Are games art? Does it matter?

They're not.

It doesn't.

your second question answers your first question

1. Anything and everything can be art. No exceptions.

2. It's all up to personal interpretation and value so it doesn't.

>>381371028
Literally anything can be considered art. If a 2 year old throws paint at a wall, it's art. I think too many people conflate quality with art and don;t know the actual definition because by definition it is art.

>>381371515
Pretty much this

https://youtu.be/KAExa9P7hME

>>381371028
Dumb frogposter

File: 1497532491868.png (596KB, 600x686px) Image search: [Google]

596KB, 600x686px

>>381371028
Video Games Are NOT ART

Yes. Everything is.

No.

They can be, but they don't have to be, unless they want to.

>>381371028
Absolutely yes.

Yes it does and people not understanding it is holding games back.

>>381372420
anyone that wants video games to be art, generally does not want good things to happen to video games.

if asked going to someones art gallery i would say fuck off.

if someone called me an artist, i would be insulted.

>>381371028
No
Yes
Video Games becoming recognized as art will kill video games.

File: YYmYrUX.jpg (354KB, 2048x2048px) Image search: [Google]

354KB, 2048x2048px

Do you think games and cinema will somehow merge in the future?

>>381372692
>anyone that wants video games to be art, generally does not want good things to happen to video games.

??????????
What the fuck are you talking about, could you elaborate?
It's literally the opposite.

>>381372815
>Video Games becoming recognized as art will kill video games.

Literally the opposite. Video Games becoming an industry and seeing them solely as products with objective value instead of as art, is what's killing them slowly but surely. What used to be fun, optional entertainment, is now developed with "what makes the most money" instead.

>>381372692
Yeah, how can the great artists that of the past that form the foundation of western culture itself even compete with commercial toys for children?

>>381371515
>I've watered down the definition of art so much that it no-longer has any value!!!
Congrats, fuckwad, now let the adults talk.

>>381372692
You think "art games" are things like walking sims/cinematic/indie stuff, but something like SMB and Mega Man are also art games. Once again, """""high art"""""""""""""" and "art" are not the same things.

no, it doesn't

//ommiting 5 gorrilion post

>>381373065
>using the literal definition is watering it down
read this """""adult"""""""""""""
>>381373143

>>381372816
"the medium is the message." the sharing of agency with the observer in games is at direct odds with stuff like books and film. games could wind up with production values as great as film, theoretically, but a game that tries to be a movie becomes neither and vice versa.

>>381373065
>watering down

Let me ask you, how is it watering down the definition if games are not art? Have you never experienced big emotions in games, are they not meaningful to you? Then you understand that it's the same case for millions of others, and suddenly not seeing games as "art" and thinking that they don't somehow 'qualify' for this is straight up retarded.

>>381371028
no

art is trying to envoke feelings with tools of the medium.

video games are just fun time wasters like action movies or hentai.

simple as that.

>>381373778
>fun isn't an emotion

get your head out of your ass and think about what you write

>>381373034
>theater was never predominantly fart jokes touring around villages
>music was never what that drunken twit does real well with a shoddy lute at the tavern when he's not passed out in a pig pen
>film was never just stolen from waves, stage and page to capitalize on this fad of moving pictures
>no one's ever made a toilet actual art
>tv was never good

man you're stupid

>>381373875
sorry I should say a thought instead of an emotion.

like something that you think of without thinking about it, but you're subconscious registers it. thats art.

>>381371028
Artists are faggots, so if fames are art that means they're shit.

anything that's expressive and observable is art.

I can take a dump on your mom, and it would be art.
instead of paint, i use feces, instead of canvas, i use her chest

>>381373981
>like something that you think of without thinking about it, but you're subconscious registers it.

uhh what?
I still think I know what you mean and video-games literally do exactly this lol

>>381373952
10 year olds aren't allowed to browse this site

File: 1497918687513.jpg (445KB, 1600x1144px) Image search: [Google]

445KB, 1600x1144px

>>381371968
Go home robot

>>381373065
>the definition can only include what I subjectively feel is art.
What's your definition?

