Games are Art: aka. suck it Roger Ebert

[K9]

National Endowment for the Arts is now accepting grant proposals for digital media projects including digital games and other gaming platforms

Not that this will change much I suspect, and whether or not this will open up any new ideas in game design remains to be seen.

[NiX]

I just don't get why anyone cares if they can be considered art.

[Yegolev]

People want to be validated, yo.

[Merusk]

It's ok not to make money in Art.

"Man, Dikatana sucked!"

"You're just too plebean to get its message."

[Morat20]

I just don't get why anyone cares if they can be considered art.

Art is protected speech, among other things.

Mostly, however, it's the same pissing fight that always happens between generations. Rather than just being, say, a slapfight over whether Victor Hugo's serialized (and paid by the word) stories in newspapers are 'literature' or just 'shit that the masses like, not like Homer' the fight is over a change in medium as well.

I'm not schooled enough in art history to be sure, but I'd wager a small amount that a similar slapfight occured between painting/drawing and photography, and again between photography and video.

[K9]

I just don't get why anyone cares if they can be considered art.

The illusion of participating in something with a veneer of respectability probably

[Malakili]

I think games have moved more into the art direction, but I actually think this is BAD for games.  The more artsy a game is, generally speaking the worse the mechanics are.  I want to play games to play games.   If I want art, I'll go to see an orchestra, or watch a movie, or go to a museum (all things I've been known to do).  But to me games have always filled a different space than that, and generally speaking I'd prefer to keep the over lap to a minimum.  

Incidentally (or not), this is likely why  I've found single player games to be a lot less interesting over the years than they used to be.  They just tend to have a lot less "game" in them than they used to.  It seems like single player games are more and more often meant to be experienced, rather than played.  

[Morat20]

I think games have moved more into the art direction, but I actually think this is BAD for games.  The more artsy a game is, generally speaking the worse the mechanics are.  I want to play games to play games.   If I want art, I'll go to see an orchestra, or watch a movie, or go to a museum (all things I've been known to do).  But to me games have always filled a different space than that, and generally speaking I'd prefer to keep the over lap to a minimum.

So for movies you just watch, say, the "Scary Movie" franchise? (Which I think we can all agree isn't art). But hate 'artsy fartsy' films like The Black Knight?

"Art" is not synomous with "boring shit". Admittedly, there's a genre called 'art film's' (or something close) but that doesn't mean only those films are art or artistic (in fact, many really aren't!).

Same with games. Art in games isn't gorgeous visuals -- art in games has to encompass gameplay. Hell, it IS gameplay. Portal, for instance, is art. It's a strongly crafted story, a unique and challenging gameplay, and a strong identity. Mass Effect 2 is art. Hell, the Halo games can even count.

[Musashi]

"Everything we do is kung fu."

[Malakili]

So for movies you just watch, say, the "Scary Movie" franchise? (Which I think we can all agree isn't art). But hate 'artsy fartsy' films like The Black Knight?

"Art" is not synomous with "boring shit". Admittedly, there's a genre called 'art film's' (or something close) but that doesn't mean only those films are art or artistic (in fact, many really aren't!).

Same with games. Art in games isn't gorgeous visuals -- art in games has to encompass gameplay. Hell, it IS gameplay. Portal, for instance, is art. It's a strongly crafted story, a unique and challenging gameplay, and a strong identity. Mass Effect 2 is art. Hell, the Halo games can even count.

You have what I'm saying completely wrong.  I'm not saying that games aren't art, I'm not saying art is boring shit.  I'm saying, when games get closer to being art, they get worse AS GAMES.   Its the reason I think Multiplayer Black Ops is a great game, and the reason I'd rather watch a run through of Single player Black Ops on youtube than play it.

I LOVE the fine arts, I'm not calling art boring shit at all.  You're talking to somewhere here that regularly goes to the ballet and has written a master's thesis on the history of avant garde film in the Soviet Union.  My appreciation for the arts is deep and profound, but I thats not necessarily what I'm looking for in video games.

