281 réponses à ce sujet

[tenojitsu]

 Riddle me this... SInce when did video games stop being GAMES and become "art?" I understand that designing characters, environments, etc takes an artistic touch, like being able to draw, and writing a good story requires a great deal of skill and talent, but is it really art? In my opinion, books are books, movies are movies, and "art" is painting, sculpture, and other stuff like that. I never learned about books, movies, or video games in any "art" class that I've taken. How come everyone that does anything that requires a bit of skill want to be called an artist? The guy who owns the local BBQ joint makes some mean fried chicken, maybe he's an artist too.

Its a video game, period. Art can't be mass produced, i.e., there is only one Mona Lisa (yes there are copies and if that's where you take your argument just don't even bother). The content of a DVD game that gets pumped out by the thousands is not art, and I'm tired of being told we have to treat Bioware like "artists." I'm sure these are the same people that feel the need to call everyone they know the first time their snot nosed kid goes poopy in the potty, because apparently that's art too (see mass effect 3 ending)

Modifié par tenojitsu, 20 mars 2012 - 08:06 .

[az350z]

tenojitsu wrote...

How come everyone that does anything that requires a bit of skill want to be called an artist? The guy who owns the local BBQ joint makes some mean fried chicken, maybe he's an artist too.

Maybe you're right. When's the last time someone filed an FTC complaint because his chicken wasn't as spicy as he thought?

Same thing as this.

/thread............

[Midnight Eternal]

tenojitsu wrote...

 Riddle me this... SInce when did video games stop being GAMES and become "art?" I understand that designing characters, environments, etc takes an artistic touch, like being able to draw, and writing a good story requires a great deal of skill and talent, but is it really art? In my opinion, books are books, movies are movies, and "art" is painting, sculpture, and other stuff like that. I never learned about books, movies, or video games in any "art" class that I've taken. How come everyone that does anything that requires a bit of skill want to be called an artist? The guy who owns the local BBQ joint makes some mean fried chicken, maybe he's an artist too.

Its a video game, period. Art can't be mass produced, i.e., there is only one Mona Lisa (yes there are copies and if that's where you take your argument just don't even bother). The content of a DVD game that gets pumped out by the thousands is not art, and I'm tired of being told we have to treat Bioware like "artists." I'm sure these are the same people that feel the need to call everyone they know the first time their snot nosed kid goes poopy in the potty, because apparently that's art too (see mass effect 3 ending)

THIS^

That and this reminds me of Hideo Kojima's opinion about it. From how I understand it he didn't directly say this, but that games will never be art.

Modifié par Midnight Eternal, 20 mars 2012 - 08:08 .

[Simpfan]

What art "is" is up to interpretation, as is whether the ending can be shooed away because of it.

But video games are a form of art, just like music is a form of art, and literature and theatre.

[Cyruge]

I think the main reason why the "art" defense doesn't work is because games are made for the customers, just like a chair or a banana. It's a product, and it's up to the consumer to validate it and if necessary, ask for something better.

[ConradsLaces]

Hmmm... thought provoking.
So... if ME3 is 'art'...then we all just bought reproductions of the original...

I like your thoughts on the topic... art, to me, definitely has a one-of-a-kind feel to it...
but...
there are some games - most of them indy - that just have a certain... i don't know what... to them... and they make me think very deeply... 'Braid' comes to mind.

But... at that rate - it's just a thought provoking video game... does EVERYTHING that provokes deep thought need to be called art? By my own logic, there, a visit with my shrink would be considered art... and so would your post... because.. damn it.. now I'm thinking about the whole
"what is art?" question...

Heh - very good post... and I agree with your view. Sorry for my ramblings.

[Kuari999]

Games are art as much as literature is... but well... Sherlock Holmes and Conan Doyle is a good counter. There are rare times where the fans are flat out right and you simply screwed up.

[tenojitsu]

ConradsLaces wrote...