>>381373778
>art must invoke feelings
why

>action movies can't be art
right, the director of photography has nothing to do with those explosions

>>381373981
>art should invoke a thought
why

>should
but doesn't, frequently

>>381374160
ya, you don't want to be outpaced in your hug box

>>381374157
>uhh what?

basic example: see something red, someone trained you that red is bad, see red person, that person is bad

>I still think I know what you mean and video-games literally do exactly this lol

yeah but they never do it to the same level and they focus more on fun. If they try to do it they're just a weak ape of cinema/books/art

theres very little that games can do that other mediums can't. player interactivity is pretty much the limit to what "art" we'll get.

>>381372692
>anyone that wants video games to be art, generally does not want good things to happen to video games.
Oh fuck off with this close-minded bullshit. I'm primarily someone into fighting games, cuhrayzee, and 'videogame-y' games in general but I'm not stupid enough to think that's all video games can be.

You're what's holding video games back from maturity.

File: 53e.png (12KB, 128x128px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 128x128px

>literature is are
>movies are art
>music is art
>combine all three and all of a sudden it's not art

Really makes your noggin joggin

>>381374338
>right, the director of photography has nothing to do with those explosions

just because hes a director of photography doesn't mean what hes doing is art.

a boat maker could carve some wood and sell some boats, and in the same vain could use that technique to carve wooden statues. one would be a product the other art.

>>381373778
>videogames don't evoke feelings
t.I'veNeverPlayedAVideogame

>>381374384
>they never do it to the same level
>only good art is art
opinion discarded

>>381374527
>products can't be art
sure warhol

>>381374514
not all literature is art, that piece of paper telling you about your hemroids isn't art.

that porno isn't art

death metal isn't art

there are rules and exceptions.

Yes.
No.

>>381374619
>videogames don't evoke feelings

doubt it was the video game that did it but the story/cinematics/music/anything else that wasn't the gameplay

theres some exceptions sure.

>>381374635
>opinion discarded
>wants to talk about art
>discards opinions instantly

lol

>>381374384
>basic example: see something red, someone trained you that red is bad, see red person, that person is bad

Yeah and games do this all the time even on much deeper level.

>yeah but they never do it to the same level and they focus more on fun

On the same level compared to what? "they focus more on fun" how is this relevant, and what does this even mean? Would you describe Penumbra games as "fun"?

>theres very little that games can do that other mediums can't.

Except what separates games from others is that you can interact and control them. Other mediums don't do this. It's what games are.

>>381374654
what's the difference between porn and art?

>death metal isn't art
man do i know a gang of boys who'd slap your shit in for saying that. they're all musicians.

>>381374803
>has uninformed opinion
>expects to be listened to
some of us know what we're talking about

>>381374396
Nice so you're literally me

t. >>381372819

>>381374805
>Yeah and games do this all the time even on much deeper level.

No they don't, not even. movies are far deeper than any game and literature is on a far deeper level than any movie.

games are like the all you can eat buffet across from fine dining.

>>381374805
>On the same level compared to what? "they focus more on fun" how is this relevant, and what does this even mean? Would you describe Penumbra games as "fun"?

maybe, but I wouldn't really call that a game.

>Except what separates games from others is that you can interact and control them. Other mediums don't do this. It's what games are.

yep and I'm interested in seeing someone prove me wrong but I feel like it's not going to.

File: 1423262765190.jpg (32KB, 367x479px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 367x479px

>>381374514
>pineapple pizza is delicious
>Well done steak is delicious
>Coffee with milk and sugar is delicious
>Combine all three and suddenly it's not delicious

Really got my cogs a turnin

>>381374879
>>some of us know what we're talking about
yes some

>>381375012
>No they don't, not even. movies are far deeper than any game and literature is on a far deeper level than any movie.

>the best selling game of all time, Tetris, is so abstract art that no-one properly knows why it's so liked

>lol movies and literature are deeper duh

retard

>but I wouldn't really call that a game.

ok the last 'retard' was a tongue in cheek insult but this time it's serious:
you're retarded.

