The Friday Debate – That Belongs In A Museum?

Don’t really care, All I care about is having fun.

Definition off art: “Something really beautiful.”

Yes, games can be art. Look at concept art, they look stunning!

I think games are absolutely art. First of all because its a creative procces by people who dedicate their lives in creating these products.

Second, the artwork of games alone can be seen as art.

Third, mega projects like God of war, Heavy Rain and the likes cost years to develop and god knows how much manpower. After that we gamers play it and give our well thought of conclusion about it.

Fourth, no gamer likes the same thing. Just like with art gamers dont like everything another gamer likes. It’s purely objective which makes for great arguments, a thing connected to art.

Fifth, Ico, Shadow of the Collossus, Okami, Rez etc.

Good point @Prangstar

I think games can be art, especially the ones that have an affect on, like Heavy Rain and so on.

Games have the potential to be art, however I don’t believe anything that is currently available can be compared to the great works of contemporary art.

I think that games can be art, but they need to have “something” between the sounds, between the pictures, between the story. In my opinnion Okami, first MGS and Flower had it. It’s hard to explain, but..when you finish one of this games you know that it wasn’t just a bunch of pixels, and sounds. They have that specific deep. And that deep..that must be the art.

I do not understand people when they say that games are not art. But why? Becouse you can control what happens on screen?

A snapshot in a family album is not a piece of art – but that doesn’t mean that all photography falls short of being art.

Likewise, some games can certainly be considered art. They are resolutely crafted in a way to draw emotion from the “viewer” and to challenge the thought process. Above are mentioned games I would certainly class as art.

However, as a general point, no, I don’t think games are an art form – they’re mostly an application of technical skills.

A video game can never be considered ‘real art’.

Art, by definition, is not ‘something beautiful’ as noted above. If you study art, you’ll know that the thing that makes art stand out from anything else we produce is that it is effectively ‘useless’ – in other words, a piece of art can have no actual purpose. You may argue that its purpose it to elicit an emotion, and art does that, but it doesn’t have a definable purpose.

A car’s purpose is to transport us. No matter how great a Lamborghini might look, it isn’t ‘art’, because it has a real purpose.

Therefore, games can never be considered real art. The ‘art direction’ of some games is incredible and therefore can elicit the same kind of emotions as real art, but because every game has a purpose (go here, do this, get that, earn a trophy etc.), art they are not.

If a ball of paper can be considered as art – a game can be considered as much more than just ‘art’.

The ball of paper represents an idea, a thought, perhaps even an emotion, yet a game goes beyond that. The ideas are all part of the creation process, yet artistic flair will need to remain prominent in every aspect for the overall art to truly prevail.

So in my opinion a game can be art, whether it’s as a finished product or one of the processes that makes up that product.

@DolphGB – Excellent post, but you’ve missed something important.

What “use” is a game? A car takes us from A-B, but a game simply “wastes time”. It doesn’t transport us, it doesn’t produce anything of value, a game’s only use is in essence – to entertain.

So as a book, film or painting – it’s only function is “to enjoy”. Surely, that makes it as potentially pure art as any other form?

You’re mistaking “purpose” for “interaction”. I will play the first level of Rez over and over simply because it’s a joy. I don’t need to. I don’t wish to advance in the game. I just love the build of musical score as I interact with the game.

Is a musician an artist? They only play one note after another to achieve the purpose of producing the musical piece a composer has written. The “art” is in the way they use technique to produce that final piece of music.

A games designer is like a composer, producing a work, and we as gamers, are artists. We follow the game as a musician will follow the notes on a page to produce a final musical work. We all have our own styles and interpretations though and handle each part of the “composition” differently.

I consider taht a game is an art… this is art

The pinnicle of art as a video game ‘for me’ has to be clearly Shadow Of The Collosus. Ask any game dev. I work in a games retailer and we have alot of people who work on games that come in and all claim/mention SOTC within the subject of art.

Theres truely nothing like it and probably wont ever be.

The whole market now days is riddled with first/third person shooters and its really getting boring. Im playing Army Of Two 2 right now and its just obvious that its not a great game not because its a shooter but because its played it safe within the realm of being a shooter and thats what EVERY other shooter are doing these days because it sells. Gaming is becoming a business and because of that creativity is lacking. Tremendously.

What im trying to say is Call Of Duty brand is killing the industry if everyone else is cashing in on its success, and no matter how alot wont like to admit it theres complete truth in that full spot

Vanquish i guess seems to be a slight exception. But then only time will tell right James?

Im beginning to really like these debates every fridays, i met alot of gamers who think the same as i and its great. keep it up James.

Its a great way of filling all our friends list with none kronic MW2 players.

