Are games art? What DO gamers want? Discuss here where I won't fucking see it.

[Howard Alan Treesong]

This is a catch-all topic for your GARBAGE that's SHITTIN UP MY SALE THREAD

[Raban]

I didn't know it was gonna be a problem, I apologize! I thought the Bore was like the wild west.

I think we're done though...

[Timber]

You cant be anything you want to... don't ever give up the dream. When is Persona 5 coming out?

[Joe Molotov]

Some of the Playboy centerfolds from Mafia 2 were pretty artsy.

[Human Snorenado]

People who want story at the expense of gameplay should go to the movies or watch tv more and quit ruining gameplay.

[Human Snorenado]

tl;dr- if you enjoy the MGS series you should probably shoot yourself in the face

[Raban]

tl;dr- if you enjoy the MGS series you should probably shoot yourself in the face

MGS1 and 2 have actually got pretty deep gameplay mechanics though. MGS3 would be cool too if it didn't require pausing the game every 45 seconds.

[Human Snorenado]

tl;dr- if you enjoy the MGS series you should probably shoot yourself in the face

MGS1 and 2 have actually got pretty deep gameplay mechanics though. MGS3 would be cool too if it didn't require pausing the game every 45 seconds.

Yeah, too bad the first has aged and the second one barely lets you play at all in between raping you with it's shitburger of a "narrative"

[Raban]

There's always VR Missions!

[Great Rumbler]

I just want to play some games that are fun, that's it.

[Eel O'Brian]

Far Cry 3 looks like it'll do some weird things as far as shooters go. Evidently there are a bunch of psychedelic drugs on the island, and at various points you'll be tripping balls while shooting shit.

[Timber]

I botched that post completely.

[Joe Molotov]

Far Cry 3 looks like it'll do some weird things as far as shooters go. Evidently there are a bunch of psychedelic drugs on the island, and at various points you'll be tripping balls while shooting shit.

Getting high on an island and having a wild, psychedelic, native ritual orgy is the kind of art I can get behind.

[Eel O'Brian]

I dunno about art, but I appreciate a decent/competent story in an rpg, seeing as how you're usually playing those for 20+ hours.  It doesn't have to be great or anything, but it's nice when there's been an effort.

[magus]

People who want story at the expense of gameplay should go to the movies or watch tv more and quit ruining gameplay.

i don't get why people think like this,movie and tv don't feature any sort of interactivity at all,that's why something like phoenix wright works,because it's interactivity makes you think and partecipate in the murder plot where if you just watched a crime drama you would just go "ah-ah" "ah-ah" there is space for both sort of games geebus

I dunno about art, but I appreciate a decent/competent story in an rpg, seeing as how you're usually playing those for 20+ hours.  It doesn't have to be great or anything, but it's nice when there's been an effort.

games are no more,no less artistic than animu and michael bay movies,it's just that gamers have a small dick and want someone to cuddle them into telling them their hobby is better

tl;dr- if you enjoy the MGS series you should probably shoot yourself in the face

I SURVIVED SNATCHER
it was

[Raban]

I think the question "Are games art?" is pretty damn easy to answer. It's too bad every time it's brought up the conversation gets spun out into nonsense.

Games have art in them. A game is not art. Here's how you can look at it without having to thinking about whatever specific video game you felt was "artistic".

Baseball itself is not art. But the designs on all the baseball player's outfits, the various architectural accents of the stadium they might be playing in, the manufacturer's logo on the catcher's mitt, those are all art.

A game is just a set of rules for the participant(s) to follow. Art is a form of expression/communication. Video games have both of these things.

games are no more,no less artistic than animu and michael bay movies,it's just that gamers have a small dick and want someone to cuddle them into telling them their hobby is better

Have I ever told you that I love you, magus?

[Eel O'Brian]

well, of course games are artistic and have art in them, i don't think anyone's disputing that

usually, though, the "are games/can games be art?" question is put forth in the context of "can games be meaningful?" where "art" is a lazy, all-encompassing filler word for "meaningful," or "substance," etc.

