Gaming Video games not art?

[Guest candeleria]

[COLOR=Black][FONT=Verdana]I was reading a gaming magazine this morning and was shocked by what I have read...Hideo Kojima ([URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hideo_Kojima]click here for his info[/URL]) said that Videogames are not art...My jaw dropped upon reading this...I cannot believe that HE said it.. :animecry: ..I mean he is Hideo Kojima! The game designer of the Metal Gear Solid series/sequel!...I want to hear your opinion about this... :help:[/FONT][/COLOR]

[kalon]

Because art has no true definition, it is hard to define where games stand in what is considered art. Kojima-san thinking that games are not art does not seem unreasonable. Many video games should definitely not be called art. The Guy Game, Barbie Horse Adventure, the Superman 64 game and other similar creations fall far from being art. (In fact, you can barely call those games.)
I do feel that many games, such as the Legend of Zelda series, should fall somewhere into the art category, but their makers don't necessarily feel this way. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, after all. (I'm really long-winded and ranty today.) ;)

[Ayokano]

Personally, games to me are more as an entertainment. Some games have artistic qualities to them, but that doesn't make it art. Some games use motion capturing, so does that make them movies? Anybody can program something tasteless and unoriginal, but it takes much more to call it art.

It also raises a question, ?Would I put a game in an art gallery, or in a theater?

Just because games aren't art, doesn't make them any less enjoyable. Just like art, there are good pieces and bad pieces. Basically, video games are built of different Medias, and art can be one of them if the creator chooses.

[Guest Stafal-chan]

Hmm i dunno i think in a way some video games are like art...but i dunno because in art you can design things and video game characters and backrounds and stuff isn't just pulled outta tin air.There's people who probably sketch these things up, especially characters. But i dunno...personally i liek the video games with good looking art...like if the stuff looks really bad i dun always want it. like Final Fantasy games are really goodlooking (as well as fun to play)^_^

[Flame_Alchemist]

Well as far as I'm concerned art can come from anything at all. I mean some 'artistic' paintings I have seen are just terrible but they are seen as art.

To me there is loads of artistic talent in video games, character design for one is artistic. The soundtrack is also artistic and so on, so to me video games are definately artistic in many ways.

[Riku]

[quote name='Flame_Alchemist']To me there is loads of artistic talent in video games, character design for one is artistic. The soundtrack is also artistic and so on, so to me video games are definately artistic in many ways.[/quote]

[COLOR=MediumTurquoise][SIZE=1][FONT=Tahoma]I totally agree with you, my wuvable boyfriend. :3 *hugs*

*Ahem* Anyways, agreeing with Flame here, I think that video games are art in itself. Everything dealing with them has to be creative in it's own way... I mean, the person who deals with those things has to have some sort of "Creativity" to put into the music, character design, background and even... no, make that ESPECIALLY the music. In my opinion, if video games aren't creative or artistic... then they're probably not even worth playing because the designers didn't even put their hearts into making it. So, why should we? :X[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]

[Desbreko]

[QUOTE=Ayokano]Personally, games to me are more as an entertainment. Some games have artistic qualities to them, but that doesn't make it art. Some games use motion capturing, so does that make them movies? Anybody can program something tasteless and unoriginal, but it takes much more to call it art.

It also raises a question, ?Would I put a game in an art gallery, or in a theater?

Just because games aren't art, doesn't make them any less enjoyable. Just like art, there are good pieces and bad pieces. Basically, video games are built of different Medias, and art can be one of them if the creator chooses.[/QUOTE][color=#4B0082]By that logic, movies aren't art either. They're also an entertainment, and anyone can go out and shoot a tasteless and unoriginal home movie that wouldn't be considered art. So does that mean all movies aren't art?

I think people get too hung up on the mediums being used when they try to classify things as "art" and "not art." If a medium doesn't fit into the traditional mold of what art is generally accepted to be, it faces opposition like video games are facing right now. And, believe it or not, movies went through the same thing when they were new. Personally, I don't see the medium as all that important.

Rather, I look at the care that went into creating something beautiful, whether that's a painting, book, movie, or video game. One of the definitions of "[url=http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=art][u]art[/u][/url]" on Dictionary.com is, "The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium." And if you think about what video games are--the arrangement of various graphical and programming elements into a well crafted game--they fit into that definition without trouble. So I see no reason why video games shouldn't be accepted as an art form.[/color]

[JULES]

Video Games and Online Worlds as Art
by Raph Koster

[url]http://www.gignews.com/raph1.htm[/url]

It ain't art
Chris Crawford

[url]http://www.erasmatazz.com/library/JCGD_Volume_5/It_Aint_Art.html[/url]

Games, the new lively art
Henry Jenkins

[url]http://web.mit.edu/cms/People/henry3/GamesNewLively.html[/url]

Game on exhibition

[url]http://www.gameonweb.co.uk/index.htm[/url]


For the best discussion papers on games try
[url]http://www.gamestudies.org/[/url]



Anyone playing F105 on PS2 now?

