Could video games be considered an art form?

[Frostwraith]

Link to original post: [drupal=5423]Could video games be considered an art form?[/drupal]



So, here's my first blog post. I decided to start with a question that we can easily discuss here, since well, this is a forum about Smash Bros., which is a video game series as well.

I might be posting other questions and ideas that might pop in my head, depending on my thoughts and personal experiences. That said, I think we should get to the main question and a quite debated question, if I do say so myself.

This is a question I've been thinking for a while, so I decided to share some of my ideas here. You might as well share your thoughts on the subject, I think this will be an interesting debate, because there's a lot that can be said, specially with the immense variety present in the games, as well as other art forms.

Before I begin discussing the question, it might be useful to know what exactly defines art.

According to Wikipedia...

The arts are a vast subdivision of culture, composed of many endeavors (or artforms) united by their employment of the human creative impulse. The term implies a broader range of disciplines than "art", which in modern usage usually refers only to the visual arts. The other major constituents of the arts are the literary arts, more often called literature – including poetry, novels and short stories, among others – and the performing arts, among them music, dance, magic, theatre, opera and film. Literary arts and creative writing are actually interchangeable terms. These divisions are by no means absolute as there are artforms which combine a visual element with performance (e.g. film) and the written word (e.g. comics). This list is by no means comprehensive, but only meant to introduce the concept of the arts.

Whether or not a form of creative endeavor can be considered one of "the arts" can be contentious due to the cultural values attached in Western culture to the term "art", which can imply that it is a field elevated above popular culture.

Check the full article here.

After reading this quote, we can say that another keyword here is creativity. After all, every work of art is part of human creativity; a part of our imagination. But it is as well a form of expressing something, usually feelings, ideas or thoughts.

Now that we've already defined what constitutes art, we may go to the next step: discussing the question "Could video games be considered an art form?"

In my opinion, video games can be considered works of art.

A reason for this is because for every game made, there's an idea behind it. Even if the game doesn't tell a story or a message, it doesn't mean that it's uncreative. Video games as a medium are flexible enough to create new gameplay concepts. As per the definition above, artworks derive from human creativity. Of course, one can argue that a certain work is more artistic than the other, but that is entirely subjective, much like all other art works.

Other favorable argument is, since films are an artwork, video games with emphasis on story could be considered as such as well, both possess a story, a soundtrack, and, in some cases, acting as well. The only big difference being interactivity. Like many works of art, video games can express ideas and emotions, so this can be considered.

These points considered, one could argue that video games are comparable to other works of art. That said, what are your thoughts on this subject? Are video games a form of art or not, and why could they be considered or not as such?

 

[Falconv1.0]

Yes.

If you disagree it's because you're ignorant and smelly.

Also Roger Ebert sucks.

 

[Jon Farron]

I've never thought about it, but yes, video games are an art form.

It's a piece put together by a group of people that use various other art forms like music, art, and acting. Writing is also a large part in some games. It's like an interactive movie.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Something being put together using other art forms does not inherently make it art. By that notion, Michael Bay films and Call of Duty are art. Now of course these things add to the experience but that explanation by itself is kinda terribad.

Games can inspire emotions, express ideas, cover very serious topics and whatnot, that is what makes them art, especially when done in a way that a movie or book could absolutely not achieve, my favorite example being MGS2.

 

[FlareHabanero]

Video games can be indeed be an art form in their own way. Creating an entire setting with characters, settings, plot, and music can all lead to different types of expressions or cultures explored. But what's different between a video game and something like a painting is that its art that can be interacted with. You can literally feel the art through experience as opposed to thought, which allows more freedom of expression unlike a stoic picture.

Probably the best example I can think of is Okami. The entire game is cellshaded that mimics the ukiyo-e style typically found on woodblock prints during the 17th century through the 20th century, but also incorporated some sumi-e elements for color toning. The game takes advantage of the art style by producing incredible cut scenes that no other game could ever produce otherwise, and it also uses varies tones of colors to set up the feeling of the game.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

I am not sure how anyone could say it isn't an art form..

 

[Jon Farron]

But, would it be considered a fine art? Like dancing, acting, music etc.

