Could video games be considered an art form?

[Spire]

Video games are an art form.

Photography is also an art form, and yet many contested it for over a century. It began initially as a technology capable of capturing the image of the world. It evolved into an art medium used to do just that: capture the world, just as every other medium purports. Be it realism or abstractionism, you are capturing an aspect of our world. Once photography entered the world, it changed (some would say defeated) realistic painting, hence the end of chiaroscuro and the emergence of impressionism—the painter's evolution through the veil of reality. Technology enables us to capture sensory elements so upon doing so, it's our job to unveil what lies beyond the given. That is the art.

Video games have introduced a technological means of visual and auditory projection, impulsion, and response, social interactivity, and a multitude more: in short, they have introduced the art form of emulated interactivity; a technological mirror of the physical potential of our own world. Video games have been the stimulus for our currently converging technology. Gaming brings together people, creating motivational environments. Imagine if every facet of our world was a screen, capable of sensory interaction by touch, voice, motion, and beyond. Every flat surface could be like a game. Games within games within games within the game.

The mere fact that games are being questioned as an art form makes them an art form. Meanwhile, they continue to transform the world around us at an exponential rate. Plumbing is not an art form, though there is an art to plumbing.

This is something I am analyzing in my own artistry as a painter. My peers don't seem to take gaming or the influence thereof seriously. I aim to alert that.

 

[WindMajor]

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.

The game you're looking for is Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty.

 

[Falconv1.0]

The game you're looking for is Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty.

I think I don't hate you.

C:

 

[Teran]

Not to mention Majora's Mask, the entire point of every ****ing thing that happened in that game was to make you think and even reflect.

It had actually had massive depth, not you know, GANON IS EVIL.

 

[Luigitoilet]

Majoras Mask is a much better example of an artistic videogame than MGS, a franchise that attempts to mimic cinema to express its themes. MGS 2 or 4 may be artistic achievements but they are barely video games. MMs artistry is largely expressed through gameplay mechanics and not
literal hours of cinema-lite cutscenes

 

[Teran]

Hm from what I've heard of and the little I've played of MGS2 it seems to be more than just a cutscene fest. That's sort of what made subsequent MGS games suck. Being super easy and basically being nothing but cutscenes.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

I'll never forget the first time I came across the moon children in Majora's Mask.

Also, I think the Masked Salesman kind of made me think about what I was doing as well.

 

[Luigitoilet]

I'm willing to bet that MGS2 has more hours of Codec conversations and cutscenes than gameplay. 4 is no question. there are 90 minutes of cutscenes after the final player input in 4



unrelated I hate ducking autocorrect

 

[Teran]

MGS4 is considered bad by most MGS purists though.

Well from what I heard. Never really played much Sony stuff so eh

 

[Chronodiver Lokii]

Look at sites like polycount, Cghub, cgsociety, or magazines like Imaginefx. Those are all sites that game artists posts/magazine that features game artists

Non believers will understand

(also Imaginefx is awesome and so expensive and I will buy a subscription when I graduate omg)

 

[Falconv1.0]

MGS2 is infinitely better than MGS4.

Also better than you. Yes, you. ESPECIALLY YOU, LOKII.

 

[Frostwraith]

what some people here said about Majora's Mask, I can also say about Skyward Sword.

I think the highest moments in the game were during both visits to the Lanayru Desert. upon discovering that the desert was once a place of prosperity made me relate to a possible future of our planet, and the music conveyed that feeling pretty well too.

 

[C.SDK]

^ Uh, I had to stop reading for potential spoilers. Use spoiler tags, please. I haven't beaten Skyward Sword yet. ;_;

 

[Spire]

^ Lanayru Desert was ostensibly the best part of the game. It added a timelessness to the Zelda universe that was much needed. With the unveiling of the timeline a month after release, Zelda entered a new era of temporal structure, one not bound to linearity. I think Nintendo can easily do whatever they want without breaking the timeline now. The timeshift stones supposedly translated the world into a past state of being, but who's to say what is future and what is ancient? Maybe they're one in the same...

That sense of timelessness is the closest that Zelda has reached since the epic of Majora's Mask.

 

[WindMajor]

Majoras Mask is a much better example of an artistic videogame than MGS, a franchise that attempts to mimic cinema to express its themes. MGS 2 or 4 may be artistic achievements but they are barely video games. MMs artistry is largely expressed through gameplay mechanics and not
literal hours of cinema-lite cutscenes

The reason why people use MGS2 as an example for art in gaming isn't because of the cutscenes, it's because of the gameplay, or more specifically, how it uses interactivity that can only be found in video games to emphasize on a theme. I haven't played Majora's Mask, but if you're saying that Majora's Mask is a significantly better example of artistic video games than MGS2, then I'm genuinely curious as to how Majora's Mask uses rule-based systems to express a point.

