184 réponses à ce sujet

[Xamufam]

phillip100 wrote...

WittingEight65 wrote...

A video game is not art. Ugh.

How is a video game not art?

Games are NOT art, they are PRODUCT that INCLUDES art. Just like a car, a
house, furniture, and almost every other product you pay money for and
then get annoyed with if it turns out to be less than you expected.
There are artistic elements involved to be sure, but in the end, they
are only product.


The only reason anyone ever stuck by the games are art silliness is in a desperate attempt to give them some respectability. It failed.
Respectability came through the Wii and game apps on Smart Phones reaching out to
oodles of casual gamers and making Video Games mainstream.

Not to mention that any claims to artistic integrity in ME3 were compromised the second they made a single decision based on the directives of the corporate masters. Like Multi-player, getting it out by a certain date, including or not including material because it would alienate/ reach out to certain communities, etc., etc. Decisions that
are made not out of artistic choice, but to sell a product.

Modifié par Troxa, 06 septembre 2013 - 09:50 .

[Xamufam]

AlanC9 wrote...

Troxa wrote...


For ART in stories you need:
Suspension of disbelief this should not be broken.
Secondary belief:

Inside it, what [the author] relates is 'true:' it accords with the laws of
that world. You therefore believe it, while you are, as it were, inside.
The moment disbelief arises, the spell is broken; the magic, or rather
art, has failed. You are then out in the Primary World again, looking at
the little abortive Secondary World from the outside. -J.R.R. Tolkien

You have to reach it with logic & reason in an socratic exercise, not flimsy conjecture
Mass effect is a talky techy universe so details matters
You needs narrative coherence, things should not pop up from nowhere
don't introduce a new main goal & new character.
Don’t change voice, tone or attitude. An ending will
feel tacked on if the voice of the narrator suddenly sounds alien to the
voice that’s been consistent for the previous 80,000 words.
Don't force emotional drama, that does not fit

I can think of works of art that violate every single one of these principles. 

tell

[Nole]

Because Games go beyond “art”.

[Iakus]

Well, given some think a canvas streaked with monkey feces is "art"...

[dreamgazer]

Troxa wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

@ Troxa

You are speaking about QUALITY principles of art, not about definition of art itself.

Work donť become art by its quality, but by it nature.

When it comes to litteratur & story telling the rules change
And a video game is a product.

So are films, graphic novels, and commissioned paintings.  What's your point?

[Xamufam]

dreamgazer wrote...

Troxa wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

@ Troxa

You are speaking about QUALITY principles of art, not about definition of art itself.

Work donť become art by its quality, but by it nature.

When it comes to litteratur & story telling the rules change
And a video game is a product.

So are films, graphic novels, and commissioned paintings.  What's your point?

These days I would say there is little pure art being done.  Movies, TVs, books, music; they all include artistic elements, but for the most part they are just product. many things include artistic elements but that doesn't make the entire thing art.

Modifié par Troxa, 06 septembre 2013 - 09:43 .

[JamesFaith]

Troxa wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

@ Troxa

You are speaking about QUALITY principles of art, not about definition of art itself.

Work donť become art by its quality, but by it nature.

When it comes to litteratur & story telling the rules change
And a video game is a product.

Producte can be art. There is no absolute exclusivity.

Alexander Dumas romans were published by parts in magazines and published for masses, he even blackmailed editors for more money by his romans, yet this product is considered art today.

Renaissance painters and sculptor like da Vinci or Michelangeo created their masterpieces for patrons who commonly demand alternation of these works. Both product and art.

And we can say this about nearlly all song except folk songs, about operas, many books, films and so long.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

dreamgazer wrote...

Troxa wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

@ Troxa

You are speaking about QUALITY principles of art, not about definition of art itself.

Work donť become art by its quality, but by it nature.

When it comes to litteratur & story telling the rules change
And a video game is a product.

So are films, graphic novels, and commissioned paintings.  What's your point?

I don't know his point, but my point is that art is subjective. Not every video game, story, book, painting, graphic novel, and film is art.

Is Jersey Shore art? Is Transformers 3 art?

[Nole]

Jersey Shore is art in its most pure expression.

[JamesFaith]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

I don't know his point, but my point is that art is subjective. Not every video game, story, book, painting, graphic novel, and film is art.

Is Jersey Shore art? Is Transformers 3 art?

Yes, they are.

And by subjectivity of art you can label them as bad/good, uninteresting and so on. Term subjectivity of art isnť tied to definition of art itself, but to its subjective evaluation.

[dreamgazer]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

I don't know his point, but my point is that art is subjective. Not every video game, story, book, painting, graphic novel, and film is art.

Is Jersey Shore art? Is Transformers 3 art?

... to the person viewing it. I can't count the number of time that I've heard some extremely dense individual dismiss some of cinema's greatest creations as "boring", "stupid", or "pretentious".  Does that mean it's not art? 

The process of creating those things, no matter the end result, is an artform.  Check out the visual effects and concept art for Transformers, and tell me "art" didn't play a hand in its creation. I'll refrain from trying to explain how provoking the lowest-common denominator to react to Jersey Shore through editing an music could be seen as an "artform".

[MassivelyEffective0730]

JamesFaith wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

I don't know his point, but my point is that art is subjective. Not every video game, story, book, painting, graphic novel, and film is art.

Is Jersey Shore art? Is Transformers 3 art?

Yes, they are.

And by subjectivity of art you can label them as bad/good, uninteresting and so on. Term subjectivity of art isnť tied to definition of art itself, but to its subjective evaluation.

And I think art itself is a subjective term that can only be applied to pieces of art that merit it. Of course, what is defined as art is subjective to each person's perspective.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

dreamgazer wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

I don't know his point, but my point is that art is subjective. Not every video game, story, book, painting, graphic novel, and film is art.