 

[Chronodiver Lokii]

Well
uhm
My major is Game Art/Design
I'm at an art school
I'd HOPE that games were an art form, or I'm in the wrong major.

Games are composed of many forms of art. A game starts off as a concept - a story. That story is then turned into concept art - illustrations, model sheets, idea boards, etc. Then, as the concepts are refined, they are sent off to modelers to create in hi poly and game models. They send them off to be textured. And the process continues with animators, people who work on level design and compiling stuff within the game engine, and more....and there are programmers and devs in the process as well but I'm mostly focusing on the obvious art aspects.
It is a meticulous process that involves many artists

So yeah....from personal experience....games are art.

 

[Falconv1.0]

But, would it be considered a fine art? Like dancing, acting, music etc.

Technically games serve a function other than being art cuz...it's a game. So I guess not really? I don't really care either way.

Also 99% of "art games" are total ****ing trash. Just putting that out there.

Edit-Serious question, under what definition are we using the word "art". Some people like to think something being art means its actual got some kind of value to it but if you go by the most basic definition those awful Transformers films count as "art". I bring up stuff like that because I genuinely think those are more of a product than something resembling art, so I'd really love it if people would stop ****ing going OH WELL IT'S GOT MUSIC AND VISUAL ART IN SO IT'S BY DEFINITION ART, B-RO.

ART SUCKS.

 

[Teran]

Well games can be perceived as an interactive form of art, I mean art is a very broad thing, but at the same time a lot of games designers/developers are just not producing anything particularly enriching or evocative, which are characterstics of art.

I mean some do, because they combine the arts of writing/storytelling, character creation, visual art, musical composition etc to weave a tapestry that draws you in and interacts with a good deal of our senses.

If for the sake of hypothesis we're calling all games art, so games like CoD and **** are considered their own kinda of art that's fine, but due to the puerile and narrow frame of mind in such development studios, the art equates to a toddler's crayon scribble or some kid drawing a giant penis in your exercise book. Sure it's a form of expression that's meant to evoke something, doesn't mean it's particularly earth shattering or enriching.

I don't necessarily believe that art is 100% subjective, I feel that the subjectivity comes from whether or not you really connect and grasp the creative process behind the art. Art without thought and purpose can only convey so much (ie jack ****). This is why a patchwork of colours that look like nothing but scribbles to you can be seen as fine art because the colours mesh together to convey a mood or subject, it's just in a language you don't understand.

Call of Duty (I love using every chance I get to bash this ****) is just some mouthbreathers going "oh hey so what's a big threat? Ragheads? Nah goddamn russkies, and in the year 2012 they'll be wielding AK 47s because that's what all Borises wield. They're all probably drunk on vodka too and play chess in their barracks. Also all their women are prostitutes."

So that my friends, is why when classing Call of Duty as art, that still doesn't excuse it from being ****.

 

[Jon Farron]

A game that I would consider a work of art is the Final Fantasy series. It portrays (most of the time) a very well written story, and is usually very visually appealing. Art is something that should be unique, but has core elements that stay true to the artist. With Final Fantasy, the core elements would be the Crystal theme, the ATB battle system, and weather/element based names along with somebody named Cid in almost every game. And it still has it's hit or misses, like every other artist out there. So technically, the producers of Final Fantasy could be considered artists.

Kind of like a musical artist's core sound. They take a sound they like, and build around it. That's how you recognize them on the radio. (I'm talking about REAL artists here, not the mainstream people who all copy each other depending on what sells atm, but even then they still add their special touch to it.)

 

[Ussi]

Technically games serve a function other than being art cuz...it's a game. So I guess not really? I don't really care either way.

Also 99% of "art games" are total ****ing trash. Just putting that out there.

Edit-Serious question, under what definition are we using the word "art". Some people like to think something being art means its actual got some kind of value to it but if you go by the most basic definition those awful Transformers films count as "art". I bring up stuff like that because I genuinely think those are more of a product than something resembling art, so I'd really love it if people would stop ****ing going OH WELL IT'S GOT MUSIC AND VISUAL ART IN SO IT'S BY DEFINITION ART, B-RO.