Not to mention Majora's Mask, the entire point of every ****ing thing that happened in that game was to make you think and even reflect.

It had actually had massive depth, not you know, GANON IS EVIL.

According to a lot of MGS fans, this is what made MGS2 so good and what made MGS4 so bad. MGS2 had an open ending that did exactly this, provoke you to sit and think about everything that happened in the game and form your own theories. MGS4 wasn't supposed to exist. MGS2 was supposed to be the end of everything.

Then MGS4 came out and gave a definite conclusion to everything, figuratively slapping the magic of MGS2's ending in the face.

I'm willing to bet that MGS2 has more hours of Codec conversations and cutscenes than gameplay. 4 is no question. there are 90 minutes of cutscenes after the final player input in 4



unrelated I hate ducking autocorrect

For the record, MGS2 has about 5ish hours of dialog/cutscenes. Your first playthrough of the game will almost always take more than 5ish hours since the player has to spend a lot of time learning how to sneak through each room to progress further into the game. Believe it or not, there's actually a lot of "game" in the MGS series, people just tend to joke and exaggerate how cutscene heavy the game is. I don't know the facts for MGS4, but I'm sure it'll be the same result, just closer to the 50-50 mark.

 

[ZIO]

Video Games are an art form. That is objectively true.

But, the art form is limited due to it being carried as an inevitable business. Heavily so.

The games that can be considered emotive art get canned and overlooked because the masses either don't see it cause of heavy marketing (Take a look as how hard BlOps2 and Halo 4 is being advertised now), or because it draws a small crowd with a unique taste.

Unfortunately, these art works rely strongly on the success of themselves, financially, in order for the artist to continue to produce.

And due to this strong dependency, I highly doubt we'll see truly moving pieces. They aren't viable in the market as it is, yet.

 

[Luigitoilet]

The reason why people use MGS2 as an example for art in gaming isn't because of the cutscenes, it's because of the gameplay, or more specifically, how it uses interactivity that can only be found in video games to emphasize on a theme. I haven't played Majora's Mask, but if you're saying that Majora's Mask is a significantly better example of artistic video games than MGS2, then I'm genuinely curious as to how Majora's Mask uses rule-based systems to express a point.

for the record, let it be known that MGS is one of my all time favorite game series, and yes that includes 4. I think they are simultaneously the best example of artistic video games, and also one of the worst because of the insistence on non-interactive expression. The peaks of art-gaming to me are the moments in MGS games like the Psycho Mantis Fight in 1, the last act of gameplay in MGS2 ("fission mailed", etc etc.), the ladder, and the final boss fight in 3, and the Shadow Moses prelude of 4.

however, that brings me to this:

According to a lot of MGS fans, this is what made MGS2 so good and what made MGS4 so bad. MGS2 had an open ending that did exactly this, provoke you to sit and think about everything that happened in the game and form your own theories. MGS4 wasn't supposed to exist. MGS2 was supposed to be the end of everything.

All of this "supposed to be" stuff is completely irrelevant. MGS4 may have been fanservice, and many people did not like how it handled the canon and plot of the games, and the "easy answers" that it provided for nearly every aspect of the in-game universe. None of this makes it artless, or less of a piece of art. What MGS4 did, more or less, was remove the vast majority of mysticism from the narrative and clumsily replaced it with a catch-all technological Mcguffin. It is a somewhat lazy narrative technique. You are caught up in analyzing the quality of the product, when the quality is irrelevant to its status as art/not art.

Also, I take issue with this whole "art is something that makes you think" deal that people keep throwing around. ANYTHING can make a person think about something outside of or greater than itself. With this definition, nearly any concept or product in the universe has artistic value. I don't have a problem with that, but you guys can't have it both ways. You can't single out certain products and say "this made me think about life, so it is art" and simultaneously denounce another product because of your own personal reaction to it.

The intention of the creator is not to be elevated above the interpretation of the audience. MGS4 might not have "supposed to exist", but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. It exists, and the audience has reacted to it. It's fruitless to define a piece of work by external contexts like the artist's intent (and WHICH artist are we talking about here? these games are not the singular vision of Kojima. They are the cooperative products of hundreds of people. From the sound designer to the code programmer to the script writer, they are ALL creators of the product. You can't reduce what the piece is to the context of its creation. Kojima could come out tomorrow and say that all of the MGS games are a metaphor for coal miners in Chile, and that would not make it so. Similarly, saying "most MGS fans didn't like this" is an empty gesture towards some external canon that honestly has nothing to do with the game itself.

