Can A Video Game Be Art?

[Gigiwoo]

Recently, I read this thread about Roger Ebert’s bold article, ‘Video Games Can’t Be Art’. And, that got me to wondering … Can a Video Game Be Art?

And, after thinking about it for a while. I wrote an article for Gamasutra.

Which begins:

Do you remember Roger Ebert? He’s that jovial father figure from the Siskel and Ebert movie critic show. I must have watched a gazillion of his reviews. But sometimes, Mr Ebert talks about stuff other than movies. For instance, a few years ago, he wrote an article called, ‘Video Games Can Never Be Art.’

It was a pretty bold piece, but I admire Mr Ebert a lot, so to be honest, I never really gave it much thought. Until recently, when I had an experience that I will never forget.

And, after reading it, I’m curious. What do you think?

Gigi.

[MarigoldFleur]

Yes.

Next question?

[hafizmrozlan]

Not for me.

An art is something you look at, something you admire. It is a work presented by the artist for you, from himself, unaltered.

But games, it can be really beautiful and artistic, but it is interactive in nature, player can change how it’s played, how its look like, it can depict differently from what originally intended thus it’ll never truly represent the author’s original idea nor intention.

[khanstruct1]

@hafizmrozlan

Not for me.

An art is something you look at, something you admire. It is a work presented by the artist for you, from himself, unaltered.

But games, it can be really beautiful and artistic, but it is interactive in nature, player can change how it’s played, how its look like, it can depict differently from what originally intended thus it’ll never truly represent the author’s original idea nor intention.

I haven’t found that to be true at all. Sure, more open-ended games may grant you the ability to play a game differently, but I have never seen a game that gave interaction so much power, it would change the overall mood, message or aesthetic of the game.

[fbgbdk4]

According to a recent exposition by an american museum (MOMA? Can’t remember), games are, in the less common denominator, design art. More especifically, even the gameplay is design, in the arty sense.

In a broder range, it is multimedia art:

Design: the gameplay
Art: the art
Music: see above
Theater, literature, it is all there.

Indeed, it is the most complete art.

[khanstruct1]

I think my biggest complaint when these topics get brought up is that, the people who make the claim that video games are not art (because they have no significant message, they can’t affect people psychologically or emotionally, etc) are the same people who, in the same breath, blame video games for corrupting youth and give way to violent behavior.

Their arguments contradict each other and use nothing but bias opinion, when the truth is, they just don’t like video games.

[Word]

Just wondering, why are you asking the same question I asked some months ago and even start the same way I did, and cite Roger Ebert, and repost an article you’ve used as a reply to my post already?

Anyway, see old thread for my take on the subject

…are not art (because they have no significant message, they can’t affect people psychologically or emotionally, etc) are the same people who, in the same breath, blame video games for corrupting youth and give way to violent behavior.

I am not.

[Gigiwoo]

@hafizmrozlan

An art is something you look at, something you admire. It is a work presented by the artist for you, from himself, unaltered.

I wondered what Jenova Chen himself was trying to evoke when he designed Journey. And, so I looked it up. Here it is, in his own words:

“The goal was to create a game where people felt they are connected with each other, to show the positive side of humanity in them. A lot of games today have a list of quests, places to go, items to collect and rewards to receive… We just ignore each other. So in order to make players care about each other, we have to remove their power, and remove their tasks.” … (quoted from here)

And, reading that, I am surprised at how close my own emotional experience was:

By now, my son and wife and daughter were all watching me play, engrossed in what was happening. And, pretty soon, I realized that we were approaching the end of the game. And, that’s when a sadness overcame me. I had grown fond of this stranger. Somehow, with neither words, nor language, he had become my friend. He had guided me through danger and we had both danced for joy.

And soon, this person would be gone and I would never see them again. And, as we approached the final moments of the game, we both began to hesitate. He slowed, and I slowed, and we began to communicate furiously. We sang goodbye and danced and danced and danced. Until, at last, with nothing else to say, we walked slowly, side-by-side, into the end.