ART SUCKS.

dancing is more than just art too then.. and music.. and whatever


classic games sell for a lot and are played lots.. Look at super mario bros. Though the biggest thing that stops it from like selling like crazy high prices is emulators.

 

[Falconv1.0]

dancing is more than just art too then.. and music.. and whatever


classic games sell for a lot and are played lots.. Look at super mario bros. Though the biggest thing that stops it from like selling like crazy high prices is emulators.

I don't have the proper words to follow you up on this post aside from please stop making posts until you no longer have a concussion or whatever it is that makes you type like a person who recently suffered a fairly serious head injury.

You can't call this flaming or trolling when it's absolutely ****ing true. I'm not even sure what your actual point is. Are you arguing that music is not a fine art? Are you claiming that by my standards music isn't fine art? Because I was addressing the question about whether or not games are a fine art, a fine art exists generally for aesthetics, applied art serves a function. Music is absolutely a fine art, there's way more room to argue that games may not be. Your post says and means absolutely nothing.

I'm gonna have a stroke.

 

[Frostwraith]

as a subjective concept, the definitions of art vary from individual to individual.

for me, almost anything that takes a creative effort could be considered artistic, and the quality of it depends on its originality and effort put in the making of the work. for example, I can't say that *insert generic love pop song on radio* is as artistic as a song from a movie or a video game, because the first is an idea that has been overused to the point of being uninteresting, while the latter usually is associated to the scenario, thus having more meaning, even if it can't be understood outside of context.

it's easy to see whether a work is made for quick money or when the person/people involved in the work is/are truly dedicated to what they do. in the same example above, most music on radio is just pop love songs with many similarities to one another and it's just music for dance clubs and quick money, while the music in a movie or a game has dedication, because it has to convey a meaning, it has to fit the scene associated with it, and thus, more effort is put into it.

long story short: for me, a good work of art is one that I see/listen/interact and it conveys a meaning or an emotion in me.

 

[Gene]

The thread title made me think of Okami and the Jet Set Radio series. God I love me some JSR.

 

[Chronodiver Lokii]

ART SUCKS.

FALCON I WILL FIGHT YOU (jk youre cool)

And hey, there is such this as bad art :3 (like you said...transformers....BUT DEM MODELS. The crazy animation....jeeeeeez)

 

[C.SDK]

The thread title made me think of Okami and the Jet Set Radio series. God I love me some JSR.

Hell yeah! I love me some Jet Set Radio as well.

 

[Vinylic.]

If you wanna see or play something that proves video games can be considered as art, play FEZ, Journey, Bit.Trip, VVVVVV, Flower, Flow, Portal, KUBE, samba de amigo, or any other game that is amazing to you and many, many others.

But FEZ.

Mostly FEZ. FEZ is the ****.
Second is the bit.trip series.

 

[#HBC | Joker]

Of course Video Games are art.

@Falcon. Michael Bay is an artist. The stuff he makes, is art. You can debate the quality of his art til the cows come home, it's not gonna make it "not art". It's just "bad art".

/end thread

 

[Chronodiver Lokii]

Of course Video Games are art.

@Falcon. Michael Bay is an artist. The stuff he makes, is art. You can debate the quality of his art til the cows come home, it's not gonna make it "not art". It's just "bad art".

/end thread

-applause-

And ya gotta give the modelers for transformers some credit
They do work. And the animators
Daaaang

 

[Luigitoilet]

here's a simple guide

video games, even terrible no-quality ones= art

falconv1.0's posts= artless wastes of internet space = not art

 

[Falconv1.0]

FALCON I WILL FIGHT YOU (jk youre cool)

Not if I fight me first!

Also, srs question, did the op expect answers other than "yes" from the grand majority of posters here? You might as well make a thread titled "is smash a good videogame?"

The answer of course is no. All video games are gay and stupid.

 

[finalark]

Also, srs question, did the op expect answers other than "yes" from the grand majority of posters here? You might as well make a thread titled "is smash a good videogame?"

Pretty much this right here.