[Morat20]

You have what I'm saying completely wrong.  I'm not saying that games aren't art, I'm not saying art is boring shit.  I'm saying, when games get closer to being art, they get worse AS GAMES.   Its the reason I think Multiplayer Black Ops is a great game, and the reason I'd rather watch a run through of Single player Black Ops on youtube than play it.

I LOVE the fine arts, I'm not calling art boring shit at all.  You're talking to somewhere here that regularly goes to the ballet and has written a master's thesis on the history of avant garde film in the Soviet Union, and so forth.

You're trying to apply "Art as it applies to not-games" to games. Games "getting closer to art"?

Artistic games, by their very nature, have to be fun games.

You can't have "boring ass artistic games". Boring ass games fail at the core definition of games, which means they can't be artistic games.

They might have gorgeous visuals, might have great music or excellent story, but those aren't 'artistic games' -- that's image art, music, and literature/story telling. An artistic game must be a fun one.

I don't think you can define a game as 'art' and it be unenjoyable. It's like....judging music by the standards of photography. It doesn't make sense.

[Malakili]

You're trying to apply "Art as it applies to not-games" to games. Games "getting closer to art"?

If you are defining art just as "anything, done well in the context of that thing" then, fine, I'll retract everything I've said, cause frankly, there is no point arguing with you if thats the game.  In that case football is an art because its a good sport, chess is an art because its a good board game, and nike running shoes are art because they are fantastic for keeping my feet comfortable while jogging.  It seems to lose all meaning at that point.

[Morat20]

If you are defining art just as "anything, done well in the context of that thing" then, fine, I'll retract everything I've said, cause frankly, there is no point arguing with you if thats the game.  In that case football is an art because its a good sport, chess is an art because its a good board game, and nike running shoes are art because they are fantastic for keeping my feet comfortable while jogging.  It seems to lose all meaning at that point.

No. "Fun" is intrinsic to a "game". There's no "Game" without "Fun". If you're going to have artistic games, they have to be fun.

I don't know what YOU consider an "Artistic game" -- you've given no examples, only to say they suck. (You sorta referenced Call of Duty, but not whether you really considered it artistic or how). No examples of how they are more or less 'artistic' than any other game. You haven't even defined what you consider 'artistic' for a game!

An artistic game, to me, require solid visual, story, music and gameplay elements. Portal is an artistic game. Halo: Reach, to a much lesser extent. Okami. Katamari Damancy. Bioshock. Civilization.

[Malakili]

If you are defining art just as "anything, done well in the context of that thing" then, fine, I'll retract everything I've said, cause frankly, there is no point arguing with you if thats the game.  In that case football is an art because its a good sport, chess is an art because its a good board game, and nike running shoes are art because they are fantastic for keeping my feet comfortable while jogging.  It seems to lose all meaning at that point.

No. "Fun" is intrinsic to a "game". There's no "Game" without "Fun". If you're going to have artistic games, they have to be fun.

I don't know what YOU consider an "Artistic game" -- you've given no examples, only to say they suck. (You sorta referenced Call of Duty, but not whether you really considered it artistic or how). No examples of how they are more or less 'artistic' than any other game. You haven't even defined what you consider 'artistic' for a game!

An artistic game, to me, require solid visual, story, music and gameplay elements. Portal is an artistic game. Halo: Reach, to a much lesser extent. Okami. Katamari Damancy. Bioshock. Civilization.

An artistic that was decent as art was The Path.

Edited to add; I think bioshock is a great example of what I'm talking about actually.  So much effort went into making something that was supposedly thought provoking, but in the end it was a run of the mill shooter with a boring storyline.

[Morat20]

An artistic that was decent as art was The Path.

Why? (I've never played it).

For me, Portal stands out in terms of recent games. Humor, writing, plot, music, voices, visual style and gameplay.