Hmmm... thought provoking.
So... if ME3 is 'art'...then we all just bought reproductions of the original...

I like your thoughts on the topic... art, to me, definitely has a one-of-a-kind feel to it...
but...
there are some games - most of them indy - that just have a certain... i don't know what... to them... and they make me think very deeply... 'Braid' comes to mind.

But... at that rate - it's just a thought provoking video game... does EVERYTHING that provokes deep thought need to be called art? By my own logic, there, a visit with my shrink would be considered art... and so would your post... because.. damn it.. now I'm thinking about the whole
"what is art?" question...

Heh - very good post... and I agree with your view. Sorry for my ramblings.

Haha, thanks. At least u have something to talk to shrik about next visit, 

Modifié par tenojitsu, 20 mars 2012 - 08:13 .

[Su13perfitz]

Midnight Eternal wrote...

tenojitsu wrote...

 Riddle me this... SInce when did video games stop being GAMES and become "art?" I understand that designing characters, environments, etc takes an artistic touch, like being able to draw, and writing a good story requires a great deal of skill and talent, but is it really art? In my opinion, books are books, movies are movies, and "art" is painting, sculpture, and other stuff like that. I never learned about books, movies, or video games in any "art" class that I've taken. How come everyone that does anything that requires a bit of skill want to be called an artist? The guy who owns the local BBQ joint makes some mean fried chicken, maybe he's an artist too.

Its a video game, period. Art can't be mass produced, i.e., there is only one Mona Lisa (yes there are copies and if that's where you take your argument just don't even bother). The content of a DVD game that gets pumped out by the thousands is not art, and I'm tired of being told we have to treat Bioware like "artists." I'm sure these are the same people that feel the need to call everyone they know the first time their snot nosed kid goes poopy in the potty, because apparently that's art too (see mass effect 3 ending)

THIS^

That and this reminds me of Hideo Kojima's opinion about it. From how I understand it he didn't directly say this, but that games will never be art.

Moreover the sport element can't be ignored in video games. You always compete against something even if it is yourself or the computer A.I.. Sports that are not fun are not every long for this word nor should they be. ME3 has left a legacy that is going to hang on bioware's neck like a millstone.

[Jackal7713]

Simpfan wrote...

What art "is" is up to interpretation, as is whether the ending can be shooed away because of it.

But video games are a form of art, just like music is a form of art, and literature and theatre.

So by that logic the game Tetris is art?

Was Pong art?

How about Mrs. Pacman?

Modifié par Jackal7713, 20 mars 2012 - 08:17 .

[tenojitsu]

Kuari999 wrote...

Games are art as much as literature is... but well... Sherlock Holmes and Conan Doyle is a good counter. There are rare times where the fans are flat out right and you simply screwed up.

NOT to get all philosophical, but is literature really art? I'm not trying to diminish what is involved in writing a good story, 
 but is it really art? Same goes for music. Is music really art, or is it music? I'm pretty sure that the term "recording artist" is a fairly new thing, and bards at the local watering whole in 1673 weren't considered artists. Any history majors out there to confirm this, haha?

[Simpfan]

Jackal7713 wrote...

Simpfan wrote...

What art "is" is up to interpretation, as is whether the ending can be shooed away because of it.

But video games are a form of art, just like music is a form of art, and literature and theatre.

So by that logic the game Tetris is art?

Was Pong art?

How about Mrs. Pacman?

Yes.

[tenojitsu]

Jackal7713 wrote...

Simpfan wrote...

What art "is" is up to interpretation, as is whether the ending can be shooed away because of it.

But video games are a form of art, just like music is a form of art, and literature and theatre.

So by that logic the game Tetris is art?

Was Pong art?

How about Mrs. Pacman?

I never really even thought of that angle. Good point

[Jackal7713]

Simpfan wrote...

Jackal7713 wrote...

Simpfan wrote...

What art "is" is up to interpretation, as is whether the ending can be shooed away because of it.