>yep and I'm interested in seeing someone prove me wrong but I feel like it's not going to.
Tell me a movie that I can by physical input interact and alter, and that is directed and created with that completely in mind.

>>381375278
>retard

wow you got me

>>381371028
1) yes
2) depends on which answer is profitable to you

>>381375278
>Tell me a movie that I can by physical input interact and alter, and that is directed and created with that completely in mind.

what I mean to say is that I'm interested in seeing the input actually create "art"

theres been some examples but it's been pretty much the same message over and over.

>you're in control
>think about how you're in control

>>381375053
We're talking about 3 different mediums here not 3 songs, or movies, or books at once. A more correct allegory would be
>pepperoni is delicious
>cheese is delicious
>bread is delicious
>all of a sudden it's fucking delicious
You should feel embarrassed how dumb you are.

>>381375053
false equivalency. liking stuff has nothing to do with artistic merit.

>>381374879
>what's the difference between porn and art?

a lot.
and a lot more that would be met with semantics of "feelings of desire are totally art"

>death metal isn't art
man do i know a gang of boys who'd slap your shit in for saying that. they're all musicians.

eh it was a joke that I was too tired to put thought into.

>>381375443
Tetris.
I move the blocks to categorize them in rows, after which I get score and they disappear. This feels highly satisfying, and being the best selling video game of all time, people agree. Would it have been as satisfying if there was no challenge and I wasn't the one controlling the blocks and categorizing them, but instead they always fell in the same way in some order?

Absolutely fucking not. Did user input mean something here and cause emotion? YES. And it goes the same way for literally every game.

>>381374937
I think it's pathetic how you have so many people lamenting story-based games like they're the worst things that have happened to vidya in recent years, instead of the effect that they might have had on the industry (like, say, the new God of War, even though I've never been a fan of that series). Yes, when devs fuck up the gameplay simply for the sake of telling a story (that probably isn't even good in the first place), it fucking sucks, sure. But the idea in and of itself of a game trying to tell a story or even of a dev creating game with the goal of creating art is not a bad thing in the least. It's actually good for the industry, even if some of those games just aren't really for me.

I think a lot of the issue that people have with these sorts of games is that they're mechanically shallow. I think if devs spent more effort giving their story-based games better gameplay and intertwining it with the story, people would bitch and complain less. It'd be an intermixing of story and gameplay that shows exactly how video games are different from any other medium, and showing the strength of video games as an interactive medium.

I think a lot of the complaining is also because of devs who force a story into something that really doesn't need one. Like, look at story modes in fighting games. It's expected now when the meat and potatoes of fighting games are the gameplay, yet story modes eat up precious development time for other aspects of the game that might need it more. Or look at games like the Tomb Raider reboot. Did we really need to know Lara's origin story?

>tl;dr version: gamers are a bunch of whiny manchildren who don't want their medium to evolve but to be fair, a lot of devs also suck when it comes to stories in vidya as well

It seems to me that people clamoring for vidya to be considered art are insecure in their hobbies and interests and want them to be respected more and justify the time they devote it, which is why i see alot of video game "journalist" writing about the subject. Its just wanting validation. Personally i really dont care, but i dislike the trend of striving to make games art by emulating other established practices like film and literature while sacrificing the development of what makes games unique, the gameplay mechanics. I could give a fuck less if a game has a rich narrative if it interrupts or otherwise detracts from actual gameplay elements. The Last of Us is a huge offender in this regard. Traditional drama character development does not mesh well with action shooter gameplay. Citizen Kane it aint

>tl;dr i dont care

>>381375774
>Would it have been as satisfying if there was no challenge and I wasn't the one controlling the blocks and categorizing them, but instead they always fell in the same way in some order?

funny that you say that but a lot of people watch games be played by others and still manage to experience the same feelings through them.

I actually wonder if that means anything or detracts at all from the legitimacy of the players input.

Like think. If art was nearly enjoyed just as much if I explained a painting to you, does that mean the painting was extremely surface level?

