208 réponses à ce sujet

[FlashedMyDrive]

Anything can be considered art. I could take a dump on a slice of bread and say it has some sort of profound message.

[RocketManSR2]

Then we must agree to disagree.

[o Ventus]

InvincibleHero wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Look back at my post, this time attempting to understand the point.

Movies exist in more than 1 format, as do plays. The original manuscript, like I said, can be considered art. I never once said "it's art, end of story".

Video games, however,  do not.

Nope video games are a mass media like movies. If movies are art then games are as well. Either that or your logic is inconsistent or you are making a biased argument on purpose.

I pointed out how commercial doesn't matter or depreciate things from art to not. Your defintion is invalid.

How does amount of verison have to do with art? It is still the same vision the same words the same script. They can give different cuts but both verisons are art. A videogame has written (story and dialog) and visual (movie elements) that are unique thematic and shot and frmaed a certain way to evoke a response in the user. They are art.

What exactly are you trying to disprove from me? I never once said that I think anything, be it movies, games, or plays are art.

Stop trying to force your inane logic down my throat.

Modifié par o Ventus, 26 mars 2012 - 05:33 .

[o Ventus]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

Then we must agree to disagree.

Fair enough.

[InvincibleHero]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

I'll make this simple. Music, motion pictures, sculpting, and painting are unquestionably art, but a medium that uses them all isn't? Wut?

I think they realize their argument loses steam if the admit video games are art because they know they are stepping on the toes of the creator in requesting or outright demanding changes.

[Il Divo]

InvincibleHero wrote...

RocketManSR2 wrote...

I'll make this simple. Music, motion pictures, sculpting, and painting are unquestionably art, but a medium that uses them all isn't? Wut?

I think they realize their argument loses steam if the admit video games are art because they know they are stepping on the toes of the creator in requesting or outright demanding changes.

I wouldn't say so. I consider video games to be art and have no problem asking for alterations any more than any other medium.

Modifié par Il Divo, 26 mars 2012 - 05:36 .

[RocketManSR2]

I wouldn't have gone up to Michelangelo and said to him, "Hey, I don't like seeing David's penis. Remove it." (Ouch) While ME3 isn't on that level, the comparison stands.

Modifié par RocketManSR2, 26 mars 2012 - 05:39 .

[o Ventus]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

I wouldn't have gone up to Michelangelo and said to him, "Hey, I don't like seeing David's penis. Remove it." (Ouch) While ME3 isn't on that level, the comparison stands.

Michelangelo wasn't carving millions of copies of David, was he?

[InvincibleHero]

Il Divo wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

RocketManSR2 wrote...

I'll make this simple. Music, motion pictures, sculpting, and painting are unquestionably art, but a medium that uses them all isn't? Wut?

I think they realize their argument loses steam if the admit video games are art because they know they are stepping on the toes of the creator in requesting or outright demanding changes.

I wouldn't say so. I consider video games to be art and have no problem asking for alterations any more than any other medium.

To what though? Would you feel comfortable saying you know what we should be able to kill such and such totally mutilating their story and taking liberties with their characters? I think their wrting where it is clearly intended and is free from serious defect (as in broken dialog, game breaking plot holes that are proven, etc) should be off limits or it is an arrogant request. Anything gameplay is fair game. Asking for things in DLC or patches is fine (like a extended love scene or new romance) but altering the main/story (aka ending) or characters should be left up to their interpretation since they have a larger stake in the universe than we and indeed authored it.

[InvincibleHero]

o Ventus wrote...

The plays themselves can be art. You aren't paying for the play, you're paying for admission. You pay money to receive a ticket (the product) to get in.

Movies aren't mass produced on industrial levels, neither are paintings or sculptures or plays anyway.

And yes, lithographs are products if they are manufactured and sold to generate revenue.

What is this then? If you are not making the argument that plays and movies are art then you just wasted everyone's time with a non-sensical argument. You can't say they are and aren't depending on some criteria you made up. Why even mention them at all? Because in comparison, it usually means you compare something that exhibits the traits to something that doesn't to prove they are not in this case art.

So it it now your contention none of them are art then you are flat wrong but welcome to your opinion.

Modifié par InvincibleHero, 26 mars 2012 - 05:49 .