My issue is with artistic games is that they try too damn hard to be awe inspiring and deep. Dear Esther is pretty much the prime example of this. The game gives you an ambiguous narrative that it asks you to piece together by replaying the game several times to get the full story. The issue? The game is basically a digital version of those neat little entrances to Disney World rides. Cool scenery, but you can't really do **** with it.

Honestly games don't need to shove pretencious BS down your throat to start discussions on what they're supposed to mean. Two of my friends and I had an extensive discussion over how the Forest Temple in OOT could have been the ruins of the civilization that made Majora's Mask.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Games like Majora's Mask, SotC, MGS2, and whatnot are much more legitimate examples than games with next to no actual decision making that is clearly just going MAN ISN'T ALL OF THIS PRETTY.

I enjoyed Journey for what it was, would have enjoyed it 30 times more if it was an actual game rather than a movie where you get to move around a bit.

 

[finalark]

I think that for games to be artistic they need to convey **** through the actual game play rather than give us an exposition dump. Try as hard as they can but games aren't movies or books so you're rarely, if ever, going to get a high quality story told in a traditional way.

For example, there's a freeware SCP game my friends and I call Stairs. In short, you walk down some stairs and its really ****ing scary because its game play makes it so. Another things my two friends and I have spent hours discussion is how Stairs has no exposition or cut scenes and only two characters to speak of and it works because the game itself is the narrative.

Now I'm just rambling,

 

[Frostwraith]

Not if I fight me first!

Also, srs question, did the op expect answers other than "yes" from the grand majority of posters here? You might as well make a thread titled "is smash a good videogame?"

The answer of course is no. All video games are gay and stupid.

what I expected to see in this thread wasn't just "yes" or "no" answers, but rather a simple discussion, where people share their opinions on the subject. simple as that.

you may or may not agree with the OP or you may think it might be a stupid question, but that's your point of view, not mine.

everyone has the right to express their opinion and I respect that, unlike many other people I know.

 

[Teran]

Yes everyone has a right to an opinion and people also have the right not to be respectful of others' views.

Just saying.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Everyone has the right to their opinion until it's a negative one the op doesn't like obviously.

 

[Frostwraith]

I never said I didn't like your opinions. I merely posted this to give a subject for people to discuss.

if people just come here to bash one another, well... that's not my problem! and before you think so, I'm not even mad about this.

if this becomes a senseless thread plagued by trolling and other such stupidities, eventually a mod or an admin will just lock this thread and voilà... case closed, that's how things work when a thread becomes dull and uninteresting, where people post things that aren't related to the subject and overall lack of civility. could there be a simpler solution?

that's all I have to say about this, nothing more.

 

[Teran]

Don't worry I'll be around if this blog totally tanks, but I'm not going to step in and baby everyone because a couple people made some snide jabs here and there. We're boys (for the most part), and most of us over 16, so I'd like to think that sort of thing doesn't really have any sort of real impact.

 

[Claire Diviner]

Well, as people say, all video games are artistic expressions, and while some fail miserably (looking at the likes of Superman 64, E.T. on Atari 2600, etc.), you do have those masterpieces that convey a sense of emotion, either through visuals, narrative or both. Ocarina of Time - as mentioned by others - is a good example of this. Another good example for me is Shadow of the Colossus; that game has little in the way of a narrative, but it tells a story through its visuals, gameplay, and concept. Also, games don't need to necessarily make millions to be great art, if Earthbound is anything to go by. That game's art style is quite unique, the story is unique, and the music is quirky. Despite mediocre to low sales in the U.S. (partly due to a crappy ad campaign), the game is still highly regarded as a great classic. It all comes down to perspective, really, and the quality of the art behind the game comes down to what the majority of consumers, including critics, think of it. That's my two cents and a danish.

 

[Chronodiver Lokii]

Don't worry I'll be around if this blog totally tanks, but I'm not going to step in and baby everyone because a couple people made some snide jabs here and there. We're boys (for the most part), and most of us over 16, so I'd like to think that sort of thing doesn't really have any sort of real impact.

