Are games art? Do you care?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jasong

http://images.encyclopediadramatica....8/Zomg_owl.jpg

---

http://technabob.com/blog/wp-content...miyo_mario.jpg

Well that settles it then!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Azimuth

Lol. You constantly contradict yourself. Also, please substantiate that claim.

I mean, by your own assertion here, there's simply no reasonably critically evaluating shit games, because, by your own definitions, shit games won't feature - among other things - "mature themes" or anything of enduring worth (=ART). So there's basically no such thing as, say, something like Damnation - universally panned by critics, but apparently on no tenable pretext.

Really, it's like you yank this stuff out of your arse. :P

---

I'm not even sure what you're getting at here. How can you engage in a dialog concerning the matters I outlined above without an implicit recognition that what you're evaluating is an art form? I'm not talking about a rudimentary marks-out-of-five sort of review score aggregation - you can review whatever you feel like. A discussion of the means by which videogaming conveys narrative for instance - its strengths, weaknesses and potential - is inevitably infringing onto sacrosanct territory if you can't just acknowledge, as I said, a priori, that it's an art form.

What I don't understand is what exactly is WRONG with recognizing videogaming as an art form? As densweep pointed out, if you wanted to discuss the Sistine Chapel for instance, but you couldn't discuss it as art, all you'd have to talk about are the kinds of paintbrushes he used, the angles of the ceiling, the age and history of its creation, restorations, and so forth - missing the heart of the creation itself. Or if you could do, please tell me how - perhaps I'm missing something.

I'm Copy-Pasting all this. Gonna make me a novel, sell it for 10 billion US$ and pay you each a Happy Meal In Royalties.

:p Just like tetris hey.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maplassie

I'm Copy-Pasting all this. Gonna make me a novel, sell it for 10 billion US$ and pay you each a Happy Meal In Royalties.

---

Depending on which side of the fence you are, is it art? Do you care?

I just want to shoot people in the head with my R700. Don't care if it's art or not :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maplassie

I just want to shoot people in the head with my R700. Don't care if it's art or not :P

---

As long as you sign your name in the blood, you can call it art.

Nope don't care.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jasong

I'm not even sure what you're getting at here. How can you engage in a dialog concerning the matters I outlined above without an implicit recognition that what you're evaluating is an art form? I'm not talking about a rudimentary marks-out-of-five sort of review score aggregation - you can review whatever you feel like. A discussion of the means by which videogaming conveys narrative for instance - its strengths, weaknesses and potential - is inevitably infringing onto sacrosanct territory if you can't just acknowledge, as I said, a priori, that it's an art form.

---

You've still not substantiated this.

And you continue to contradict yourself. During the course of this discussion, you've suggested that:

1. Only some games could be considered art.
2. It matters that we are able to consider games as art.
3. It doesn't matter if we can consider games as art.
4. We can't critically evaluate games without first presuming they're a form of art, disingenuously avoiding the logical inference that, without first presuming they're a a form of art, we're entirely unable to critically evaluate them.

It's the last part I find especially absurd. And, as I've pointed out several times in this discussion already, IF WE CAN'T ABSOLUTELY DEFINE WHAT CONSTITUTES ART, HOW CAN WE EVALUATE ANYTHING AS "ART", ANYWAY?

Quote:

---

What I don't understand is what exactly is WRONG with recognizing videogaming as an art form? As densweep pointed out, if you wanted to discuss the Sistine Chapel for instance, but you couldn't discuss it as art, all you'd have to talk about are the kinds of paintbrushes he used, the angles of the ceiling, the age and history of its creation, restorations, and so forth - missing the heart of the creation itself. Or if you could do, please tell me how - perhaps I'm missing something.

---

I think you lack imagination.