[foo man chew]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

I wouldn't have gone up to Michelangelo and said to him, "Hey, I don't like seeing David's penis. Remove it." (Ouch) While ME3 isn't on that level, the comparison stands.

No it doesn't david wasnt a mass produced product.Just because something is art doesn't mean that the consumer doesn't have the right to ask for change.Art is the cowards argument for putting out a sub standard product and not wanting to take acountability.

[o Ventus]

InvincibleHero wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

The plays themselves can be art. You aren't paying for the play, you're paying for admission. You pay money to receive a ticket (the product) to get in.

Movies aren't mass produced on industrial levels, neither are paintings or sculptures or plays anyway.

And yes, lithographs are products if they are manufactured and sold to generate revenue.

What is this then? If you are not making the argument that plays and movies are art then you just wasted everyone's time with a non-sensical argument. You can't say they are and aren't depending on some criteria you made up.

So it it now your contention none of them are art then you are flat wrong but welcome to your opinion.

I was originally talking about video games, you were the one that brought in plays and movies.

Video games are not art, simple. Everything else can be considered. I personally don't think they are, not anymore at least.

[CELL55]

I think that when a video game is created, it's art. When a video game is sold, it's a product. When promises are made about a video game that are patently false, it's lying.

When a painter paints a painting, it's art. When a painting is sold, it's a product. When a painter promises to paint a picture of apples, but when sold turns out to be bananas, it's lying.

[InvincibleHero]

foo man chew wrote...

RocketManSR2 wrote...

I wouldn't have gone up to Michelangelo and said to him, "Hey, I don't like seeing David's penis. Remove it." (Ouch) While ME3 isn't on that level, the comparison stands.

No it doesn't david wasnt a mass produced product.Just because something is art doesn't mean that the consumer doesn't have the right to ask for change.Art is the cowards argument for putting out a sub standard product and not wanting to take acountability.

So I have to ask by what right do you get to ask someone else to change what they made?

[InvincibleHero]

CELL55 wrote...

I think that when a video game is created, it's art. When a video game is sold, it's a product. When promises are made about a video game that are patently false, it's lying.

When a painter paints a painting, it's art. When a painting is sold, it's a product. When a painter promises to paint a picture of apples, but when sold turns out to be bananas, it's lying.

How does it morph into non-art just because money changed hands? It is the same as it ever was.

[o Ventus]

CELL55 wrote...

I think that when a video game is created, it's art. When a video game is sold, it's a product. When promises are made about a video game that are patently false, it's lying.

When a painter paints a painting, it's art. When a painting is sold, it's a product. When a painter promises to paint a picture of apples, but when sold turns out to be bananas, it's lying.

A fair enough way to present it.

[o Ventus]

InvincibleHero wrote...

CELL55 wrote...

I think that when a video game is created, it's art. When a video game is sold, it's a product. When promises are made about a video game that are patently false, it's lying.

When a painter paints a painting, it's art. When a painting is sold, it's a product. When a painter promises to paint a picture of apples, but when sold turns out to be bananas, it's lying.

How does it morph into non-art just because money changed hands? It is the same as it ever was.

It isn't that it's being sold, it's that it's being sold with the sole purpose of generating revenue.

Are you dense, or legitimately misunderstanding?

[Il Divo]

InvincibleHero wrote...

To what though? Would you feel comfortable saying you know what we should be able to kill such and such totally mutilating their story and taking liberties with their characters? I think their wrting where it is clearly intended and is free from serious defect (as in broken dialog, game breaking plot holes that are proven, etc) should be off limits or it is an arrogant request. Anything gameplay is fair game. Asking for things in DLC or patches is fine (like a extended love scene or new romance) but altering the main/story (aka ending) or characters should be left up to their interpretation since they have a larger stake in the universe than we and indeed authored it.

Not at all. I'd argue it's irrelevant who authored it. What matters is that it achieved its express purpose: to entertain.

When most people purchase books, films, games, etc, the thought process is not: I will pay for an artistic vision. The thought process is: which artistic vision is most likely to entertain me? This is why I'm buying Bioware games, instead of Call of Duty; the latter are not likely to keep me interested. The second I'm not entertained, Bioware has a problem (assuming enough people share a similar sentiment). Consumerism is about voting with the wallet. Companies see fit to provide a product and attach a price tag. Here, consumers are simply taking the initiative to make a market known for a certain product (an ending which entertains).