But video games are a form of art, just like music is a form of art, and literature and theatre.

So by that logic the game Tetris is art?

Was Pong art?

How about Mrs. Pacman?

Yes.

LMAO

[recentio]

Novels and films can be mass produced and they are art. Games really are art. But they are also craft -- specifically the craft of storytelling and gameplay -- and they are also commercial product. Criticism of the poor high-level craftsmanship present in the ending is entirely justified, IMO.

Modifié par recentio, 20 mars 2012 - 08:19 .

[Simpfan]

Art is a term that describes a diverse range of human activities and the products of those activities, but is most often understood to refer to painting, film, photography, sculpture, and other visual media. Music, theatre, dance, literature, and interactive media are included in a broader definition of art or the arts.

The arts are a vast subdivision of culture, composed of many creative endeavors and disciplines. It is a broader term than "art", which as a description of a field usually means only the visual arts. The arts encompass visual arts, literary arts and the performing arts – music, theatre, dance and film, among others

[tenojitsu]

recentio wrote...

Novels and films can be mass produced and they are art. Games really are art. But they are also craft -- specifically the craft of storytelling and gameplay -- and they are also commercial product. Criticism of the poor high-level craftsmanship present in the ending is entirely justified, IMO.

I see your point, but I really dont consider novels or films art. Do they take a great deal of skill to create, yes. But does everything that takes skill to accomplish neccessarily mean it is art?

[whydoyouwanttoknow]

Even if it is art, if someone sells you art, wrapped up in a box, and you can't see it unless you pay for it, and it's advertised as being a pic of a duck and you pay for it and open it and it's a pic of a dog the artist can't claim artistic licence because you paid for a pic of a duck.

[tenojitsu]

Simpfan wrote...

Art is a term that describes a diverse range of human activities and the products of those activities, but is most often understood to refer to painting, film, photography, sculpture, and other visual media. Music, theatre, dance, literature, and interactive media are included in a broader definition of art or the arts.

The arts are a vast subdivision of culture, composed of many creative endeavors and disciplines. It is a broader term than "art", which as a description of a field usually means only the visual arts. The arts encompass visual arts, literary arts and the performing arts – music, theatre, dance and film, among others

Thanks for the Webster definition, but thats not really the point of this topic. The whole point is that the definition of what people consider art these days has become inflated, to say the least

Modifié par tenojitsu, 20 mars 2012 - 08:25 .

[Eidelweiss]

Cyruge wrote...

I think the main reason why the "art" defense doesn't work is because games are made for the customers, just like a chair or a banana. It's a product, and it's up to the consumer to validate it and if necessary, ask for something better.

That's not necessarily true. Most works of art are commissions from patrons brought to the artist. In a lot of classical pieces, someone asked an artist to draw something for them. Examples include Da Vinci's Mona Lisa, Rembrandt's Night Watch, and Michelangelo's David. Even modern day examples of 'art for art's sake' is done with an audience reaction in mind along with the hopeful sale of those pieces so that the artist can continue his or her artistic endeavors.

The second half of your comment still applies.

P.S. I definitely consider video games to be works of art because you're telling a story (literature) with audio (music) and visuals (graphic/visual art) alongside player input. The real reason why the art defense doesn't work in the case of the endings of Mass Effect 3 is less about the actual definition of what art is and more about the fact that it doesn't follow and semblance of logic and millions of other reasons that other people have posted before. 

[recentio]

tenojitsu wrote...

recentio wrote...

Novels and films can be mass produced and they are art. Games really are art. But they are also craft -- specifically the craft of storytelling and gameplay -- and they are also commercial product. Criticism of the poor high-level craftsmanship present in the ending is entirely justified, IMO.

I see your point, but I really dont consider novels or films art. Do they take a great deal of skill to create, yes. But does everything that takes skill to accomplish neccessarily mean it is art?