WE'S ALL MANLY MENS

----

And it's not just art games that are considered art.
LoZ: Windwaker had some of the best art direction of its time for a game. One of my teachers is convinced it has the best art direction of any LoZ game....and I believe him on that. They went above and beyond, and I applaud them for it.
Battlefield 3 has fantastic art direction vs MW3 due to their insane lighting systems, realistic physics (game engines are annoying, yo), and the fact that BF3 used better textures than MW3. MW3 recycled textures from MW2, which is a smart choice....but not when the models are unwrapped and scaled weird, so textures stretch awkwardly.
Bioshock makes great use of art deco meets steampunk meets awesome. ....DAT ART DECO.
Assassins creed made great use of references - they compiled tens of thousands of images for each game to help them concept and model assets. They have realistic architecture that fits the times, lots of correct renaissance artwork, and more.
Etc etc etc I could go on for hours.

 

[Luco]

Something being put together using other art forms does not inherently make it art. By that notion, Michael Bay films and Call of Duty are art. Now of course these things add to the experience but that explanation by itself is kinda terribad.

Games can inspire emotions, express ideas, cover very serious topics and whatnot, that is what makes them art, especially when done in a way that a movie or book could absolutely not achieve, my favorite example being MGS2.

Exactly.

I've been trying to explain to people that games are an art form for a very long time. For the reasons that falcon stated, it's only too obvious that they belong up there with film and music.

To me, this one is simply a no-brainer. Good games really reflect what i'm saying. Games like MGS and terranigma, Chrono trigger and Beyond Good and Evil. Even the SSB series has it's own things to offer. You get pleasure out of viewing art, thrills out of watching film, ideas and creativity coming out of music... and you get all of these + fun when playing a game.

Yeah, games are art. Definitely.

 

[Luigitoilet]

I dunno what all the big deal about having games considered art is anyways. it doesn't make DOA Bikini Girls Volleyball any more of an artistic achievment. Sure, it's "art", but it's some of the lowest quality available art across any medium, and that goes for the vast majority of all video games ever made.

"art" isn't a word that signifies quality. at this point in time, video games are juvenile, imitative reductionist art that are rarely innovative in any meaningful sense. they're art on the same level as a pinball machine or a B-movie

 

[WindMajor]

The arguments that I've read about games not being art basically revolve around the notion that "games" aren't expressive because you can't express free speech or ideas through a rule-based system and/or objectives, and just because you add other art forms to a game (music, film, visuals, etc.), doesn't mean that a game is a form of art.

Think baseball: There is a clear objective and a system of rules. It's a game after all. It's also usually accompanied by music, graphics, advertisements, and commentary. Televised baseball combines other forms of art, but just because it does doesn't mean baseball is suddenly artistic. It's added, but it's not needed. Without all that, baseball is just a game who's rules don't express ideas, culture, or speech.

 

[Jim Morrison]

About as much as an art form as television is.

EDIT: meh it's more like movies I guess.

 

[ZelDan]

The arguments that I've read about games not being art basically revolve around the notion that "games" aren't expressive because you can't express free speech or ideas through a rule-based system and/or objectives, and just because you add other art forms to a game (music, film, visuals, etc.), doesn't mean that a game is a form of art.

Think baseball: There is a clear objective and a system of rules. It's a game after all. It's also usually accompanied by music, graphics, advertisements, and commentary. Televised baseball combines other forms of art, but just because it does doesn't mean baseball is suddenly artistic. It's added, but it's not needed. Without all that, baseball is just a game who's rules don't express ideas, culture, or speech.

I can't say I agree with that. What if the game creator used rules or objectives to guide the player on some path that was intended to make one think? maybe the game makes objectives that, once you completed, made you wonder why you did such things or made you think about the implications of the actions of which you were tasked with doing?

I can't really think of a perfect example of a game that does this at the moment, but still, just because something has rules or objectives doesn't disqualify it from being art IMO. There can still be thought/creativity or expression through rules and objectives if handled correctly.

 

[Falconv1.0]

About as much as an art form as television is.

EDIT: meh it's more like movies I guess.

Are you claiming tv shows can't be as "artistic" as movies? What about The Wire?

._.

 

[Luigitoilet]

About as much as an art form as television is.

EDIT: meh it's more like movies I guess.

This post is nonsense.

 

[Teran]

I think he's watched too many 90s sitcoms.