In another thread, I used a comparison to painting. If you're interested in impressionist paintings, but the market wants realism, ultimately you're going to have to choose: artistic integrity or financial success. The two are not always achievable.

Modifié par Il Divo, 26 mars 2012 - 05:56 .

[RocketManSR2]

o Ventus wrote...

Michelangelo wasn't carving millions of copies of David, was he?

No, but what if the statue had molds created of it and millions of copies were reproduced from them. Does that diminish what Michelangelo had accomplished?

Modifié par RocketManSR2, 26 mars 2012 - 05:59 .

[o Ventus]

RocketManSR2 wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Michelangelo wasn't carving millions of copies of David, was he?

No, but what if the statue had molds created of it and millions of copies were reproduced from them. Does that diminish what Michelangelo had accomplished?

*assuming he did something paricularly impressive in carving David*

If they were sold to generate profit, yes.

Modifié par o Ventus, 26 mars 2012 - 06:00 .

[foo man chew]

InvincibleHero wrote...

foo man chew wrote...

RocketManSR2 wrote...

I wouldn't have gone up to Michelangelo and said to him, "Hey, I don't like seeing David's penis. Remove it." (Ouch) While ME3 isn't on that level, the comparison stands.

No it doesn't david wasnt a mass produced product.Just because something is art doesn't mean that the consumer doesn't have the right to ask for change.Art is the cowards argument for putting out a sub standard product and not wanting to take acountability.

So I have to ask by what right do you get to ask someone else to change what they made?

Its simple if i purchase it and it didnt deliver what was advertised as the consumer of said product i have every right to ask for change,refund or to refuse to support their company ever again.Why is everybody so sensitive on the pro art side.If you go to a restraunt and order a hamburger with no ketchup and they bring you a hamburger with ketchup by your logic you have no right to ask for them to fix it.Gues what they created it so its art and that argument can be made for every product ever created.Hence mass produced video games should be treated like every other product.

[The Anti-Saint]

FlashedMyDrive wrote...

Anything can be considered art. I could take a dump on a slice of bread and say it has some sort of profound message.

^
In a nutshell.

Oh, Mass Effect 3 is definitely art...it's the Mona Lisa with a giant green, red, and blue X splotched on her face.

[InvincibleHero]

Il Divo wrote...

Not at all. I'd argue it's irrelevant who authored it. What matters is that it achieved its express purpose: to entertain.

When most people purchase books, films, games, etc, the thought process is not: I will pay for an artistic vision. The thought process is: which artistic vision is most likely to entertain me? This is why I'm buying Bioware games, instead of Call of Duty; the latter are not likely to keep me interested. The second I'm not entertained, Bioware has a problem (assuming enough people share a similar sentiment). Consumerism is about voting with the wallet. Companies see fit to provide a product and attach a price tag. Here, consumers are simply taking the initiative to make a market known for a certain product (an ending which entertains).

In another thread, I used a comparison to painting. If you're interested in impressionist paintings, but the market wants realism, ultimately you're going to have to choose: artistic integrity or financial success. The two are not always achievable.

I understand your point of not being entertained, but if they change it for you it may alienate more than they gain by making you happy. Plenty of people can be happy with it as is so why does it have to change? You feel your needs outweigh the creator and all other users to get your satisfaction.

I agree you can choose not to buy a product and that is the proper response as far as most products go. In this case it isn't something you can get 100 people to agree yep it's broken in a concrete and objective manner to say you deserve a remedy like bad ram that doesn't work. for a refund or new ones.

[RocketManSR2]

o Ventus wrote...

*assuming he did something paricularly impressive in carving David*

If they were sold to generate profit, yes.

I think I see your stance. Once someone seeks to make a living off of something like painting or sculpting, you no longer consider it art?

- There are those who express themselves through music with no desire to get rich off of it. Why isn't that art?

Modifié par RocketManSR2, 26 mars 2012 - 06:06 .

[wolfstanus]

Oh look another armchair thread. Let me guess your a art major? Or an expert? Or are you some random Internet guy saying its not art without having any idea what art is?

"person is smart... People are stupid animals "