So, art becomes this ever-intangible and inaccessible label where everything is artistic and also nothing is artistic. Is this really a bad thing? Does it even matter? The MGS games have moved me, including 4, and so they are works of art. On the other end of the spectrum, Super Mario Bros. has the capacity to move, or inspire, or comfort someone. It too is a work of art. I can't call it artless just because I did not have a spectacular emotional reaction to it, or it didn't inspire me to "think about life".

 

[Falconv1.0]

for the record, let it be known that MGS is one of my all time favorite game series, and yes that includes 4. I think they are simultaneously the best example of artistic video games, and also one of the worst because of the insistence on non-interactive expression. The peaks of art-gaming to me are the moments in MGS games like the Psycho Mantis Fight in 1, the last act of gameplay in MGS2 ("fission mailed", etc etc.), the ladder, and the final boss fight in 3, and the Shadow Moses prelude of 4.

I actually really agree with this. I really think more game devs need to work on conveying themes and whatnot in the actual gameplay. Nothing wrong with cut scenes but I think mgs does get just a tad excessive (and way the **** too excessive in 4).

 

[WindMajor]

My response to Teran wasn't an opinion of mine, it's just simply me stating an argument. And I wasn't trying to say that MGS4 wasn't art either. I'm just saying that people didn't like it as much as MGS2 for X reason. Earlier I spoke about the status of video games as art (not the quality) by bringing up the topic of rule-based systems. Can rules and objectives of a game be artistic? I'm not one to give opinions anymore, but I did manage to answer with "MGS2" a couple of posts ago.

 

[BarDulL]

I haven't thoroughly read through the thread, but it's of my opinion that pretty much anything you create can be considered a work of art. There's a difference between chipping a rock and sculpting a statue though.

 

[G-Dub]

Play through Conkers Bad Fur Day and tell me thats not art...of course it was just a bunch of parodies and fart jokes.... still. top 5 N64 games and my personal favorite.
And yes video game design is definitely art- playing video games may not be art.... i suppose that debatable tho.

 

[Spire]

There can be an art to playing games. There's the average player who plays through Ocarina of Time from start to finish, and then there's the compulsive player who must plant bombs in specific locations not to solve puzzles, rend foes, or uncover secrets, but to satisfy a thirst for balance by ritually fulfilling this act around the digital world. What you do defines who you are, but how you do it defines who you are behind the veil. It's the how that makes art, not the what.

 

[Chronodiver Lokii]

Zio, halo 4 is art though o A o
I mean Lookit that game
Holy crap amazing production
The behind the scenes videos are sooooo freaking cool omg

Cod not so much because they reuse textures incorrectly and can't even unwrap their UVs correctly. Sooo much texture stretching and warping on simple models!!!! Ugh, makes me sad.

Also stfu falcon xD

 

[ZIO]

Yeah, sure, it is an artwork.

But it is following an already predetermined path set out by the trends of the market. That in which I find is restrictive of fully expressing oneself.

Sure, I suppose they all could have done it because they wanted to. Which then I could just be spitting hot air right now.

I don't know. It's hard for me to articulate.

 

[Teran]

what some people here said about Majora's Mask, I can also say about Skyward Sword.

I think the highest moments in the game were during both visits to the Lanayru Desert. upon discovering that the desert was once a place of prosperity made me relate to a possible future of our planet, and the music conveyed that feeling pretty well too.

This is true though, the Lanayru desert sections were by far the strongest in the game, not even just the game, but the entire series.

 

[Frostwraith]

looks like I didn't exactly express my thoughts... -_-

Majora's Mask was more emotional than Skyward Sword. what I meant to say was that some aspects present in Majora's Mask were also present in Skyward Sword.

 

[Teran]

What I found weird about MM is that for all of the legendary hero destiny stuff in most of the other games, MM's quests actually felt like they mattered. Like, I beat Ganon in OoT and it's just another day at the office, or just clearing any area in general.

MM had "side" quests which from a pure gameplay standpoint, didn't really seem to have much consequence (they all do at the end but playing through the first time you'd never guess), yet somehow each one leaves an impression and has so much weight behind it.

The thing is, I shoukdn't consider it one of the greatest if not the greatest games ever made, but sadly it would appear that the industry is one that just doesn't facilitate progress. The poly count is higher, the shaders are pretty, the areas are huge, blah blah, but you know what I actually miss about games?

