Slashdot Mirror
US Government Recognizes, Funds Video Games As Art
Kilrah_il writes "The National Endowment for the Arts recently published their criteria for next year's Arts in Media grants. One of the key changes is the inclusion of video games as works of art. 'Projects may include high profile multi-part or single television and radio programs (documentaries and dramatic narratives); media created for theatrical release; performance programs; artistic segments for use within an existing series; multi-part webisodes; installations; and interactive games. Short films, five minutes and under, will be considered in packages of three or more.' For those who worry that game companies will try to get a grant for a commercial game, notice that the grant is only for non-profit organizations."
Is this the year of linux games? With finding from "The National Endowment for the Arts" ;)
notice that the grant is only for non-profit organizations."
You mean like the National Football league which makes billions of dollars a year and is a 501(c)6 designated nonprofit organization?
There's hardly a shortage of video games out there. Given the deficit problem we already have, why should we be spending money to produce a good that is already being produced in massive quantities, particularly a good that only the well off (who can afford high end PC's or expensive gaming equipment and subscription) will be able to take advantage of?
Isn't this essentially just forcing people to purchase games that aren't selling on their own merits?
Given the terms of the grant, I see them having trouble finding appropriate projects to fund. For that reason, I can't help worrying that this all could go down poorly.
On the one hand, sure, they're going to give these grants to smaller, actual "indie" development groups. But on the other hand...
If I'm reading this right, they're looking for indie developers that are set up with good PR and exposure. There aren't that many of those, are there?
You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
Va plus sur ce site si tu toleres pas les Américains. Franchement j'en ai marre de ces francophone qui croient que c'est eux le seul peuple civilisé du monde, ou que les Etats-Unis sont un pays de sauvages. Oui il y a des sauvages ici, mais pas plus qu'en France (ou en Belgique, Québec, etc... je sais pas exactement d'oà tu viens)
Le français vous intéresse?
Je crois que tu as manque le *sarcasme* de mon commentaire, unfortunately. And it's probably because english is not your first language, which is all right with me. There's no sarcasm emoticon.
I'm very far from not tolerating Americans. I consider myself as one, and having worked at IBM for more than 8 years, most of my customers were from the US. (same thing with the next company I worked at, with 80% of the business being with ISPs in the US)
Nouvelles de jeux et technologies en français. TC
I'm not against forcing all Americans to pay a little to fund nonprofit videogames. (After all, they get to force me to pay for other stuff I don't necessarily appreciate.)
That's like the opposite of correlation != causation.
I think the vast majority of art that is produced using grant money is stuff that only a very small percentage of the population enjoys or appreciates.
Typically, if a large percentage of the population enjoys or appreciates it then it doesn't need arts grants: it can be commercially viable. Arts grants are for the stuff that hardly anybody would pay the going rate for, but that the budget holders think is important for some reason.
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
The same country that recognizes ketchup and potato chips as vegetables now recognizes game as High Art.
Who said anything about high art?
Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
Okay, I know that there are some video games that have originated in other nations that were made partially with government grants. The problem is that I can't find any citations! Anyone remember some of these?
My mind is saying Syberia and The Longest Journey were partially funded by grants from Norway and Canada but I can't find citations. I'm pretty sure that France also has a grant for video game development.
Well I guess now that the NEA has slapped down Ebert's pronouncement that video games are not art he'll have to reverse his opinion. http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2010/04/video_games_can_never_be_art.html
Yeah, video games will be reduced to the level of modern "art".
Expect to see a million "Moon Master" remakes by people who use these grants to draw a salary for doing basically nothing. The equivalent of putting Ketchup on a pile of dog shit and call it art.
not-for-profit endeavors?
Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
They aren't exactly known for their discerning nature. Maybe wait for some organization with some respect to memorialize video games before declaring vindication.
Dear God, I sure hope so.
Ebert is an idiot who doesn't recognize that while a picture or song that could stand on its own is considered "art" but yet if the same thing is included inside a computer game, somehow it is no longer art. He is archaic relic from the past who doesn't grok "The _medium_ does not matter."
Here is a clue dumb ass:
People fucking KNOW it's their taxes.
However it's the government the recognizes Games as Art.
So the title is correct, and you are a knee jerk dumbass, who pays shit for taxes.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Ebert is not an idiot, by any stretch. He's WRONG, and has even kind of hedged that way.
Thinking people are idiots because they disagree only means you aren't actually thinking about their arguments, and you are underestimating them.
And the medium Does matter in art. It's a factor.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
You know what? This is the best comment. All of the other comments should go away. This one. This one right here is the best. It is.
Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
Art for art sake is not covered. It has to be for carrying into execution the foregoing powers. So the Army making a shooter to promote enlistment is covered. A non profit making a game where you cure aids isn't.
Oh, you joke.
Nethack, as itself? Almost certainly not. Nethack, reskinned to immerse the player in an artistic or cultural situation? With a sufficient advertising budget to convince people to actually play it? That might pass and, depending on the situation or scenario you present, it might even be worthwhile.
As a further example, remember that any game which would be suitable for this grant doesn't even necessarily have to be playable, just evocative. Consider the innocuous-seeming board game Train , which was pretty much designed to make you want to stop playing most of the way through the first time and never to try it again. That one didn't just hit its mark, it kicked it in the kielbasa. To its detriment, some people failed to realize that the board game was villifying the original event, and instead chose to hate on the board game for celebrating it.
You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
Funding and supporting the arts is the mark of an advanced society. In your opinion it is government waste. I'm sure there is a ton of pork in these programs, but the government does have an interest in expanding our culture through art. The idea of supporting the arts through tax coffers is not new or unusual. Its not just 'wasted' money.
Good-bye
Concerning this specific topic, he certainly acted like an idiotic illiterate know-it-all, specifically because he pontificated on the issue of games being ineligible to be considered as art while not having played a single one.
I'll respond in English because you did in the majority of your post is in that language, leading me to believe that you are more comfortable in it than in French.
I'm sorry for missing the sarcasm in your post; your typically French half-joking anti-Americanism and your French signature made me think that you identified ethnically as a member of some Francophone culture. Since you identify as American, the situation is completely different -- I believe in Jesus's teaching to "take the plank out of your own eye before taking the speck from your brother's" (even though I am not a Christian), which means I find Americans criticizing American culture to be much more acceptable than French people doing so.
I am 100% American, born to and raised by 100% American parents, and I vote for leftists, don't think potato chips are a staple of good eating, care about the environment, and value intellect and learning: all contrary to common French stereotypes about my people. That's why even though I'm the biggest Francophile I know, the derisive attitude of many (but not all) French people, which stems from ignorance about the good parts of American culture, irks me greatly.
So I apologize for flying off the handle at you, but I hope that after reading this post you'll understand why I did so.
Le français vous intéresse?