Because these people devote their life to it and they don't want to be "nerds".
Because these people devote their life to it and they don't want to be "nerds".
This is probably your most coherent and correct post ever. You get a gold star.
But yeah, seriously tho. I don't CARE that games are fuckin nerdy- I'm a nerd and don't give a shit. I like playing games. I sometimes like playing games with animu looking leads as long as they're not too fuckin' creepy. All of the "games as art" people need to just stfu and go back to jerking off to ICO and SotC and leave me alone with my nerddom.
Sorry, but according to an IGN™ gaming journalist™, Metroid Prime™ Trilogy is a video game masterpiece on the level of Citizen Kane.
CITIZEN KANE!! :o
Ive played some games that I would call "art". They're long term appeal is negligible though.
In order to defend itself and it's artistic freedoms, games have to legitimize their artistic value. Otherwise, it will be treated like porn and I don't think the industry or the fans want that.
Also, don't act like you aren't ashamed of the nerd factor, especially this forum. If you didn't care so much you guys wouldn't spend so much effort in Wii-bashing. The whole battle over what the Wii provides in comparison to what is provided on other consoles is based on a strange justification of what each person plays.
The industry grew but it didn't grow up.
Ive played some games that I would call "art". They're long term appeal is negligible though.
Yeah, but you also call Wii Music a game, so who the hell in their right mind is gonna listen to you about anything?
It's hard to grow up when people are taunting poor nintendo fans, which is comparable to the holocaust.
Sorry, but according to an IGN™ gaming journalist™, Metroid Prime™ Trilogy is a video game masterpiece on the level of Citizen Kane.
CITIZEN KANE!! :o
Wat
It's hard to grow up when people are taunting poor nintendo fans, which is comparable to the holocaust.
Hey, bring up a thread where people had to exaggerate what was being said to try to deflect me.
I wouldn't try that tactic here though.
In order to defend itself and it's artistic freedoms, games have to legitimize their artistic value. Otherwise, it will be treated like porn and I don't think the industry or the fans want that.
Also, don't act like you aren't ashamed of the nerd factor, especially this forum. If you didn't care so much you guys wouldn't spend so much effort in Wii-bashing. The whole battle over what the Wii provides in comparison to what is provided on other consoles is based on a strange justification of what each person plays.
The industry grew but it didn't grow up.
In order to defend itself and it's artistic freedoms, games have to legitimize their artistic value. Otherwise, it will be treated like porn and I don't think the industry or the fans want that.
Also, don't act like you aren't ashamed of the nerd factor, especially this forum. If you didn't care so much you guys wouldn't spend so much effort in Wii-bashing. The whole battle over what the Wii provides in comparison to what is provided on other consoles is based on a strange justification of what each person plays.
The industry grew but it didn't grow up.
WHAT THE FUCK DOES THIS HAVE TO DO WITH THE WII?!!! GO DRINK BLEACH! :rofl :rofl :rofl
and I think you're completely wrong about the industry and fans not wanting it to be like porn.
COD and Halo fans wouldn't be happy if online MP had exposition or narration or tasteful music playing in the background. The industry, especially, thrives on the superficial aspects. More stats, guns, gameplay options, more hours, better graphics, better sound, more intense competition...these are the things that sell games.
These things come together to provide the sensation feedback that gamers want, thus selling games, which is what the industry wants. And that's all it is...sensation feedback aka synapse porn.
right, art is anything the noble amateur wants it to be. can't win this one. drats!That's right, you can't. "Define art" has been a philosophy 101 koan since you and I were babies.
right, art is anything the noble amateur wants it to be. can't win this one. drats!That's right, you can't. "Define art" has been a philosophy 101 koan since you and I were babies.
What are these boundaries, who exactly defined them and then who aggragated their general acceptance?
Why does art need to elicit emotion? How much emotion does something need to generate in the audience before it becomes art? Can you measure the worth of art by how much emotion it creates?
There's a lot to consider here. The argument isn't supported very well with unsourced statements like "<chess is> about as artistic as math." What barometer of art is this using? The emotional one? Because math has probably made me far more emotional than chess ever will (that emotion being anger.)