Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

But Is It Art?

Posted by Zonk on from the preach-on-brother dept.

Once again the ever popular topic of 'Games as Art' rears its head in a Gamespot editorial. Matthew Rorie talks the artistic and social value of games, and touches on comics and film to boot. From the article: "As of now, innovation in games is driven more by commerce than by any kind of noble artistic ideal. For that to change, and for games to be taken more seriously by people who don't play them, games need to become cheaper to make, they need to be made by more- diverse groups of people, and they need to be more accessible to nongamers. You could argue about the accessibility point, but the other two factors aren't improving, and they probably won't improve anytime soon. Most game companies seem to be preaching to the choir by developing games that will mostly appeal to people who are already interested in them."

7 of 56 comments (clear)

  1. Is It Art by MrCopilot · · Score: 4, Insightful
    No

    Games can be artistic in style.

    Art is art for the sake of art. Games are games for the sake of entertainment.

    Next rehashed question please.

    --
    OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
    1. Re:Is It Art by snuf23 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then how come some films are considered "works of art" when they are also created to entertain?
      And a lot of conventional art is created to feed the artist.

      --
      Sometimes my arms bend back.
    2. Re:Is It Art by _xeno_ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Try playing Shadow of the Collossus. That game is art of art's sake, at the expense of gameplay in some ways. (Freaking camera.)

      In the exact same way that TV shows are art and movies are art and plays are art, games are art. I think most people would agree that board games are a form of art, so it would follow that video games are art as well.

      Besides, I'd have to question your statement that "art is for the sake of art." I'd say all art is for the sake of entertainment, at the core. The entire point of art is some form of entertainment, even if it is a more intellectual form of entertainment.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
  2. Yes. by generic-man · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes, good games are art.

    Likewise, a nice-looking car is a work of art. An iPod is a work of art. A thoughtfully-designed building is a work of art. The math test in which I expertly demonstrated that 0 = 1 is a work of art. The arrangement of boxes in my basement is a work of art. My mash-ups of Google Maps with Britney Spears songs are all works of art.

    Lastly, this entire post is a work of art. Treasure it as if it were your own, but it's not; comments are owned by the poster, and you may not reproduce mine unless it is within the rights accorded you under the Creative Commons CC-NA-lk-OI-MM-5L-Z| license.

    --
    For more information, click here.
  3. Who Cares? by yotto · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seriously, who cares? Is a car art? Is the ocean art? Is this post art? Just make me a fun game and I'll play it.

    --
    Pulp Audio Weekly - Geek News and Reviews
  4. Accessible? by Sierpinski · · Score: 3, Interesting

    and they need to be more accessible to nongamers

    Shouldn't that mean that paintings, sculptures, and other forms of traditional "art" need to become more accessible to non-museum-going people? This is becoming less of a problem with the internet (and specifically sites like Google Image) but the full effect of traditional art doesn't get expressed to those who are not active in the artistic community (ie those who don't go to art museums and such.)

    I'd say that games contain art. Some people would argue that code writing (at least the good kind) is an art. Surely some of the music scores and sound effects are art. The levels, characters, weapons, backgrounds, textures, etc. are art.

    Games contain art. Games are entertainment.
    Art museums contain art. Art museums are entertainment.

    --
    And they said zombies weren't real!
  5. Under these requirements, what is art? by nine-times · · Score: 3, Insightful
    As of now, innovation in games is driven more by commerce than by any kind of noble artistic ideal...

    Yes, because movie studios and art galleries don't want to make money. Painters and directors have absolutely no commercial hopes for their creations. I know all the professional painters I know aren't trying to sell their paintings.

    ...games need to become cheaper to make...

    Like movies are cheap to make? Yeah, I mean, I can scrounge up a couple hundred million in a weekend. Paint, canvas, they cost money too. More than you'd think.

    ...and they need to be more accessible to nongamers.

    ...and paintings need to be made to be more accessible to people who don't look at paintings, movies to people who don't watch movies....

    Look, I'm not saying that it isn't possible to improve the game creating/playing community or something, but are they art? Yes. That it can be expensive, commercial, and that it has a limited audience has nothing to do with the question whatsoever. Art can be all of those things. Good art can be all of those things.