I think I'm rambling a bit but thats just really interesting.

File: 1487233373587.png (80KB, 211x244px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 211x244px

>>381375053
>>381375454
>Food analogy

Games are an art gallery

>>381376004
For some I'm sure, but people like you also don't know the meaning of art. It's not something "deep" like you make it out to be.

>>381376007
>funny that you say that but a lot of people watch games be played by others and still manage to experience the same feelings through them.

PFffffffffwwwwtttt they do not. They literally do not. Do you also think it's possible to get exercise by watching someone lift weights? Do you get your stomach filled by watching someone else eat?
Looking at someone doing the experience you can emphasize with what he's feeling possibly, yes, but "experiencing the same feelings" as he's getting from the games? Don't be stupid. Wouldn't work for a painting either. Even if someone described a painting to you, it's not the same as looking at it, because you don't have the freedom to look at it like you want. You're discussing the entire thing on extremely surface level so I fully understand why you would think that games are not art. You sound like you'd think that a painting of a dog barking is just a dog barking and that's all value there is to it.

And to be honest you never even addressed my tetris point properly. How can you get the "same feelings" from the tetris by watching someone else play it, unless he's moving the blocks in the exact same sequence as you would, and basically be a complete replica of yourself... ugh it hurts my head to even think about your stupidity, I'm sorry but I cannot continue and have to change thread.

>>381375012
penumbra games weren't games? does that mean eraserhead wasn't a movie?

>>381375278
>tell me a movie...
man can you dance architecture? can you play biology music?

>>381375759
>a lot
pretty sure courts decided it couldn't be objectively determined like 70 years ago during a spate of obscenity cases. i think the quote was "i can't tell you difference but i know it when i see it." maybe it was about whether naked lunch was porn or art.

>it was a joke
ya, seemed like you lost focus for a sec.

>>381375774
i'd say tetris is art. since "video games" is a medium about systemic feedback, it's super pure video game art because it doesn't rely on writing or graphics or sound outside of enhancing appreciation (not enjoyment but understanding) of the state of play. adding a failure state just creates tension, but how different would it be if the screen just moved when you hit the top and the bumped rows were no longer available to complete rows in? the lack of tension would rob you of any sense of accomplishment or advancement, which in games are similar to a work having satisfying rhythm and balance, directing the eye to the point of focus (the "start game" button).

>>381371028
I really want someone to take a 4k high quality screenshot of TW3 or some other GRAFICS heavy game and post it in all the "ARE GAMES ART" threads

>>381376702
and what would that prove?

>>381376493

The fuck are you talking about? I never said anything about it being deep.

>art is a term that carries a degree of legitimacy to alot of people, hence why people care if it is labled as such. I dont care
>i do care when video games sacrifice what makes games unique in the service of narration, i.e. cut scenes etc. This is my opinion

>>381376004
>by emulating other established practices like film and literature while sacrificing the development of what makes games unique, the gameplay mechanics.

This is exactly the result of not seeing games as art.
Understanding games as an artform and what it's ultimately about (on a very abstract level; look at tetris) is what leads to very good gameplay mechanics.

What leads to story rich film emulation bullshit is exactly the result of not understanding games as 'art' and capitalizing on what makes games games.

>>381373003
>as products with objective value
But no one sees them like that.

>>381376901
>>art is a term that carries a degree of legitimacy to alot of people
My point is that it doesn't. It can but it does not inherently so.
>>i do care when video games sacrifice what makes games unique in the service of narration, i.e. cut scenes etc. This is my opinion
That's fine but it literally has nothing to do with the discussion.

This fucking thread: dumb frogposter edition.

>>381377013
I have some bad news for you.
A lot, I'd almost say most people do.

>>381373003
Art was about wealth to begin with and vidya if anything is moving further away from being a purely mercantile business

>>381377086

>inherently

Never said that either. I was arguing that many people think it does, or else they wouldnt care.

