Censored Video Game Content Stifles Artistry

AnInkle writes "The question of whether modern video games represent art and the persistent attempts to censor controversial content in games have been discussed here at length. Now, a blogger at The Tech Report makes the case that censorship of violent and sexual images and themes in video games is precisely what inhibits video games from maturing artistically beyond a nascent form. He cites a historical comparison between video game and film production, as well as geo-cultural comparisons of film production in the US vs. Europe and of video game development in the US vs. Japan. Are these comparisons apt and the assertions valid, or might the embrace of video games as a legitimate art form be limited for entirely different reasons?"

Comments

Re:artistic maturity ?

[ShieldW0lf]

You think I'm a fascist because I want to have some respect for things that have merit and have them not lumped into a category with a bunch of crap. By your definition, and by popular definition, if I take a dump on a stage and stick a flag in it, that is an artistic endeavor no different from painting a masterpiece. I think you do this because you don't wish to be held to any standards. I think you hurt us all when you do this. If it's fascism to oppose your position, then I support fascism.

Re:8==U=N=C=E=NS=O=R=E=D==D ~~-_

[Omestes]

I think a better example of game-devs not seeing themselves as artists (nor wanting to be) is the lack of style in most games. Most modern games go for a boring gray-brown "realistic" palette, and try for realism as much as possible, and most games, game-play wise, are boring cut-and-paste jobs from previous successful games in their genre, with perhaps a single added gimmick to sell themselves as better than I-XVI in whatever series.

Games as story telling is equally as trite, these days.

In short, there is no real innovation (outside of realistic-style graphics), and without innovation you have no real creativity.

There as some examples that go against this, Like Katamari and the studio who made No More Heroes and Killer 7.

But comparing games to Hollywood (as we are apt to do), we can see this mirrored there. You have your large, pretty, summer blockbusters and romantic comedies, taking the lionshare of the market. With a small niche of David Lynches, and Stanely Kubriks (I would have thrown Tim Burton in there, but he's been doing formulaic crap for awhile now, as well).

Most art is like this in the modern consumer market. Look at music, 90% of it is consumer grade pap, and 10% of it is made by genuine musicians (as artist). Design is in the same space too, with 90% being Ikea/Crate and Barrel crap, and the rest being filled by little botique markets. I could go on.

We have the illusion of things being more "artistic" in the past, because all of the formulaic crap is quickly forgotten, and all we remember is the unique or innovative. Games will be the same way, and already somewhat are. You remember Duke Nukem, but can you remember what was the big Tom Clancy/WWII game of five or six years ago?