Giving a ****. It's not that I'm too jaded to be pulled in, for example playing some retro games I never had the chance to try out I will still get sucked in, dated tech and all. There have been a handful of games this gen that I really did enjoy, but for the most part, I feel a lot of awful design choices and ideals have become the industry standard, and well... yeah

Whatcha gonna do brother

Also just to make it clear this wasn't a direct reply to Frostwraith's post.

 

[Chronodiver Lokii]

Yeah, sure, it is an artwork.

But it is following an already predetermined path set out by the trends of the market. That in which I find is restrictive of fully expressing oneself.

Sure, I suppose they all could have done it because they wanted to. Which then I could just be spitting hot air right now.

I don't know. It's hard for me to articulate.

Halo was one of the first modern FPS games to perfect the FPS mechanics today. Why NOT build off that if that's what the industry wants? XD bungie and now 343 have made this franchise really amazing.

Art games aren't the only games that are art : o
People think its a bad thing when companies try to sell to sharks popular nowadays
Why not? XD it's a multi billion dollar industry. And, the team has to eat xD especially since only a fraction of games designed ever make it to release

Also Teran why don't we talk game design?! Srsly!! I already talk with falcon about stuff (between raging at 3DS max or failing at texturing rofl) and he says he talks game design stuff with you xD

 

[Falconv1.0]

Not really gonna debate how "artistic" Halo is or whatever the dump but I genuinely don't see why people couldn't make a game with lasting artistic value and whatnot that still sells out like crazy. It seems less like it can't be done and more like people just aren't really trying.

 

[ZIO]

Okay. Halo was the first to bring the FPS genre into the world it is in today. I wouldn't go so far as to say that it was perfected. Rather, it was simplified in such a way to make it easily accessible to a wider audience than they used to.

That said, that doesn't mean because of that, they should keep going on that direction. Their works then become derivative. Which then become uninteresting. It would be like Leonardo da Vinci nothing but works like Mona Lisa, with some differences among them, but not enough to truly separate themselves from the other. It just comes off as mindless at some point.

People think its a bad thing when companies try to sell to sharks popular nowadays
Why not? XD it's a multi billion dollar industry. And, the team has to eat

This is the problem, though. And why folks have a difficult time defining game as a form of art even though it is surrounded by nothing but art forms. This mindset. The definition of art is a broad one, and the World of Art has had a difficult time defining WHAT makes something ART. They, at one point, believed art was meant to represent real life and artists should strive for realism. Then Cameras came in and achieved that goal and the world of art shook. It used to be thought a piece of art must be put on display, meant to be seen, in order for it to be considered art, but then Duchamp walks in and places in an art show a work he did nothing to piece together (A urinal) and the World of Art began reconsidering, again.

Art should be made for the SAKE of art. Not for the sake of making money to eat. I understand these folks need to eat, but this is why it's hard to consider it art. Some do it for the sake of fame and fortune. Sure, they can have a successful game. That's great. But if their purpose was solely to make money and all, I honestly wouldn't consider it Art.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Zio, with that mindset wouldn't it also mean movies have trouble being considered art because they need to make a certain amount of money?

 

[G-Dub]

I feel a lot of awful design choices and ideals have become the industry standard, and well... yeah

I blame this on money and gamers only caring about looks and not substance.
On a side note: Did anyone ever play uniracers? THAT was art.

 

[Frostwraith]

Okay. Halo was the first to bring the FPS genre into the world it is in today. I wouldn't go so far as to say that it was perfected. Rather, it was simplified in such a way to make it easily accessible to a wider audience than they used to.

That said, that doesn't mean because of that, they should keep going on that direction. Their works then become derivative. Which then become uninteresting. It would be like Leonardo da Vinci nothing but works like Mona Lisa, with some differences among them, but not enough to truly separate themselves from the other. It just comes off as mindless at some point.




This is the problem, though. And why folks have a difficult time defining game as a form of art even though it is surrounded by nothing but art forms. This mindset. The definition of art is a broad one, and the World of Art has had a difficult time defining WHAT makes something ART. They, at one point, believed art was meant to represent real life and artists should strive for realism. Then Cameras came in and achieved that goal and the world of art shook. It used to be thought a piece of art must be put on display, meant to be seen, in order for it to be considered art, but then Duchamp walks in and places in an art show a work he did nothing to piece together (A urinal) and the World of Art began reconsidering, again.

Art should be made for the SAKE of art. Not for the sake of making money to eat. I understand these folks need to eat, but this is why it's hard to consider it art. Some do it for the sake of fame and fortune. Sure, they can have a successful game. That's great. But if their purpose was solely to make money and all, I honestly wouldn't consider it Art.