[RedVelvetGlove]

[quote name='candeleria][COLOR=Black][FONT=Verdana]I was reading a gaming magazine this morning and was shocked by what I have read...Hideo Kojima ([URL=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hideo_Kojima]click here for his info[/URL]) said that Videogames are not art...My jaw dropped upon reading this...I cannot believe that HE said it.. :animecry: ..I mean he is Hideo Kojima! The game designer of the Metal Gear Solid series/sequel!...I want to hear your opinion about this... :help:[/FONT'][/COLOR][/quote]
I agree. It is not really art because it is not meant to convey a message, and a single person doesn't put their heart and soul into, it is a job to a lot of people.

God, I am gonna get yelled at for this, but that is my opinion...

[Desbreko]

[QUOTE=RedVelvetGlove]I agree. It is not really art because it is not meant to convey a message, and a single person doesn't put their heart and soul into, it is a job to a lot of people.

God, I am gonna get yelled at for this, but that is my opinion...[/QUOTE][color=#4B0082]Heh. I'm not going to yell at you, but I do disagree.

Again, I'd bring up the fact that movies and even anime are widely recognized as art forms. Yet both of those are also worked on by many people for a living. As well, games are just as capable of conveying a message as any movie or anime. A lot of them don't even bother to try, but then again, a lot of movies and anime don't either.

There are so many parallels between games and movies in this regard that I think it's logically impossible to include one as an art form while exluding the other. It just doesn't make sense.

If you want to limit your definition of "art," you can exlcude both, sure. But I can tell you right now, there'd be a lot of screamers if the government tried to censor movies on the basis that they aren't an art form and not protected under the free speech clause. Which, funnily enough, is what some people are trying to do to video games right now.[/color]

[RedVelvetGlove]

[QUOTE=Desbreko][color=#4B0082]Heh. I'm not going to yell at you, but I do disagree.

Again, I'd bring up the fact that movies and even anime are widely recognized as art forms. Yet both of those are also worked on by many people for a living. As well, games are just as capable of conveying a message as any movie or anime. A lot of them don't even bother to try, but then again, a lot of movies and anime don't either.

There are so many parallels between games and movies in this regard that I think it's logically impossible to include one as an art form while exluding the other. It just doesn't make sense.

If you want to limit your definition of "art," you can exlcude both, sure. But I can tell you right now, there'd be a lot of screamers if the government tried to censor movies on the basis that they aren't an art form and not protected under the free speech clause. Which, funnily enough, is what some people are trying to do to video games right now.[/color][/QUOTE]
Yay for not yelling! I get what you are saying, and I don't see a lot of movies as art either. Some of them do have a message, but many don't. Also, art is more than a message, I don't know how to explain it. It's almost impossible to put into words. I'm really serious about art, and I know it is wrong, I guess, to limit what I count as art, but if we keep going at the rate we are, EVERYTHING will be art. A person crumples up paper and it is art suddenly. Don't feel bad about the video games, I hate most modern art too. :p
Oh, and I forgot about the government censorship statement. They don't really censor based on art. Your free speech has nothing to do with art, it's just a right. It applies to other things, like the ability to simple say what you want, as long as it doesn't hurt someone, and that's not art, but it is safe under the 1st amendment.

[Desbreko]

[color=#4B0082]I agree, I wouldn't call all movies or all games art, the same as I wouldn't call that piece of crumpled up paper art. But the thing being called into question here is whether video games, as a medium, can be considered an art form along with paintings, writing, movies, and all the other widely accepted ones. Judging whether or not something is actually art or not is highly subjective, but defining something as an art form--a medium of artistic expression--is relatively objective.

My point here is that video games as a medium can convey a vast range of artistic expression just like other widely accepted art forms. Yes, all games are not what's generally accepted to be art. But then, I don't think anyone would consider the paint on your bedroom wall as art either, yet paintings are an established art form. So I really see no reason why video games should not also be accepted as an art form.

As for my comment on censorship, I realize our right to free speech is not directly related to something being an art form. But, given the parallels between games and movies, censoring one while leaving the other alone is completely illogical. What I was saying was that, were the government to try and censor movies like they've tried with games, I think there would be a huge outcry not only because people like their movies but also because it would be censoring a widely accepted art form. And because it's illogical to censor one and not the other, and because people would scream a lot louder against one than the other, there's something wrong there.