Edited to add; I think bioshock is a great example of what I'm talking about actually.  So much effort went into making something that was supposedly thought provoking, but in the end it was a run of the mill shooter with a boring storyline.

*shrug*. Most mass-market art isn't all that great, or at least hard to judge at the time.

Hugo's work was considered pulpy trash. Shostakovich's stuff started a riot. (Or was that Strazinski? The Russian that did Rite of Spring). 98% of the literature produced a year is trash, 2% is critically acclaimed, and what ends up being considered 'must reads' and 'artistic' won't be settled for decades.

Same with video games, especially as a burgeoning artistic field. I find it heartening that they're experimenting. It certainly beats Shooter 47: Just like the first 46, but with more polygons!

Storyline is part of it -- videogames are a mixed medium, after all. A very mixed medium. Each game is going to be strong or weak in different elements.

[Amarr HM]

Games are art man, look at the work that goes into those models, the score, the design, the acting, the dialog, the scenery, the control system, the UI, the programming. That's just to mention a few artforms that games use. I think you're thinking of art as all formaldehyde encased dissections of bovine.

[HaemishM]

I'm not schooled enough in art history to be sure, but I'd wager a small amount that a similar slapfight occured between painting/drawing and photography

Yes, it did. As well as slapfights over whether abstract painting was art compared to photorealistic paintings, whether photographs should be manipulated in the darkroom or just be what you shot, etc. etc. etc.

[Morat20]

I think we're having the discussion on video games NOW because video games have reached a sort of critical mass -- both in number and range of titles, but even more that the first generation of people to grow up and keep playing games has hit their thirties and forties.

Shit rarely is considered "Art" unless it's done by and appreciated by adults.

Title depth and number is important, because it means we're getting enough diversity and depth to start working out what IS and ISN'T "good games", "Artistic games", etc.

[Musashi]

"Everything we do is kung fu."

Motherfucker.

Maybe that will help.

[Yegolev]

"Everything we do is kung fu."

Motherfucker.

Maybe that will help.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlMgEYwdzEU

[HaemishM]

Now THAT'S art.

[Ingmar]

It's just "jazz/rock/rap/sampling/etc isn't music" all over again.

[Yegolev]

Exactly.  Once someone defines art, I'll worry about categorizing things that way for personal gain.

[Soln]

honestly, does everything have to be validated as capital-A, big frown, Penguin Classic, BravoTV, hip Wired magazine, New Yorker trauma story, Western Tradition PBS "ART"?   

 Games don't need the categorization of "Art" just like Opera didn't need it when it was starting.  Games (video or otherwise) are complex, popular, with a growing history of artifacts that are referential to give it its own design vocabulary.  Worrying about games being compared to "Art" objects is not necessary.  It'll end up there regardless in a generation.

Oh and that Ebert argument was mostly posturing by PA, who in a typical self-promoting PA move, promoted it as a crisis.

[Malakili]

The funny thing is I haven't even been saying that games can't be art.  I'm just saying that something like Capture the Flag is a *game* to me (in the context of TF2, CoD, or just, actual real life capture the flag), whereas the single player player games seem to have a lot less gameplay as their focus and more on the user "experience."   Its not like there is a magical cut and dry cutoff point.  I'm simply saying that I think games as art don't make for especially good games, they can make for good experiences though.  Maybe the distinction I'm making doesn't matter to most people so I sound like I'm nitpicking .

Whether or not Bioshock is equivalent to Bach in some sense is utterly unimportant to me, I'm much more concerned about the way developers are approaching their games because they view them as an experience rather than a game (sometimes).  I think that is related to the art question, personally.  If you divorce it from that distinction, then I honestly don't care at all.

[TheWalrus]

I think it honestly depends on the game. Perhaps single player stuff just isn't your bag. I recall finishing Vampire:TM and feeling like I'd just taken part in a movie. It was pretty damn cool. Several other games since then have done the same for me. I like story in single player stuff. Gameplay tends to take a backseat to storyline for me. Obviously, this isn't true for you. Diffrent strokes and what not.

