Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
WhiteLion

Philosophical issue about gaming

Recommended Posts

Can a videogame be considered a piece of art or is it just a form of amusement?
Which are the elements that makes a video game something more?
Do you have some example of that?

I'd like to know what you think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both

I'm graphic designer but here all call me here "Artist"

So to be suitable to do graphics you need study art, history of art , color theory, Gestalt desing School, Psychology of the design...etc.

These are some basic classes for an artist , photographer etc.

Have storyline as a movie, to make this possible you need start theory of Communications, drafting,

Theory about media, now about literature.

And is more than art ;) is math too. But I'm not programmer/ coder.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It all depends on your definition of art. I don't think I see art when I look at many modern and post-modern things.

In Dutch (and related languages like German), art is translated as "Kunst". Which is in its term derived from the verb "kunnen" or "to can". So art in its pure form is reduced to someone who can do something special. The English art has similar relations to "artisanal", which is also about the ability to create stuff yourself. Art is a skill.

In that view, I don't see a lot of post-modern art to be art, but many games are certainly art. It's obvious to me that the textures, 3D models and music are art. But also the storyline, and even code can be considered as art.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As with many things such as music or films, video games can be "considered" as art as well as entertainment. Its most often encountered in the context of business however. Games publishers are businesses with profitability as the bottom-line and hence their product designs are largely influenced by business concerns.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something similar happened to me yesterday. Whilst playing a game, I realised that all I'm doing is clicking a button that activates reactive animations on this 2d screen in front of me....

The same could be said for a film, just a fast correlation of images that makes you think they're in movement, after you clicked play.

Art from my personal point of view is anything, created with the purpose to make the viewer feel different emotions. For me, the more stronger/deeper/impactful emotions, the better the art is.

It could be awe, sadness, joy, compassion, surprise.... the more complex the feeling, the better the art is.

That said, I'll also consider better pieces of art those that are able to transmit those feelings in the shorten time possible/with the minimal amount of the "medium to transmit the feeling". To explain myself, I consider a better piece of art a single image that made me feel a deep & complex feeling than a movie who took more than 1h to make me feel that way.

From my definition, you can conclude that in my opinion the best art is the controversial, social critic, aggresive/blatant type of art, because in my experience it usually is the one who can trigger in me the most complex and sudden feelings.

Also you can derive from my definition that art is very subjective because each individual reacts different to the artist stimulus, and that's why there are so many pieces of art that are considered good, when there are people who doesn't like them at all.

EDIT: Tailoring the answer with videogames.... Haven't you played a game that made you cry, or almost did? have you ever played a game that made you feel in an universe which made you feel in awe or surprised? have you ever played a game that made you feel compassion for that character who died through the game?

If yes, then some games that you played would be considered for me as art. :)

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Two quotations from Marcel Duchamp, an artist who single-handedly redefined art in the modern world and then promptly retired to become a chess player.



“While all artists are not chess players, all chess players are artists.”


and


“All in all, the creative act is not performed by the artist alone.. the spectator brings the work in contact with the external world by deciphering and interpreting its inner qualifications and thus adds his contribution to the creative act.”

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EDIT: Tailoring the answer with videogames.... Haven't you played a game that made you cry, or almost did? have you ever played a game that made you feel in an universe which made you feel in awe or surprised? have you ever played a game that made you feel compassion for that character who died through the game?

If yes, then some games that you played would be considered for me as art. :)

Then Fallout 3 did that

Edited by Skhorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The same could be said for a film, just a fast correlation of images that makes you think they're in movement, after you clicked play.

Art from my personal point of view is anything, created with the purpose to make the viewer feel different emotions. For me, the more stronger/deeper/impactful emotions, the better the art is.

It could be awe, sadness, joy, compassion, surprise.... the more complex the feeling, the better the art is.