[Himu]

Goddamit not this shit again

games are not art and i don't understand why gamers NEED games to be art or even meaningful

[Human Snorenado]

Goddamit not this shit again

games are not art and i don't understand why gamers NEED games to be art or even meaningful

So they can feel like they're not societal outcasts

I say who cares, wear that shit with pride, society is a fucking shithole anyway, why would you want to be normal

[Timber]

[Himu]

I mean, I like a lot of games that weigh heavily on the artistic side, namely adventure games of the point n' clickin' variety, which are nothing but stories tethered with puzzles. Games like those, like Grim Fandango, I DO consider to be art because it a meaningful piece of human culture. But my problem are the gamers who act like games as a medium should STRIVE to ALL be like that. It's so ridiculous and reeks of the highest form of pretension from a medium that is mostly shooting distinguished black fellows in the face.

[Raban]

well, of course games are artistic and have art in them, i don't think anyone's disputing that

usually, though, the "are games/can games be art?" question is put forth in the context of "can games be meaningful?" where "art" is a lazy, all-encompassing filler word for "meaningful," or "substance," etc.

Hm. Laziness indeed. Either way, I think games definitely can be meaningful, but I'll admit that might be bias. They've been meaningful to me my whole life.

Goddamit not this shit again

games are not art and i don't understand why gamers NEED games to be art or even meaningful

So they can feel like they're not societal outcasts

I say who cares, wear that shit with pride, society is a fucking shithole anyway, why would you want to be normal

Damn straight!

[tiesto]

I don't care one way or another. I've liked my fair share of pretentious, arty-farty games (most recently, Journey), but when it comes down to it, there's nothing like pure arcade tests of reflexes and muscle memory... or RPG with stats and turn-based battles and complex systems... for me.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

People that want to make the games = art argument are losers who want to justify why they're in their mid 20s enjoying their nerdy hobby.

"Wow so Metal Gear Solid and Super Mario Bros. are art?  I guess I don't feel like such a loser after all by playing video games!"

Just enjoy your nerd hobby without any pretensions.

[brawndolicious]

People who want story at the expense of gameplay should go to the movies or watch tv more and quit ruining gameplay.

Would you really prefer to skip cutscenes and not make any choices in a game like Mass Effect or Deus Ex? Having the gameplay be part of the story can enhance your appreciation of it.

MGS is just a shit story as it is, but it's the rule and not the exception.

[Positive Touch]

[naff]

tl;dr- if you enjoy the MGS series you should probably shoot yourself in the face

MGS1 and 2 have actually got pretty deep gameplay mechanics though. MGS3 would be cool too if it didn't require pausing the game every 45 seconds.

Yeah, too bad the first has aged and the second one barely lets you play at all in between raping you with it's shitburger of a "narrative"

Bu bu bu it's a self aware post modern work of art!

Used to love getting high and playing mgs2 in high school. Loved that shitburgers story <3

[rodi]

I think there's a huge difference between games that Michael Bay could have made and games that actually leave you with a profound experience. Throwing the extreme left and extreme right and everything in the middle into a bag labelled "nerd hobby" is going a bit far.

imo

[recursivelyenumerable]

Lots of great art has shitty stories, your criticisms are unpersuasive

[brob]

something simply being "art" is meaningless. people arguing about this probably are self-diagnosed with some form of condition.

[Great Rumbler]

A child scribbling on a sheet of paper with a crayon is art, but that doesn't mean it's meaningful art.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

OR DOES IT?!?!?!?!

[close]

[Himu]

Lots of great art has shitty stories, your criticisms are unpersuasive

who said anything about great stories? games problem is that they are interactive, unlike other mediums, which means that there are a whole slew of things, such as mathematics and programming, not to mention the visual side of things, and the mechanics that go with it. this means that not enough time will always be paid attention to or even cared for in regards to actually crafting something meaningful to human culture. games are fun, and that's why i like them. but it's no surprise that the more artistic games are lacking in the more traditional gameplay department. games like silent hill 2 are atrocious when it comes to game mechanics, but are excellent showcases as to what the medium is capable of. But still, ultimately, it'll be better as a book or a movie because being a good game should and always will, be more important than being a meaningful game. that's just how the medium is, and the quality of the stories is irrelevant; for most games it comes down to: be a good game or tell a good story and be a crappy game. A good movie can still be a good movie without telling a good story, so long as it is well directed and edited to make the narrative flow with a sense of cohesion. but ultimately the entire POINT of movies *is* to tell stories. The point of video games is to entertain and offer brain teasers and puzzles to beat with a set of rules in place.