>nothing to do with the discussion

Games emulating other mediums of art in the service of attempting to be art doesnt pertain to the discussion of videogames being art? My man i think you may be completely retarded. Try reading what i write before arguing

File: laughing-pepe.jpg (27KB, 399x385px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 399x385px

>>381377135

>>381377491
>Games emulating other mediums of art in the service of attempting to be art
Do you mean this literally? Like they go out of their way to make the game be considered "art"? or are you saying they copy other artforms?

File: 1491874008480.jpg (2MB, 2994x5978px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2994x5978px

Vidya is the highest form of art

>>381371028
No, it doesn't matter, in my opinion no art matters though. Although, The MoMA had a whole video game exhibit a few years back, I know for a fact Dwarf fortress has been in art exhibits, as has Pac-man and The Last of Us, I don't know if they were at the MoMA or a different exhibit.

>>381376702
>i want a new flavor of shit
trust me it won't taste better

>>381377013
what are video game publishers, alex?

>>381376920
right: mise-en-scene involves a lot of the principles of painting and theater, but is uniquely a quality of film. games achieve similar kinds of unique feel not by putting you in the center of action, but by making you responsible for the action. it's why stuff like nier and spec ops: the line and shadow of the colossus give so many people a hardon: everything sucks and it's your fault for making it that way. as far as i know no other medium is capable of making you personally responsible for fictional happenings, whether you like them or not. my favorite part of nier automata is that the earth is totally at peace if you'd never arrived. making the player responsible for this. 2B is only the player's avatar who has no other means of interacting with the world except violence. i think that's neat, and is made more obvious and potent by the written dialog of suffering and the visual evidence that the earth is doing pretty fine without you.

but ya, who gives a shit, this is all intellectual mastrubation

>>381376857
>>381377991
Bob Ross painted happy little trees and big mountains with techniques and expertise he had developed over years and that was art. Some dude made 3d digital models of trees and mountains that require a set of skills and knowledge of techniques and experience to make it look good, its different form but still the same art is it not?

But youll probably nit pick like the little bitches you are.

>>381377659

>copying

Never said copying. A cut scene that emphasizes drama and character development is clearly emulating the established practice of film, and if its not their intention to make art, others obviously recieve it that way, referring once again to the last of us, praised for its narrative focus which was carried in large part by plot and character development via cutscenes. Youre dense and im done

>>381378574
is a printer an artist ?

File: 1492110824239.jpg (38KB, 419x420px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 419x420px

>>381378641

Hotline Miami was art.

>>381378574
if bob ross painted a background in a game as a whole art or is the background art?

File: 1474623255073.png (10KB, 284x178px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 284x178px

>>381378641

>>381378574
>"don't nitpick you silly boys"

technique is what is applied to create... anything. you can have awful technique and still make art: that's what punk music was all about. inb4 "that's not music"

but it seems like people are hung up on
>high art vs low art
>intention as art vs intention as product
was dickens's work high art? because it was monthly soap opera for a magazine.

is days of our lives art? if it sucked your intellectual braindick harder would you argue it transcended the medium?

File: 1480595528225.png (72KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 900x900px

>>381378641

>>381371096
This.

File: 1462365111174.png (41KB, 156x129px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 156x129px

>>381373563
>how is it watering down

>Literally anything can be considered art.

That's watering down.

>>381378574
>>381378683
>But youll probably nit pick like the little bitches you are.

Fucking called it

>>381380529
No, by definition that is absolutely true. It can be, doesn't mean everything is.

>>381371028
Yes. No.

>>381371028
Yes. No.

File: 1494888060673.png (117KB, 305x382px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 305x382px

>>381380908
>>381380913

File: 1438553220012.jpg (242KB, 610x470px) Image search: [Google]

242KB, 610x470px

>>381371028

>Are games art?

Yes.

>Does it matter?

Up to you.

>>381371028
>Are games art?
No. Historically, games are a completely separate tradition from art.

>Does it matter?
Yes. Games are entertainment projects which are gravely damaged by the pretense of art.

No, games are not art. Games are toys.
No, it does not matter.