That said, I'll also consider better pieces of art those that are able to transmit those feelings in the shorten time possible/with the minimal amount of the "medium to transmit the feeling". To explain myself, I consider a better piece of art a single image that made me feel a deep & complex feeling than a movie who took more than 1h to make me feel that way.

From my definition, you can conclude that in my opinion the best art is the controversial, social critic, aggresive/blatant type of art, because in my experience it usually is the one who can trigger in me the most complex and sudden feelings.

Also you can derive from my definition that art is very subjective because each individual reacts different to the artist stimulus, and that's why there are so many pieces of art that are considered good, when there are people who doesn't like them at all.

EDIT: Tailoring the answer with videogames.... Haven't you played a game that made you cry, or almost did? have you ever played a game that made you feel in an universe which made you feel in awe or surprised? have you ever played a game that made you feel compassion for that character who died through the game?

If yes, then some games that you played would be considered for me as art. :)

That's true. Books are basically a combination of characters, usually put in a combination that will make you emotional. Movies and films are books that don't require you to use as much of your imagination, in movies you can see what is happening and experience the emotions from a more realistic (in the terms that you can see how people react etc.) perspective. Games are movies that allow you to take control of a specific character, which often makes you associate your self with them. Due to this, games make you feel like the main character, therefore any hardships that character undergoes makes you feel, for lack of a better word, emotional. There are quite a few games that made me almost cry. Even the ending of AC 4 made me re-think life for a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think that videogames are a form of art, for the complexity of knowledge that they require to be created and for the thing that they can bring inside all the existing forms of art. Some of the games that I consider masterpieces are for sure Monkey Island, Psychonauts, Amnesia, but I do like even Quake and Command and Conquer..good old school :P
I think also that Video games, expecially mainstream, tends too easily to be propagandistic and prone to business, they could be much more than what they are now.

Edited by WhiteLion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think video games are an edge case, just like crafts and design - the borders are fluid and not easily defined, and it also depends on what the game is like. I think that anything made by the creative impulse and that someone perceives as an art form is art. In this sense, coding can also be an art form - OK, all you do is logic and mathematics really, but then you create something new that gives you joy - isn't that art? In that sense, even translating the game can be an art form, when you hit a difficult string and get creative and then finally manage to find something that works perfectly, and even might be a bit different from the original.

I find this quote from the Wikipedia page illuminating:

In a 2010 interview with Nora Young for Spark, Jim Munroe identified part of the problem with the identification of games as art as the fact that video games represent a very new medium and that some critics find novelty alarming.

I think it only becomes difficult when legal issues are involved - e.g. like free speech. This can be true for board games as well as video games - here's a satire, for example: http://www.waronterrortheboardgame.com/.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I see this in more black and white than most people...

to me;

the question of "are video games art?"

Is like asking "is Basketball a sport?"

"Is chess a board game?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Movies and video games are art because they display an image that trigger the emotions of the conceived. Art back then was used as propaganda to convince people to believe that something appears as a real factor or to describe a real situation. I know people do not question artwork describing the past, so I feel it is necessary to create in art what people should think of when they see a roman soldier or a viking warrior for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can a videogame be considered a piece of art or is it just a form of amusement?

Which are the elements that makes a video game something more?

Do you have some example of that?

I'd like to know what you think.

Nice questions :artist:
Any form of amusement is intrinsically an art-form already.
Video games are comprised of multiple arts the visual, the audio, the motive and the logic, to name four.
It is a combination of these together with a level of interactivity that make video games at least different but, perhaps not always more.
It depends what floats your boat. The saying of "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" is perhaps an old one stemming from traditional visual paint and
canvas but, since the advent of the IT revolution I will suggest that it is in your ears and actions too.
What do I think?
A video game is undoubtedly a work of art!
That the whole of creation is indeed a wonderful work of art with its motions, sounds, and lighting and matter. Its Creator being the expressor and we
and other living creatures being the beholders.
....
Enrique, I have also often thought of it(and still do) as a transmitter, reciever type of interaction.
Zy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...