Features

Phoenix Gamma · #1

Well first you'd have to define "art", which is a whole can of pretentious worms that I hate opening, so I won't.

But you could definitely argue that games qualify as interactive art, which is a legitimate and recognized form of art. The only thing is there are a lot of fucking awful ass games all about the same thing (shooting dudes, stabbing dudes, punching dudes). Sorta like how comics are art, even though most of it caters to kids and manchilren and is about dudes in tights with superpowers.

Grislygus · #2

Videogames will never be art. Unless, of course, some pop factory art tool like Murakami develops a video game; suddenly "ironic" video games will be seen as a clever and stunning subversion of the shallow, corporate and moneybased culture that it satirizes by becoming yet another facet of that shallow, corporate, and moneybased culture.

The stuffed-turkeys of the art dealing world will have their minds blown by contemporary pop art (yet again) and Takashi Murakami will laugh all the way to the bank. In the meantime, videogames made for the sheer purpose of being FUN and TURNING A PROFIT will still be looked down upon as pathetic and inferior commercial art. (Unlike Murakami! He's a GENIUS! We <3 SUPERFLAT PLEASE LET US THROW MONEY AT YOU, YOU STUNNING AND TIMELESS GOD OF EARTH-SHATTERINGLY LIFE AFFIRMING ARTWORK! HUGS AND KISSES!)

Terrible videogames made specifically to be knowing and sophisticated will be sold at 14.3 million dollars a pop at international art auctions, and galleries will begin showing classic game covers sealed away in crystal cases. These will be seen as deep, meaningful, and unintentionally relevant pillars of pop art that achieve heights of grandeur and sophistication that no *scoff* CONVENTIONAL artwork could ever hope to achieve. Keanu Reeves, Nicholas Cage, and Jennifer Anniston will immediately begin decorating their walls with classic arcade posters that they paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for.

Phoenix Gamma · #3

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grislygus

Videogames will never be art. Unless, of course, some pop factory art tool like Murakami develops a video game; suddenly "ironic" video games will be seen as a clever and stunning subversion of the shallow, corporate and moneybased culture that it satirizes by becoming yet another facet of that shallow, corporate, and moneybased culture.

That's already happening. That's why people circlejerk over Suda51 even though he hasn't made a single game that was good aside from a few flashes of goodness in No More Heroes 2.

If I ever meet anyone in person who seriously argues that the overworld in NMH1 is bad because it's a statement, I will personally shove my foot so far up their anus that it pops out of their mouth.

Anselm · #4

When FFVII came out, a few friends would come over and we'd play it together. Three of us, passing around the joystick at intervals and making battle decisions for the character that was considered our avatar.

One of their parents asked me how we could play a game so much. I explained that it was the story that kept us interested. The same reason you read a good book. I also explained that for many people of my generation, a good video game means the same as books did for previous generations.

When Aeris was run through by Sephiroth's sword, the room got pretty quite. It changed the mood of our social event. We had vested interests in the characters.

A good game will leave an impression. I would consider that art.

In short, I agree with you. Some games are not art because they don't merit any creativity or real furthering of the industry.

How about a discussion on games that should be considered art, and games that should just be considered an insult to the hobby.

Art: FFVII

Insulting: Mario Party 8

~Anselm~

10,000 Volt Ghost · #5

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anselm

When FFVII came out, a few friends would come over and we'd play it together. Three of us, passing around the joystick at intervals and making battle decisions for the character that was considered our avatar.

One of their parents asked me how we could play a game so much. I explained that it was the story that kept us interested. The same reason you read a good book. I also explained that for many people of my generation, a good video game means the same as books did for previous generations.

When Aeris was run through by Sephiroth's sword, the room got pretty quite. It changed the mood of our social event. We had vested interests in the characters.

A good game will leave an impression. I would consider that art.

In short, I agree with you. Some games are not art because they don't merit any creativity or real furthering of the industry.

How about a discussion on games that should be considered art, and games that should just be considered an insult to the hobby.

Art: FFVII

Insulting: Mario Party 8

~Anselm~

You should have played FF VI. It was better art AND co-op.