>>381371028
Is chess art?
And no, it fucking doesn't. It would be better if this conversation never even started because then we would have more actual games instead of tumblr indie walking simulators and AAA trying to be cinematic.

File: 1438553091697.jpg (347KB, 610x747px) Image search: [Google]

347KB, 610x747px

>>381382456
>No. Historically, games are a completely separate tradition from art.

Completely irrelevant when trying to determine whether or not something is art.

>Yes. Games are entertainment projects which are gravely damaged by the pretense of art.

Why?

>>381382559


>No, games are not art. Games are toys.

irrelevant.


>>381382732

>Is chess art?

Is it not?

>>381383064
>No, games are not art. Games are toys.
>irrelevant.
How is it irrelevant? Are Lego blocks art? Is your little sister's teddy bear art? Are the little cars you used to play with as a kid art?
Video games are no different than these things, it's just that the age of the target audience is different.
>>Is chess art?
>Is it not?
No.

>>381383064
OK is football art
Or checkers
Or dodgeball
We're so quick to think of video games as art, but you don't think of irl games as art, correct? Games are games. Art is art. And that is OK.

>>381383064
>all that reddit spacing
didn't read your post but it hurts my eyes and is a complete waste of space so fuck you

>>381383323
>How is it irrelevant? Are Lego blocks art? Is your little sister's teddy bear art? Are the little cars you used to play with as a kid art?

Define art.

>No.

I'm sorry you feel the need to be stubborn.


>>381383358

Everything is art. It's a meaningless word unless you take subjectivity into account. Nothing is objectively art, only well crafted.

>>381383358
>the art of passing
>the art of playmaking
>the art of coaching
Plenty of people refer to sports artistically. But I still think those are two different things/definitions of the word.

Art. Isn't. That. Serious.

File: 17itxmvhcyn4gjpg.jpg (38KB, 500x318px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 500x318px

>>381383454

File: 797648508660.png (53KB, 319x370px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 319x370px

>people want games to be art
>simultaneously hate anything too videogamey, like Mario and Metroid, because not enough character development and crying and "diversity"

Art can go jump off a cliff.

>>381383678
>people want games to be art

Define art. Pretty sure it's not wanted, it is simply what it is.

>>381383678
This
Vidya is about fun and bing bing wahooing
As harsh as it sounds, if you want to (((evolve the medium))) into something resembling "film" (modern shit film), you need to fucking leave.

File: 1483504490444.jpg (72KB, 720x690px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 720x690px

>>381383995

That's absolutely not what anyone is trying to do by saying video games are art. It is simply what they are, it's not some illuminati scheme. Nobody is trying to make video games art. It is simply what they are and what they have always been.

>>381383678
If modern dogshit is art, you bet your ass Mario is a fucking masterpiece

Art can be anything, right? So why is there even a debate about this?

>>381383678
This

Also I love the notartwork of those games

>>381383809

They want games to be safe and "protected" from evil problematic influences, like the toxic masculine rape culture for example. This means two things: less cis white male protagonists (which isn't a bad thing per say) and games being dumbed down because difficulty and challenge and skill are seen as "evil extensions of the almighty patriarchy" (this is a bad thing).

Have you forgotten the movie games like Uncharted, or the artistic "experiences" like Sunset and Gone Home?

>>381383064
>Completely irrelevant when trying to determine whether or not something is art.
No, it's a completely valid perspective.

Games are formalized play. Play is an ancient mammal behavior where youths learn to function in the real world via (relatively) safe practice, simulating the real thing. Through games play tends to peel away from its practical value, but at the root, it's still just a complex expression of a primitive impulse.

Art is more connected to communication. Recordings of the human experience, history, culture and the divine.

To give an example of the importance of historical perspective on these matters, there was no such thing as "art music" until the 19th century. Until then, any non-religious music was (rightly) seen as entertainment. Notice how severely "art music" degraded after it became recognized as such, through the 20th and 21st centuries.


