Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Are The Press Neglecting Games As Art?

Posted by simoniker on from the rootin'-tootin'-high-falutin' dept.

Thanks to the Guardian Online for their article discussing whether the press are rating games seriously enough as an artform. According to journalist/researcher Matteo Bittani, "the games press in general is guilty of treating games as if they had no other relevance than being mere commercial products." He goes on to argue that: "Games are still being assessed by the same criteria of playability, graphics, sound and longevity as they were 15 years ago, causing the analysis to just boil down to 'technological determinism in full effect'." Is there any merit to reviewing games on more conceptual, artistic grounds, or is that idea overly pretentious?

4 of 52 comments (clear)

  1. Not yet, but soon by acxr+is+wasted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Games cannot be considered serious art by the "mainstream" because most video games right now, by and large, are "technological determinism." Why? Because that's what sells games.

    GameSpy just had that "Underrated Games" column, which included both Rez and Ico, two very hypnotic and "purposeful" games. It's pretty clear that the non-standard sort of experience that really captivates the player simply doesn't appeal to the big "middle-crowd" of system owners; people who only buy a few games that appeal specifically to their tastes. Very few people seem to be "hardcore" enough to want to experiment.

    Games will reach that point, but they haven't reached it yet. As for pretentiousness... well, almost any art can be called pretentious.

    --
    "Come on, let's go drink till we can't feel feelings anymore."
  2. So does the gaming industry by Piquan · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Personally, I think that the gaming industry cares smeg-all about the artistic merits of games, and only what sells. This wasn't always the case, but seems to be the overwhelmingly prevalent attitude coming out of the industry today.

    Is it any wonder the press uses the same scorecard?

  3. Criteria determine value as art of game design by phauxfinnish · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Games are still being assessed by the same criteria of playability, graphics, sound and longevity as they were 15 years ago
    These are the factors for determining value in a game as art. Yes, game design is an art form. However, unlike popular art, though similar to an artform such as wine making, there are certian criteria to judge with the finally deterimation of value based on personal opinion.
  4. Fun by GypC · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Games should be, and are, judged ultimately by only one criteria... is it fun?

    Take, for example, "American McGee's Alice". Artistically, it was a tour de force. But it was plagued by mediocre mechanics and gameplay, and, despite the beautiful level design, the levels were like a "rail-shooter", there was only one path to follow. It got good initial reviews because of its sheer beauty, but people soon came to realize that it just wasn't much fun.

    Artistic? Yes. Fun? Not really. So, as a game, it wasn't very good.

    Long term sales are the best indicator of a game's quality. All intellectual pretension aside, the people vote with their wallets. Word of mouth will ensure the success of a game that most people find fun.