Are video games art?

[petik1]

I've read a few articles explaining how video games are not art. I was actually angered a little when, in one article, pictures of painting and photography were put with screenshots of what looked like Grand Theft Auto to show what "art" really was to the writer. People outside of the actual gaming community need to realize that games are more than just Mario and the ever controversial GTA. Take a look at Eduardo the Samurai Toaster for Wiiware and I dare you not to call it art. Music is art. Movies are art. Why can't video games be? People bust their butts to create something to their liking. Is this not like music or movies or any other form of the orthodox definition of art? On the same note, is video game music considered regular music (like you'd listen on your ipod)?So, what are your opinions?










Pictures to prove my point.

[linkzpikachu]

depends on your tastes. i think they are more so in the storyline and music than the graphics myself, thats like how i think classic cars are shiny chrome-plated works of art compared to todays shit.

[petik1]

That's another thing. Books are art. Why not the storyline of a game?

[Jedi Master Baiter]

On the same note, is video game music considered regular music (like you'd listen on your ipod)?

What do you mean by regular?

There is a wide spectrum of video game albums out there, search for yourself:

http://vgmdb.net/

As for art, I'd like to consider games as being a tool to create art, especially some of those tool-assisted speedruns (2 tools!):

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

& machinima videos (yay! I get to link my vid again!):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IKuL9xHbYE#t=1m50s

[cubelmariomadness]

Most people who say that video games are not art are just people thinking of this 

[linkzpikachu]

^ quality shit right there 

[UglyJoe]

Anything that you call art, is art.  By presenting it as art, it is an art object.

So, yeah, if you want to call videogames art, then they're art.  That shouldn't be the question.  The question should be, does the video game spectrum, by and large, produce good art?

[botulismo]

A lot of people who think that they are qualified to judge art but have never actually produced art themselves (either known as art critics or sponsors) say that it's not art because they've got some preconceived notion that a game is only something a child plays for pure entertainment. These are people who have enough income to keep artists' living and working expenses paid for with their pocket change. That is to say, a lot of them are up in years along with being up in money. This of course affects their viewpoint tremendously.

There's simply no intersection between the art social world and the video game world. Video game companies are not pushing to make themselves known as art. Independent video game programmers (the people I'd imagine would be the first to try to make that crossover) don't think to show their works in art shows. Instead they go for their established audience instead of trying to make a completely new one.

I've been to a few modern art museums and in college I went to a few art shows with friends, and it's sort of funny how technologically far behind artists are. I've seen things made within the last two years that look like they were made on an Amiga (not that that's a bad thing by itself, mind you) that seem primitive by Demo scene standards of 15-20 years ago. The surprising thing is that this was by far one of the closest overlaps of computers in a "serious" art setting. So, maybe in about 20 years, if we're lucky, we'll see something in a museum that resembles a game of today. Now, there may be a fluke, where someone might be willing to accept something everyone else calls a video game as art if you called it something else and put it somewhere prestigious. Call it an "Interactive Computer Generated Performance Art Installation" and they'd at least call it art, even if it's something they didn't personally like.

I've never known an artist who would say that video games could not be art. Most artists know that art comes in all different forms. But artists are few and far between in the art world. Think of the art world as a social circle. The critics decide what is allowed in as art. The artists have little say because they're being sponsored. In this aspect, it hasn't changed much since the days of the Renaissance. There are exceptions, but by and large the idea of the struggling artist is still pretty true.

Anyway, that's just my thoughts and observations. I'm sure I've missed out on some things. Art really isn't my thing; video games are, I've just observed these things incidentally. The overall point that I'm trying to make is that 99% of what is considered art is decided by critics, sponsors, and the social circle that surrounds them, not artists. The type of people who make video games haven't intersected the art world. One day it will, but it'll probably take a few more generations.

Also, as far as whether I think video games are art, yes, of course they can be. Video games are a medium. The medium doesn't dictate whether something is good art or bad art. In general though, I've felt far more emotionally moved by video games than I have by stereotypical art because I feel like I'm participating in the experience rather than simply passively viewing it.

[petik1]

I think the term "video game" helps segregate games and art just because of its connotation. If it were to be called creatively deisgned interactive media and made by one known for other forms of media, i believe then the lines could be blurred.  Also, i hate the idea of a "critic". How could you judge someone's ideas or expressions?

I like to use the word "art" liberally. Art is everything from macaroni glued on construction paper to the venus de milo to any form of sculpture or statue. Art can be a building or food, or an invention. So i say, video games, i think, are art. Plain and simple.

[botulismo]

I think the term "video game" helps segregate games and art just because of its connotation. If it were to be called creatively deisgned interactive media and made by one known for other forms of media, i believe then the lines could be blurred.  Also, i hate the idea of a "critic". How could you judge someone's ideas or expressions?

I like to use the word "art" liberally. Art is everything from macaroni glued on construction paper to the venus de milo to any form of sculpture or statue. Art can be a building or food, or an invention. So i say, video games, i think, are art. Plain and simple.

I don't think the system of art critics and art sponsorship is right; this just seems to be how the world works. Society tends to crave the approval of experts. Unfortunately, in this case, all the "experts" decide this based on pure opinion. Heck, even TV still faces this very same issue.

[petik1]

So, all in favor of starting a gaming art museum where all critics are shot on site?

[nensondubois]

Any form of someone's mind creations plastered into creativity is in turn, art. Matial 'arts' is not really art an if you look at it, at best it is just psychotic logical physics at best... maybe even non-innate survival if you're lucky. Since people classify everything that people do as art, you can see the confusion. Now back to video-games: While there are still some limitations today, the older consoles are way better and will always be because of the fact that they had a creativity channel (that can't or has yet to be matched by today's crummy standards) that forced game designers to work at peak potential with said creativity in mind making true art in the process. Still all video games are art because someone used their creativity... and no, I'm not going into the semantics of creativity in itself unless warranted. (I just added that last bit for drama).

That's how I feel about video games and art. I did not explain movies and television, nor music, because they all fall under the same basic elements, and I'm sure you can see and possibly agree.

[Jedi Master Baiter]

Matial 'arts' is not really art an if you look at it, at best it is just psychotic logical physics at best...

Matal arts? Like mating? Kamasutra is called "the Art of Love."

[petik1]

I'm sure he meant martial arts 

And I'd lump martial arts with dance. It's just for a different purpose. Trust me, martial arts can be considered an art, especially when you've done it before 

[nensondubois]

I'm sure he meant martial arts 

And I'd lump martial arts with dance. It's just for a different purpose. Trust me, martial arts can be considered an art, especially when you've done it before 

Martial arts was spelled correctly so yes, I meant it.