[Phoenix Dark]

I think gamers want commitment and stability

[Himu]

I may be soon if i play my cards right

[brawndolicious]

Lots of great art has shitty stories, your criticisms are unpersuasive

who said anything about great stories? games problem is that they are interactive, unlike other mediums, which means that there are a whole slew of things, such as mathematics and programming, not to mention the visual side of things, and the mechanics that go with it. this means that not enough time will always be paid attention to or even cared for in regards to actually crafting something meaningful to human culture. games are fun, and that's why i like them. but it's no surprise that the more artistic games are lacking in the more traditional gameplay department. games like silent hill 2 are atrocious when it comes to game mechanics, but are excellent showcases as to what the medium is capable of. But still, ultimately, it'll be better as a book or a movie because being a good game should and always will, be more important than being a meaningful game. that's just how the medium is, and the quality of the stories is irrelevant; for most games it comes down to: be a good game or tell a good story and be a crappy game. A good movie can still be a good movie without telling a good story, so long as it is well directed and edited to make the narrative flow with a sense of cohesion. but ultimately the entire POINT of movies *is* to tell stories. The point of video games is to entertain and offer brain teasers and puzzles to beat with a set of rules in place.

Interaction can make you more emotionally invested in the characters. If you're just talking about doing QTEs to boost your stats and loot, then maybe you have a point. But a game that rewards observation and planning out your tactics will make you feel a bit more like you're actually in the characters shoes. It can make you think more about how the player character would perform his job which can then enhance how you feel about the actual story events going on with that character.

In this way, a lot of games put storytelling on the same tier as gameplay in how memorable they make the experience. And when I say "a lot" I mean 1%, but you get that the medium can offer some things that books/movies can't.

[Himu]

I agree that interaction is the one thing that separates gaming from other stuff and also that characters work well with gaming. Gaming is great at a few things: 1. Characters, even if they aren't as well written for the most part, I really enjoy game characters because you are with them for 10, 20, 50, 100 hours and you grow attached; 2. Immersion story telling, ie. world building in a game like Skyrim, or role playing in a game like Baldur's Gate, or the psychological horror presented in Silent Hill 2 that bends player expectations; 3. controlling a character and using him/her for your own doing, games like the aforementioned Silent Hill 2 are great at this, you see a big ass hole? Well, Mr. game player, you have no choice but to jump in it. What are these holes for? You don't know. What do they represent? Maybe James' further descent down the abyss of Silent Hill and his own insanity? Either way, if it weren't a movie, you'd just watch him do it, but in a game you control, you - the player - have to actively make the player do uncomfortable and  unwanted things in order to progress the game.

This is why, if you want a real pure bred "art" genre for video games, you really should just stick with adventure games of the old pc variety, because they feature all of this and more, of which I consider games like Shenmue and Silent Hill to be a part of.

sheeeeeeeeeeeit /clay davis

I look forward to playing your games.

only pre-production art, like character designs and environmental design. not interested in any other aspect.

[rodi]

Who says there isn't any interaction in art?

[brob]

'interactive art' is a thing. more commonly interactive installation art.

[rodi]

I never got installation art, but it's still interactive and it's still art. Hey, just like some video games! 

[Himu]

I don't think you got my point about interactivity and video games. Video games are not art due to their interactivity. They're not art because they're emotionally stunted and incapable of doing little else except being entertainment BECAUSE they have to be interactive and engaging and "fun". When you have games that limit interactivity in place of cutscenes and story, you have really bad games. So it's either make a story-based game with shit gameplay or make a game that has an emphasis on "fun" and little else, especially not story. This means there is a limitation within the medium.

We drew a parallel to sports earlier in this thread, but I've never known video games to tear down racial, social, and country walls that impede progress like sports have. Video games have offered humanity very little despite being 40 years old. Sure, they're special to us, but due to the very confines of the medium, it limits the range of people who can be involved in it by default, and that's just one of the major points against video games; art should and always be something hands on, that all people can access and weigh in their opinion, and due to the very basic principles of video games - controls, mainly -  someone who has never played them WILL struggle playing something like fucking Mass Effect. Whoops! But ANYONE who isn't blind can go to a movie and watch the latest Scorsese film. Notice that diff? That said, while I don't think games are an artistic medium, I do think there some games can be considered art, but they are exceptions and not the rule.

[brob]

there is no rule that says games have to be fun (or engaging for that matter). Nor is there a dichotomy wherein you are forced to either have cut-scenes and a story with shit gameplay or make a game that has an emphasis on fun and little else. so the conclusion that there is a limitation within the medium is flawed.