[Malakili]

I think it honestly depends on the game. Perhaps single player stuff just isn't your bag. I recall finishing Vampire:TM and feeling like I'd just taken part in a movie. It was pretty damn cool. Several other games since then have done the same for me. I like story in single player stuff. Gameplay tends to take a backseat to storyline for me. Obviously, this isn't true for you. Diffrent strokes and what not.

I agree with you 100%, but thats kind of my point.  I don't want games that make me feel like I've taken part in a movie, and I feel like the the "games as art" trend make those kinds of games more likely to be made.  Thats all I've been trying to say.

[Venkman]

I see where you and Morat20 are coming from, because you're looking at things from completely different angles.

The term "Art" has been abused in the past to justify the direction something took that nobody liked. "Art" has also been stated as the pursuit of people who don't actually know what they're doing but couldn't come out and say that. This is very rare, but it happens enough to sully to term "Art". There's of course also the non-artist's layperson's impression of artists as efeet snobs who speak in a language only they understand with pinky finger in the air.

On the flip side, we have these incredibly complex games designed to deliver experiences people want. They're designed (what I crassly refer to as "art to achieve an end user goal") and the best ones achieve their goals through a combination of interesting premises, great mechanics and unique twists. There is an art to making these games, which over time is becoming "art". It just isn't "art" as defined by people who have previously defined other "art", but that's always been the case. Ya both have already covered the friction between established art and new found art. Art is always created first and then defined as art later.

I think this thread is timely given the Upcoming Exhibit at the Smithsonian American Art Museum.

To abuse a phrase: Art is both in the eye of the beholder, and in the eye of the generation following the one in which that art was first created.

[Samprimary]

there, i did it

[Ingmar]

Whatever man, that is totally derivative. It isn't even Yeg's real face!

[Soln]

still authentic  

[Furiously]

I think MMOG's will be the source of art.

What if there was a train in WOW... and there was a can of spray paint next to it. And allowed you to spray graffiti into the boxcars. A semi-fun activity, but then what if there was a website that showed every single train someone had ever made, sorta like a huge andy warhol type thing.

[Kail]

I think MMOG's will be the source of art.

What if there was a train in WOW... and there was a can of spray paint next to it. And allowed you to spray graffiti into the boxcars. A semi-fun activity, but then what if there was a website that showed every single train someone had ever made, sorta like a huge andy warhol type thing.

That would make the players the artists, rather than the programmers/modellers/etc.  Also not sure why you'd say MMOs would be the source for this kind of thing, given that most of the titles that would allow for this kind of creativity have been single player games.

[Job601]

All Ebert is trying to say, and despite apparently never having played a video game he's right about this, is that the very best video game narratives  (Planescape, Grim Fandango, Bioshock) only rise to the level of a mediocre fantasy novel, or maybe a Hollywood blockbuster.  I loved all those games, and there are works in the canon of western literature that are not super high quality  (say, Uncle Tom's Cabin, or maybe Pamela), but I don't know of any game that can compete with the greatest literature of all time.  It's an unfairly high standard, but I think that's what Ebert is trying to say.  Think about it -- everyone gushes like crazy over Planescape: Torment because it's just about as good as a Dungeons and Dragons novel.  As people have pointed out, what he misses with this analysis is the way in which games can create their own kind of meaning and their own kinds of aesthetic experiences, in the way Mario is, or Portal.

[Furiously]

I think MMOG's will be the source of art.

What if there was a train in WOW... and there was a can of spray paint next to it. And allowed you to spray graffiti into the boxcars. A semi-fun activity, but then what if there was a website that showed every single train someone had ever made, sorta like a huge andy warhol type thing.

That would make the players the artists, rather than the programmers/modellers/etc.  Also not sure why you'd say MMOs would be the source for this kind of thing, given that most of the titles that would allow for this kind of creativity have been single player games.

No... it makes the act the art...