I second this.

It's like in music, or I should say, commercial music, most of which has no quality whatsoever. Some of the artists live in the shadow of their fame and because they have legions of worshipping fanatics buying anything coming from them.

The same happens in games.

Creativity and dedication should be the primary factor when working on a project. As I see, money should be a reward for that work, not the objective of the work. Why? Because if you work hard, you deserve to be recognized. If you don't, you don't deserve such recognition.

Why are scientists like Einstein, Marconi, Marie Curie or Darwin recognized? Because they devoted their lives to their researches, some of which have influence on how we live today.

Same applies to anything. The problem nowadays is that most people don't care about what they shove to them, they just buy it because everyone does or because it was made by <insert name here>, blah blah blah... that's why we have **** quality music plaguing almost all radio stations. I may be just 19, but every time I hear 80's music, I mostly like what I hear, whenever I hear hear music from nowadays, it's mostly cheap pop love songs.

What I said for music, I also say for games. There's a lot of shovelware plaguing the consoles that no one gives a **** about. Quality games are getting even more rare.

Of course, let's not make generalizations out of this. It's just that the majority of things out there are made to appeal the majority of people, who have low standards for whatever form of entertainment. There are still talented people who still care about their work, and haven't fallen to the low standards of today.

Obviously, the companies are aware of this, and start producing low quality stuff, because they know it will sell anyway.

And that's how I see things, you may or may not agree with me.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Comparing video game devs to scientists sure is cool, man.

So someone can't produce a project that makes money (as in, that's part of the objective) and also have a passion for it? That's blatantly untrue. That's not an opinion thing, that's a "you're completely full of ****" thing.

 

[ZIO]

Zio, with that mindset wouldn't it also mean movies have trouble being considered art because they need to make a certain amount of money?

True.

Which is why defining Art is such a difficult thing. Make it too narrow, and works are going to inevitably left out. Make it too broad, and products that realistically shouldn't be considered are can be.

Art can be anything. If you call your door an artwork, it can then become an artwork. Why? Because you've then taken it out of its daily considerations and brought attention to it where there would be none originally. Like the Urinal. You took it out of its original context.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Whether or not it takes/needs to make money to be viable doesn't somehow make something not art. If you're going to be a successful artist, you kinda need to make money so you aren't living under a ****ing bridge doing nothing.

 

[Chronodiver Lokii]

Dadaism was a weird time in art where they were trying to make a point to be random and make no sense to expression disillusionment with WWI...so i guess thats what the expression for the urinal was

..........wow so they were the hipsters of the past.

 

[Frostwraith]

Comparing video game devs to scientists sure is cool, man.

So someone can't produce a project that makes money (as in, that's part of the objective) and also have a passion for it? That's blatantly untrue. That's not an opinion thing, that's a "you're completely full of ****" thing.

If that's how you see it, then so be it. And I never said that both passion and desire for money can't coexist. After all, we all have need money to live, so what better way to earn money than doing something you like?

What just happens is that people often get obsessed with money and stop caring for a well done job to get as much money as they can. Sure ambition is good, but there's something else called greed.

And yes, my head is full of ****, and you're not the first one to say that to me. I've already said many things in my life that normal people wouldn't dare to say loudly.

 

[WindMajor]

Art is something that should be profitable. You have to work on it, and other people consume it. Why is it bad that people profit out of it?

If you're concerned with the concept of people "selling out" by making art for other reasons like for money or for fame, then that has nothing to do with the status of art or the piece of art at all. It has to do with the artist and how much of your respect they deserve.

Call of Duty is art. Sure, the guys behind it are all scumbags and only want to make a quick buck out of it, but you can't deny that Call of Duty is art. How artistic is it is beyond me, but it's definitely art, and it's definitely a product that people can and should make a profit out of.

 

[Frostwraith]

Art is something that should be profitable. You have to work on it, and other people consume it. Why is it bad that people profit out of it?

If you're concerned with the concept of people "selling out" by making art for other reasons like for money or for fame, then that has nothing to do with the status of art or the piece of art at all. It has to do with the artist.

Call of Duty is art. Sure, the guys behind it are all scumbags and only want to make a quick buck out of it, but you can't deny that Call of Duty is art. How artistic is it is beyond me, but it's definitely art, and it's definitely a product that people can and should make a profit out of.

I never said it's bad to profit from art. We all need money for a living, that's for sure.

But at least make something that's worth the money. But, oh well, art is subjective, so if people like crap, I don't care. But I am free to express my views, no matter how insane they are, am I not? As long as no one is harmed, that's fine by me.