And if it is a requirement that all people can access and weigh in their opinion this excludes far more than just video games. You also seem to be using 'art' as a qualitative statement which goes back to the absolute perfunctory nature of this discussion.

The only area I see this being a valid -serious business- discussion to have, and still retain some feeling of worth is if having games be called 'art' comes with some benefit. Like for instance applicability to a governmental culture fund or somesuch shit. Most funds of this nature already accept video games as fund-able ventures though (limbo was funded this way, to provide an example), so why bother?

[Himu]

I heavily disagree with the first parts of your post, but agree completely with the last statement. I just like getting into it because I'm bored, not that I really care.

[brob]

if you are bored you should rather spend your time reading this three part feature on rockpapershotgun about Pathologic, an amazing adventure game that is absolutely no fun at all.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/04/10/butchering-pathologic-part-1-the-body/

[fistfulofmetal]

I agree with Brobzoid. The idea the games HAVE to be anything is dumb.

But I think that way about anything. Putting limitations on any medium is dumb.

[Himu]

I disagree. Being fun is the main part of being a GAME. Change the word for what it's described then. But when I think of games, I think of enjoyment, for a whole multitude of reasons and that should be the most important trait any game should strive for.

[cool breeze]

this reminds me of the most wahjah inducing video

[brob]

games are rules and win/loss conditions, a game is a game regardless of how fun you or I think it is. I had absolutely no fun at all playing super mario galaxy, but it would be autistic to argue that it's less of a game for it. (children's) toys, on the other hand, should probably be fun. so I guess I could pee in mario's cornflakes anyway.

[Himu]

The parameters we're talking doesn't mean that EVERY game is going to be fun because that is impossible. Not all of us have the same taste.

However, the purpose of games is to win. You win through interaction with the game. A lot of the "artistic" games like Journey or Heavy Rain lack the interactivity that make games unique. It seems that the more artistic a game tries to be, the less interaction there is, thus, being less of a game because of it. Is really the only point I'm trying to make. Interaction = engaging, fun, unique. Many games' idea of "art" and "story" is to shove as many cutscenes down your throat as possible which impedes on the interaction that makes games unique.

[Himu]

When I say gaming is limited, I'm not placing a limit on the medium; the medium limits itself by being games in the first place since the goal will always be to win.

[brob]

if the parameters we are talking about don't apply to every game we aren't talking about the parameters for what constitutes a game.

The artistic games you mention, and others like them (heavily promoted by large companies, etc) are so Kinkade~esque and absolutely devoid of anything it's impossible to care beyond the initial visual jerk-off. if you watch a HD play-though of Journey on youtube you have effectively pirated that shit. Did you read the article I posted himu?

[rodi]

I see what you're saying, Stringer Bell, but some parts of it doesn't sit well 

When I play a game I really don't play to win or lose. Sometimes I just want to be engaged in something that I find visually and audibly pleasing, and entertaining. However, I do understand that there are some games that I would never ever want to see recognized as art. Like, I'm sure some people feel the same way about dubstep.

[OptimoPeach]

edit: nm lol

[rodi]

Don't be jelly

[rodi]

There's only two or three people who seem to take this topic semi-seriously anyway. I don't think this counts as much of a thread 

[chronovore]

Some games are art, some aren't.

Some films are art, some aren't.

Or maybe it's safer to say, "Films are art, but some of it is bad art."

[rodi]

Some games are art, some aren't.

Some films are art, some aren't.

Or maybe it's safer to say, "Films are art, but some of it is bad art."

Agreed.

[TEEEPO]

and it used to be that color photography couldn't be considered art until one of the highest institutions in the art world displayed Eggleston's first portfolio, which literally changed everything overnight.



the arguments used against video games being art seem silly to me, especially given art's long history of rejecting the new and radical. 

[Joe Molotov]

if you are bored you should rather spend your time reading this three part feature on rockpapershotgun about Pathologic, an amazing adventure game that is absolutely no fun at all.

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/04/10/butchering-pathologic-part-1-the-body/

I would watch someone play that game, but I wouldn't want to play it.

[brob]

don't think I've seen anyone do a video LP of it, but there was a very good video let's play of The Void on Something Awful. archived here: http://lparchive.org/The-Void/

The Void is infinitely more playable than Pathologic, but it's still requires some effort as most of the systems/mechanics aren't explained all that much.

[Timber]

OKAY I'm gonan play Pathologic.