And, as the credits rolled, I realized, I was sad and I was joyous, both. And, when I set down the controller, I was surprised at how much emotion this simple game had evoked. Playing it again, going deeper into the mechanics, had helped me discovered a bit of joy and wonder about my fellow man, a stranger I will never see again.

I think Jenova Chen nailed it.

Gigi

[Word]

Well, then I can only recommend you try playing Armagetron once (see my signature)

It’s the only thing you ever play once you’re good at it.

[fbgbdk4]

@Word

Well, then I can only recommend you try playing Armagetron once (see my signature)

It’s the only thing you ever play once you’re good at it.

Have you ever played Positron?

http://www.gamespot.com/positron/

[Word]

actually pretty sure i have, yeah, but thanks;)

[imaginaryhuman]

I think art is more about BEING the artist and creative expression, creating artistically, putting on a performance which is artistic. I think that the end result, the form, the finished product itself is not really the art. But what’s important is where the art came from, the state of mind and heart, the spirituality behind it, the intention, and that has nothing really to do with the end product. So I think looking at the end product to decide whether it is art or not misses the point of what art is - art as the way the soul expresses itself, the way that creation happens, not focussing on what is created. And then people look to the end result and ask if it’s art or try to receive a sense of what the artist was experiencing when they expressed it, but really the end result is just a doorway to the mind of the artist and if you go through that doorway past appearances then you yourself are being an artist, connecting with that person on a level of oneness of mind. Or something.

[Khyrid]

Yes, in fact they have to capacity to be art more than any other medium. The fact they are games and it has been considered childish has given the the reputation that they are not.

Now, many games, if not most are not really art, but that doesn’t mean games cannot be art.

Anyone who thinks otherwise has never been moved by a game before, I pity them.

shadow of the colossus
super metroid
FF7 and others

to name a few…

[khanstruct1]

Anyone who thinks that they can determine what art is or is not, clearly doesn’t know the first thing about art.

It can be art you don’t “get”. It can even be art that you don’t like.

Personally, I don’t “get” the plastic snow shovel hanging from the ceiling at the Walker Art Center in Minneapolis, or the Cherry Spoon Bridge in the Sculpture Garden, but apparently they evoke something in someone. So be it. I’m not going to tell someone that it isn’t art; it simply isn’t my taste.

I’m not so arrogant as to make the distinction for someone else.

[poncho]

Nice to have one editor of gamasutra in here

I do consider some video games as art, the same as some “art” do not think of it as art, i mean some games are just do this think for ever an ever, the same as some art pieces are, this paint with only but a blue dot in center…

[sama-van]

Doesn’t art is supposed to be a way to communicate his feel?
A way to say thing from a physical representation?

I think people they do not think too much about it can express art on their own.

But at the inverse, people trying to understand too much about art will only be spectator trying to understand things they won’t be able to feel one day.

I’ll simply define art from the creation of something we can attach a deep feel.
There is no art if we do not feel what we do.

Then well, video games?
If people get sadness, happiness, etc… playing games.
I think the video games could be call a piece of art.

[makeshiftwings]

Seeing as how there are endless university courses and volumes of books all trying to decipher what is or is not art, I don’t think this thread is going to come up with the one true answer. Everyone has a different opinion on what exactly that certain something is that transforms “not art” into “art”.

[nipoco]

Not for me.
Games are entertainment. They serve a different purpose than art.

My 2 cents

[khanstruct1]

@nipoco

Not for me.
Games are entertainment. They serve a different purpose than art.

My 2 cents

Is a movie not entertainment? A book?

I’ll agree, a lot of games don’t make any attempt at being art. Some are simply toys to be played with. However, that can easily be said for most anything else that is considered “art”. Movies, books, plays. Heck even some paintings and sculptures make no attempt at being art.

[drewradley]

Let’s see; many video games have music (art), writing (art) and pretty pictures to look at (more art). So why does putting all those things that are commonly accepted as art into an interactive format make it no longer art? Can the gestalt really be less than its parts? I don’t think so.