Oh, and to come back to your comment about most movies not having a message: Like I said, classifying things as "art" and "not art" is highly subjective, so you're perfectly entitled to your opinion. . . . But I don't really see why something needs a message to be considered art. There are many beautifully constructed buildings around the world which I and a lot of other people consider art--and architecture does happen to be another widely accepted art form--yet I don't see any message in most buildings' designs. It is, in fact, kind of hard to convey a message in architecture simply due to the medium's nature. So you have to ask yourself, "If art must have a message, do I not consider architecture an art form?"

Myself, I tend to follow the definition for "art" that I quoted from Dictionary.com:[/color]

[quote]The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium.[/quote][color=#4B0082]Now, there are two main criteria for art being described here. First, the subject in question must be created with care. "The conscious production or arrangement..." means that the random crumpling of a paper, or the random slathering of paint on a bedroom wall, is not art because no real thought went into it. A fine painting or a well made video game, on the other hand, has hours of planning and revision poured into it before it reaches its finished state.

The second criteria is that the subject "...affects the sense of beauty..." This is where the distinction between "art" and "not art" becomes subjective. Obviously, what one person considers beautiful, another may find ugly. I personally don't find bloody and gory movies/games to be appealing, but sales figures show that others obviously do--so who am I to call such games/movies "not art"? There's no final authority in this area, so to each his own.[/color]

[Doublehex]

A little essay I wrote for my blog...

[quote]This is a question that I do not hear, or ask, as often that I should. I mean, it?s heard all the time that videogames are making three times, if not four times, as much as the movie industry (and I will not be surprised how much more the videogame industry makes compared to novels and comic books could be in the dozens). It is heard all the time how videogames influence young people (which I can agree to a very slight degree, but that is another article altogether!), and videogames like Dance Dance Revolution, which uses a ?dancing pad? to do dancing combo moves to get the player more points, is starting to be used in public school?s PE classes.

So, despite all these mostly positive criticism that videogames are getting, why is it that videogames are not respected as an art form? Why is it that they are as about as respectable as boardgames?

The answer is simpler than we think?it?s because video games do not express opinions. Tell me, when was the last time you saw a videogame debating the morality of the Iraqi War? Uh huh, me neither. Well, there was a movie that came out rather recently called Syriana that debated the politics involved in the Iraqi War. And remember that movie, V for Vendetta? Well, even though it takes place twenty years from now in the future, it was still a very political film.

Why is it that we can?t have games that made us think (and I am not referring to RPGs or strategy games here)? Why can?t we have a game that makes us think outside the box? Why can?t we have a game that actually questions our moral values, where we ask ourselves ?Is the way we are living now right?? Being the big philosopher in the family, I would love for this to occur: I would love to have a game that made me think when I was away from the controller beyond reading a strategy guide.

I wish there was a game out there that made me cry: a game that made me feel emotional. There are plenty of movies and books like that, so why can?t we have games like that? Is it because developers are afraid of taking a chance? Well, if movies were like that, I doubt we would have classics such as ?Gone with the Wind?, or ?Titanic?.

I wish there were games that could truly define videogames as a work of art. Until we get that sort of game, we?ll just have to make do with our interactive game boards.[/quote]

[Viper0529]

In my opinion, I feel that it depends almost entirely on the game itself.

I dont really see much art in games such as Halo, Grand Theft Auto, Black, etc. Now, even though those are amazing games, I still dont regard them as something that should be considered art. True, it might look amazing to see the hookers corpse in lifelike resolution on the pavement while you are beating her with a police baton, but it isnt really artful. Or to see the bullet holes in a covenant's skull. True, these are cool, but not artful.

However, there are some games that just look like a masterpeice. My two personal "artful games" are Ico and Shadow of the Colossus. Also, I dont think that it is just the visuals that make those games like art, but it is the rich storyline and "fairytail-esque" atmosphere. Other games that are artful to me are the Max Payne series (suprised?) and the Metal Gear series. They both have an incredible presentation and atmosphere to it. The story and characters are amazing and some of the enviroments look like they should be in an art catologue. Now, maybe I just think that the atmosphere is what makes a game artful, but maybe its the storyline?
I dont know.

Just my opinion

Best of luck to you

~Viper~

[AdarianDreamer]

That is rather convincing that arguably the best innovator in the history of video games could denounce gaming like that.

If any game would to be considered art, it would definately be the Metal Gear Solid games. They were the first interactive movies and really changed the face of entertainment all over the world. There are also other games that really convey powerful messages previously mentioned here like Final Fantasy.

However, Hideo Kojima is famous for twisting his words around pretty well. For all we know, he could have looked at some crappy paintings or something that some people consider classic art and thought that he didn't want games in the same category as that. It all depends on what you consider art as silver_blade said earlier.

And for those of you who think that the messages in video games don't apply to today's world such as the political controversies and issues, I think Metal Gear Solid is the perfect game for you if you haven't already played it.