I think we may fundamentally disagree about the meaning of the term art. To me art includes a multitude of creative endeavors, including music, the visual arts, theater, dance, poetry, literature, and yes games. I wouldn't call them all masterpieces, by any means, but I call them all artforms. What creative fields do you consider to fall under the label art?

[Simpfan]

tenojitsu wrote...

Simpfan wrote...

Art is a term that describes a diverse range of human activities and the products of those activities, but is most often understood to refer to painting, film, photography, sculpture, and other visual media. Music, theatre, dance, literature, and interactive media are included in a broader definition of art or the arts.

The arts are a vast subdivision of culture, composed of many creative endeavors and disciplines. It is a broader term than "art", which as a description of a field usually means only the visual arts. The arts encompass visual arts, literary arts and the performing arts – music, theatre, dance and film, among others

Thanks for the Webster definition, but thats not really the point of this topic. The whole point is that the definition of what people consider art these days has become inflated, to say the least

Which is your opinion.
A very short sighted narrow opinion.

[tenojitsu]

Eidelweiss wrote...

Cyruge wrote...

I think the main reason why the "art" defense doesn't work is because games are made for the customers, just like a chair or a banana. It's a product, and it's up to the consumer to validate it and if necessary, ask for something better.

That's not necessarily true. Most works of art are commissions from patrons brought to the artist. In a lot of classical pieces, someone asked an artist to draw something for them. Examples include Da Vinci's Mona Lisa, Rembrandt's Night Watch, and Michelangelo's David. Even modern day examples of 'art for art's sake' is done with an audience reaction in mind along with the hopeful sale of those pieces so that the artist can continue his or her artistic endeavors.

The second half of your comment still applies.

P.S. I definitely consider video games to be works of art because you're telling a story (literature) with audio (music) and visuals (graphic/visual art) alongside player input. The real reason why the art defense doesn't work in the case of the endings of Mass Effect 3 is less about the actual definition of what art is and more about the fact that it doesn't follow and semblance of logic and millions of other reasons that other people have posted before. 

You could make an arguement perhaps that the story and music could be considered art (although I would say these are "artistic in nature" at best, but I dont buy the visuals being art. Are they nice pictures, sure, but I wouldnt call them art.

Modifié par tenojitsu, 20 mars 2012 - 08:31 .

[juliannacorn]

az350z wrote...

tenojitsu wrote...

How come everyone that does anything that requires a bit of skill want to be called an artist? The guy who owns the local BBQ joint makes some mean fried chicken, maybe he's an artist too.

Maybe you're right. When's the last time someone filed an FTC complaint because his chicken wasn't as spicy as he thought?

Same thing as this.

/thread............

Totally different.  If the same man ordered a vegan substitute for fried chicken and received fried chicken, then filed the complaint with FTC then it would be the same thing.

I believe video games are a form of art.  That aside, time and time again it was stated that the ending would reflect the choices we made, that it would be more than A, B, or C, that it wasn't even possible to be able to count how many endings there were as it was too layered for that.

The complaint would be false advertisement, which is exactly what the FTC is for.  Do I think it was a little overboard, sure.  But not all that surprising.

[tenojitsu]

Simpfan wrote...

tenojitsu wrote...

Simpfan wrote...

Art is a term that describes a diverse range of human activities and the products of those activities, but is most often understood to refer to painting, film, photography, sculpture, and other visual media. Music, theatre, dance, literature, and interactive media are included in a broader definition of art or the arts.

The arts are a vast subdivision of culture, composed of many creative endeavors and disciplines. It is a broader term than "art", which as a description of a field usually means only the visual arts. The arts encompass visual arts, literary arts and the performing arts – music, theatre, dance and film, among others

Thanks for the Webster definition, but thats not really the point of this topic. The whole point is that the definition of what people consider art these days has become inflated, to say the least

Which is your opinion.
A very short sighted narrow opinion.

If you think questioning what is considered art these days is short sighted and narrow, you are more than entitled to that opinion.