>Why?
An unpretentious game is a fun and worthwhile diversion. A pretentious game, even if relatively good, is still worse "art" than a good piece of art. It has no business existing. The excuse is often raised that video games haven't been around as long, but compared to other recent media like film, they've had plenty of time to mature.

>>381384307

How does any of what you said make video games not art. What people want isn't relevant to what something is. I'm not saying only certain games are art. I'm saying everything is literally art, the word is meaningless.

>>381384501

My issue is the hipsters who think art can't happen unless the "toxic videogamey elements" are removed. For example, the kid who thinks Mario 64 is terrible because it doesn't have a basic 3 act structure with character development and lore and deep story narratives. Yet he ignores the massive impact the game had on the industry at the time, and how well it holds up decades later. a REAL patrician in art would appreciate the value of something being able to last a long time.

>>381384470
>No, it's a completely valid perspective.

Not from any logical platform.

>Games are formalized play. Play is an ancient mammal behavior where youths learn to function in the real world via (relatively) safe practice, simulating the real thing. Through games play tends to peel away from its practical value, but at the root, it's still just a complex expression of a primitive impulse.

This has nothing to do with what art is.

>Art is more connected to communication. Recordings of the human experience, history, culture and the divine.

Subjective.

>To give an example of the importance of historical perspective on these matters, there was no such thing as "art music" until the 19th century. Until then, any non-religious music was (rightly) seen as entertainment. Notice how severely "art music" degraded after it became recognized as such, through the 20th and 21st centuries.

No relevance to what art is.

I'm not trying to write you off, just nothing you wrote here has any relevance. Am i supposed to engage you in a serious debate over whether or not what you feel is art is actually art? Art is subjective, that's the point guy.


>An unpretentious game is a fun and worthwhile diversion. A pretentious game, even if relatively good, is still worse "art" than a good piece of art. It has no business existing. The excuse is often raised that video games haven't been around as long, but compared to other recent media like film, they've had plenty of time to mature.

That's quite a strawman.

>>381371096
fpbp

>>381384701

The important thing to take away is that everything is art. Trying to say something isn't because xyz completely misses the point.

It's entirely possible to have art of no real value to anyone....until one day it does. Again, the word is meaningless, people relate it too strongly to "value" which is entirely subjective but both are different concepts.

Art is everything.

>>381384976

Oh, I think you have a point, but the people who will argue otherwise are starting to become very vocal, to the point where they're starting to have more influence. Look at this E3 and tell me the industry cares more about gameplay instead of "diversity" and "political messages".

>>381385123
I don't think that's tied at all to the "art" debate. Just that nu-males tends to be artsy and they're all over the indie scene.

>>381385123

I don't know about any of that. I just know how art is defined and how that word is egregiously misinterpreted. A better question would be to ask is "Do video games have any real value?" Now there is a question more worthy of discussion. Asking whether or not video games are art is stupid, they clearly are regardless how you feel.

>>381385221
>>381385293

I think we're on the same page here. As long as videogames are allowed to be video games, I don't mind them being called art.

>>381384757
>what something comes from is meaningless as to what it is
You are very narrow-minded.

>Am i supposed to engage you in a serious debate over whether or not what you feel is art is actually art? Art is subjective, that's the point guy.
If that's what you believe, there's nothing to debate.

>universally accepted that art can be anything
>people still debate about video games being art

really gets your noggin joggin

>>381385609
>You are very narrow-minded.

I'm saying everything is art. You are the one claiming a narrow concept.

>If that's what you believe, there's nothing to debate.

There never was anything to debate. Everything is art. It's a stupid thing to argue about. Determining the value of something is infinitely more important than talking about what art is like it's still the 1700's. Don't act so surprised about the state of this topic, it's old news.

I'm a shape shifter

Art is nothing

>>381385893
>Everything is art

Funny thing is, with some historical perspective, you'd be able to quickly write off that idea as mere intellectual fashion. Fashions shift, truth doesn't.

File: 1411419219863.gif (2MB, 230x160px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 230x160px

>>381386846

What's the truth then buddy?

>>381371028
Yes, obviously.

Not really.