Is Jersey Shore art? Is Transformers 3 art?

... to the person viewing it. I can't count the number of time that I've heard some extremely dense individual dismiss some of cinema's greatest creations as "boring", "stupid", or "pretentious".  Does that mean it's not art? 

The process of creating those things, no matter the end result, is an artform.  Check out the visual effects and concept art for Transformers, and tell me "art" didn't play a hand in its creation. I'll refrain from trying to explain how provoking the lowest-common denominator to react to Jersey Shore through editing an music could be seen as an "artform".

I was asking in the more rhetorical sense. I wasn't being defiably virulent against either. 

Going on to what that person might have said about, say, Apocalypse Now, or Close Encounters, I'll leave it to them to decide whether it's art or not. 

I admit, I deem something worthy of art by its end result. If the end result fails, then I think the creative process was a bust, and I think it was a waste of time. I personally don't see much art beyond the existing Transformers material used in the making of the film. 

I guess the best way for me to define art (based on my own ideas on it) is by two criteria: creativity and utility. If it's not both of these, then I don't define it as art. By utility, I mean purpose, value, extending the vision of the creator to the audience or viewer in a manner that is translatable and useful.

[Ghost Lightning]

The MoMA and SAAM both consider video games art. that's more than good enough for me. And as Mass Effect is a video game, yes, it would be part of that.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

J. Reezy wrote...

Art...art never changes.

Not for me it doesn't. 

The items meriting my personal application of the term do though.

[phillip100]

Troxa wrote...

phillip100 wrote...

WittingEight65 wrote...

A video game is not art. Ugh.

How is a video game not art?

Games are NOT art, they are PRODUCT that INCLUDES art. Just like a car, a
house, furniture, and almost every other product you pay money for and
then get annoyed with if it turns out to be less than you expected.
There are artistic elements involved to be sure, but in the end, they
are only product.


The only reason anyone ever stuck by the games are art silliness is in a desperate attempt to give them some respectability. It failed.
Respectability came through the Wii and game apps on Smart Phones reaching out to
oodles of casual gamers and making Video Games mainstream.

Not to mention that any claims to artistic integrity in ME3 were compromised the second they made a single decision based on the directives of the corporate masters. Like Multi-player, getting it out by a certain date, including or not including material because it would alienate/ reach out to certain communities, etc., etc. Decisions that
are made not out of artistic choice, but to sell a product.

Thanks for your explanation.

Modifié par phillip100, 06 septembre 2013 - 10:18 .

[dreamgazer]

Troxa wrote...

The only reason anyone ever stuck by the games are art silliness is in a desperate attempt to give them some respectability. It failed.

Ugh. Horribly inaccurate. 

Not to mention that any claims to artistic integrity in ME3 were compromised the second they made a single decision based on the directives of the corporate masters. Like Multi-player, getting it out by a certain date, including or not including material because it would alienate/ reach out to certain communities, etc., etc. Decisions that
are made not out of artistic choice, but to sell a product.

So, anything with a deadline and requirements from an external source is instantly labeled "not art"?

[RZIBARA]

yes, Mass Effect is art.

[Iakus]

dreamgazer wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

I don't know his point, but my point is that art is subjective. Not every video game, story, book, painting, graphic novel, and film is art.

Is Jersey Shore art? Is Transformers 3 art?

... to the person viewing it. I can't count the number of time that I've heard some extremely dense individual dismiss some of cinema's greatest creations as "boring", "stupid", or "pretentious".  Does that mean it's not art? 

The process of creating those things, no matter the end result, is an artform.  Check out the visual effects and concept art for Transformers, and tell me "art" didn't play a hand in its creation. I'll refrain from trying to explain how provoking the lowest-common denominator to react to Jersey Shore through editing an music could be seen as an "artform".

That's it, the next time someone complains about MEHEM, I'm going to counter with "It's art!"

[dreamgazer]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

I was asking in the more rhetorical sense. I wasn't being defiably virulent against either.

Hah! I hope you didn't take my comments as a defense of those ... things.

Going on to what that person might have said about, say, Apocalypse Now, or Close Encounters, I'll leave it to them to decide whether it's art or not.

I admit, I deem something worthy of art by its end result. If the end result fails, then I think the creative process was a bust, and I think it was a waste of time. I personally don't see much art beyond the existing Transformers material used in the making of the film. 

I guess the best way for me to define art (based on my own ideas on it) is by two criteria: creativity and utility. If it's not both of these, then I don't define it as art. By utility, I mean purpose, value, extending the vision of the creator to the audience or viewer in a manner that is translatable and useful.

I get that, and I don't disagree with your method of evaluation---just the binary "yes / no" to whether it's art or not. Certain paintings, films, and graphic novels didn't impact me the way they have other people, but I'm not going to outright dismiss their artistic merit because they didn't offer me personal purpose and value. 

It does, essentially, translate back to "it's subjective".

[dreamgazer]

iakus wrote...
That's it, the next time someone complains about MEHEM, I'm going to counter with "It's art!"

Hey, you'll never hear me say a negative thing about the creator's efforts in piecing together the happy-ending fanfic. It's very resourceful and creative with the tools he's got.

Those that champion it in the context of its application? That's another story.

[JamesFaith]

iakus wrote...
That's it, the next time someone complains about MEHEM, I'm going to counter with "It's art!"

You can because it is art in its nature.

But you have to count with people still complaining about it because its quality is subjective.

[Yestare7]

 
To me, it's definately art. Moved me more than 95% of the crap in museums. 

Now, what's a thread about art without some pictures?













OK, I might have overdone it a bit...


Y

[Ridwan]

Video games are as much as art as monopoly and checkers is.