Lol

I dislike the “are games art?” question because it has a tendency to cut into far more worthwhile discussions. Ultimately it’s people arguing over whether a label should be applied to something, the outcome of which — if one can ever be reached — won’t really affect anything.

If we decide that videogames are indeed art, what changes? Daring, experimental games are still prisoners to commercial realities. It doesn’t get any easier to make independent games: you can shoot a drama with a few friends and a camcorder; there are no gimmes in game development, if you want to show two people talking in a room you’re going to need a whole team of texture artists, animators, modellers, engine coders, etc. Making games that people consider to be art — i.e. not a game like Pac-Man or Bejeweled — has a far higher barrier to entry than writing, film or music.

Rather than question whether games are art or not, how do we make the medium more accessible, not just for players but also creators? The broader the spectrum of creative talent the more moot the art ‘problem’ becomes; when there’s enough evidence of the artistic value of games there ceases to be a question, merely an obvious statement of fact.

kap got it spot on by saying creativity is basically dead with the odd exceptions ( flower , heavy rain ) in games industry and it is all because call of duty and fps after fps that have no depth just over used engines firing out around 15 to 20 fps a year . i will say though if you want any sort of variety with games and want art style games then ps3 is best option to get stuff like that , VARIETY FTW

I think Furiekins hit the nail on the head for me. Games are only what we want them to be, I consider a few titles to be art and I’m sure if a survey was taken a fair percentage of other people wouldn’t agree with everything I choose. I enjoy a vast array of games and enjoy different genres, I loved SOTC but I also enjoy the likes of MW2, the former is definitely in my opinion art but the latter certainly isn’t but that doesn’t mean I can’t enjoy it any less. Sometimes I just wanna run around with a shotgun and shooting my friends in the face and sometimes I wanna clain a giant creature and it stab it in the head, its not about what’s art and what’s not, its about what you enjoy when the mood takes you.

I think gaming is very much like the movie industry, both have the epic artistic films/games but both can equally have us enjoy seeing people being mindlessly blown up. Everything is about opinion and not everyone will agree on one thing, its the way its always been and the way it will continue

climb a giant creature* :p

The surrealists believed in a sort of communal ‘art’, although their concept relied somewhat on the manifestations of the subconscious mind, and I don’t see why we couldn’t consider videogames to be a sort of collective expression of abstracts; we have games that deal with the end of the world, with life beyond our own planet and even with political intrigue – but there are also a few ‘out there’ expressions of whimsy and of something more undefineable – Flower is a good example, it seems to reach out and ask us to slow down and consider the landscape rather than rushing through shooting whatever moves.

So while video games can never be a ‘pure’ art, that exists for no reason other than that it was created, I do not see why they cannot be seen as art in the wider sense.

in the end though there is no right or wrong answer to your question because it depends on you own definition and perception of what is classed as art.

@last comment: meh?

That Ebert chap should’ve played Ico/Shadow Of The Colossus, then this argument would’ve been over by tea-time.

To me very few games are art because they have moved me emotionally. SOTC and Flower are examples of this.

I wouldn’t call the vast majority of cames art though, because they are much too streamlined and focus tested to protect the huge investments they require. That’s not to say I don’t appreciate the people who make them, on the contrary – I just wouldn’t call them art. Maybe the term “craft” is better; I would agree that most great games are expertly crafted by highly skilled individuals but they aren’t art to me. Uncharted falls in that category, that’s no criticism at all though. I couldn’t appreciate the game more than I do, it certainly is a masterpiece. I laughed while playing it, felt tense and sometimes sad. Still, I wouldn’t call it art, because while it assaults my senses in so many enjoyable ways there is still another kind of impact that I’m not getting from it.

Wow, deep.

In my view, Art can never be a medium that is dynamic and in motion. Technically this could be termed as artistic but not Art in the normal sense. The example of Flower is a good one. This game is artistic in it’s nature but it can never be classed as art. If you take the work of Vincent Van Gough, individually each painting is a work of art but put them all together in a slideshow/video, that medium does not become art.

Art is a unique motionless body of work that never alters but conjures different emotional responses from different people. If you wanted to term anything as art within the confines of a game then you could only apply the terminology of art to the base code of that title.

But this subject is hugely subjective by its very nature, but that’s the point.

I must agree with #21, it depends on the person. I have a picture my 2 year old nephew has done stuck to my wardrobe. To me it is art, yet someone else may call it scribble. I probably wouldn’t call a statue by a group of people made of parts from a scrapyard welded together art, but to me videogames are.

Reading everyones opinion on something we all obviously care about is great to see, very enlightening

Art imitates life. Games imitate life. Therefore Games are Art.
Perhaps the opposite is true too..
Life imitates Art. Life imitates games. Therefore all Art is a game.. :b

Art is subjective. It can be whatever the hell you want it to be. It takes skills, dedication and passion.

