disturbing levels. What, do games need to be taken seriously as "art" for them to feel like their hundreds of gaming hours are validated?

    Yes, there was a degree of that in that shitstorm, true. But like I said before, Ebert's arguments were almost entirely based on an age of gaming long gone, where most games were about competition. By the time Ebert made his statements, gaming, while still competitive, also had produced evocative masterpieces in an aesthetical level and was coming up with more interesting and fascinating narratives. 

    Besides, full medium dismissals reek of anti intellectualism, anyway.
  • glennmagusharveyglennmagusharvey
    Creature - Florida Dragon Turtle Human
    Re Jack Thompson: If he were reasonable, he wouldn't have been disbarred from practicing law.

    Re Roger Ebert: Who is this person anyway, and why do I hear so much about him?

    Re videogames as art: I just completed the World 4 puzzle in Braid last night.
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    Re Roger Ebert: Who is this person anyway, and why do I hear so much about him?

    Most famous film critic in history, one of the few who has actually tried to contribute to the medium, mah husbando~
  • RedEyedAbyssRedEyedAbyss
    So how was Beyond the Valley of the Dolls?
  • MillerCrossMillerCross
    You can change. You can.
    horrible. but it was intended to be kitschy. 
  • MadassAlexMadassAlex
    One foot in front of the other, every day.
    Scythe, levelling insults at the wider gaming community based on your own unproven hypothesis is questionable on multiple levels.
  • ClockworkUniverseClockworkUniverse
    edited 2011-12-09 20:20:06
    OOOooooOoOoOOoo, I'm a ghoOooOooOOOost!
    Best example of gamer controversy and persecution complex, really.
    Yeah, I get that. I just don't get why people looked to a film critic who doesn't play games and has no interest in them for an opinion on games.
Sign In or Register to comment.