My opinion is that games are art. Therefore, there is no debate. In my mind, it is, and always has been since I first played Jak and Daxter.

In the end games are made of all the disciplines of the domain of art, creative endeavour. I fail to see how when you somehow put the elements of art together to creatw a game, it becomes lesser than the sum of it’s parts. Even with the addition of interactivity it doesn’t matter, fine art can be interactive, aswell as theatre, interactiveness with the audience is not just limited to gaming.

Yes there are higher quality, more thought provoking games than others, but the same can be said for any book, any painting, any theatre production, any film, hell, even literature afficionado’s still feel film is not art.

Woo I win! Please send the internet to the following address as reward…

But seriously, to add something to the debate: I just finished Valkyria Chronicles (which funnily enough coincides with my finishing watching the anime and listening to the soundtrack). To me, it’s not just the game which I consider art. The entire notion of ‘Valkyria Chronicles’ I consider to be art.

From the idea itself stemmed a beautiful tale of war, love, loss, suffering, liberation, racism… that in itself is art is it not? Evoking feelings from a notion or idea?

It kind of conflicts with the idea that all games are art which I don’t believe this is the case. You can’t have degrees of art – it is or isn’t. Valkyria Chronicles: art. BabieZ: Super Fun Baby Party Time: not art.

Games can be class of art, I am looking at courses of game development currently for University and some are labelled as Bachelor of Science and other Bachelors of Art.

In the sheer beauty of an environment of a game, if someone took a screen-shot that and put it on a wall next to a painting of an environment, both would look as beautiful as another.

Then again, the game is only art if experienced fully. It probably wouldn’t have the same effect on you if say it was muted the whole way or the game was just gameplay with no story. You can’t just jump in midway through the game and suddenly appreciate all there is to the game either.

Argh, I’m so confused. Why did I suggest a topic I myself don’t even have a proper explanation for?

PS I have another idea for a topic but I don’t want to steal anyone else’s thunder. I’ll leave it up to you, James.

I believe anything that can be up to interpretation can be considered to be art.
Then I realise some things are meant to be enjoyed.

Well flower is obviously art. There is no question about that. But i would question is flower a game?

I consider deep games to be art. Such as fallout 3, mass effect 2, zelda: TP, ect. You know those games that every decision has consequences and theres are many smaller stories within that one big amazing story. loadsa detail, great graphics. Beautiful surroundings and a feeling of joy to play and to look at. No one has the same character and we play as ourselves so to speak. These are the games that provoke emotional responses within the gamers and are very different experiences for each individual. For example no two people get the same emotions from viewing fine art which is also true about these games. Where as call of duty would be the same “interactive movie” kind of experience for everyone. Know what i mean?

So yes, certain games are art. Not only that but are very fine art that produces much more joy and stays in the mind of the gamer for longer, maybe even life. Some games shape the people who grow up with them and produce such fond memories in later life. Also can you image staring at the mona lisa for 5 or 6 hours a day? hmmm, no thank you! lol

Also, James, you referred to games as galleries. But it does not matter how many people participate in creating art. For example the sydney Opera house is considered art but many people constructed one architects designs in the same way games are made. I also think, to add to to point i made in my previous comment, after spending some time to ponder this subject. I truly believe now that an RPG done well is more of an art form than what people consider art in the first place. This opinion is based on some of the definition if not all i have read of what “Art” actually means.

Perhaps for the next topic you may wan’t to discuss what game/s has truly change a persons view on life or which game/s have really moved and were emotional for the gamer. Which games have the readers got the fondest memories and why. And is there any games the readers would consider to have impacted on their lives in small or maybe even big ways. Emotional games to be precise. And this may produce more feedback on this topic. I for one would love to see this topic next time!

It depends on the individual game and the developement team’s ambition but it does not help to sway non-gamer and so called “expert” opinons that the most bland, generic games are the ones that get all the coverage in the media.

Hey,
Short comment here.

One of the first things I did when I installed
my brand new PS3 was download Flower.

I liked it.

But was amazed at how quickly
(the fourth flower to be exact)
it turned in to a classic game again.

“Evade the bad stuff”
“Destroy the evil stuff”

I liked the “float and look around” levels more in the beginning.

But, It still was an interesting story / experience.
Altough maybe a bit mushy and touchy feelie.

But still.

Put more stuff like Linger in Shadows,
Flower, Detuned and others on the PSN.

And I’ll stuff my money into your online store.
Because, unlike iTunes, it gives me unique videogame experience nowhere else to be found.

Mind you, XBox Live is coming on strong with Limbo.

Also, The Last Guardian (and MGS4) are the sole reasons I just spent 300 euros on a toy…

So yeah, Sony, treasure these kind of games in your portfolio…