Are Video Games art?

[SkooterinEb]

I just turned in a paper arguing video games as a form of art, and I'm curious as to what everyone thinks.

Do you consider video games as a form of art? In what way and why?

[Gshonk]

Games are art in the way that film is art, a compilation of ancient art forms (story telling, music, imagery) and technology used in a "new" way.

[Adrir]

I somewhat agree with Gshonk. Games are as much art as any classic medium. At shallow reflection they can just be just aesthetic or interesting (like most architecture and modern art in my opinion) but they can also be extremely compelling (like a great book or a wonderful painting). However, I don't think that it is just a progression from ancient art forms.

I personally feel that the interactive and immersive nature of games enables serveral titles to be more effective at conveying artistic themes. This is due to individuals being able to actually experience and interact with a work to try and figure out it's meaning. Actually being involved in the expression of the author (through being a player) also helps different people to connect to the expression which makes games a powerful medium.

Ask yourself, why arn't games art? From primitive principle, art is creative expression and abstract communication. So what is it that disqualifies games from being art?

[Gshonk]

I agree that it is an enhanced form of art that is more interactive. Play Flower and tell me that isn't art
Keep in mind interactive art has been around for a long time.
Honestly I don't understand why people still think it isn't an art form.

[Adrir]

Originally Posted by Gshonk

Keep in mind interactive art has been around for a long time.

Yeah, but performing arts doesn't exactly have the same effect (at least on me) as playing video games.

[Halo Girl]

Originally Posted by Adrir

Yeah, but performing arts doesn't exactly have the same effect (at least on me) as playing video games.

And what's that suppose to mean?

Of course Games are an art form. As the very first steps of making a game is the process of design. Drawing/designing what the terrain will be, interior of a space ship/ house/ car etc etc... Then the design and creating of characters.

They are like a production I think, someones creative idea brought to life, a designers drawing transformed from just pencil on a page to a 3D/2D form. Yes games ared an interactive form of art, like productions but more onto this, there was a new kind of Art Gallery that opened near to where my parents live. An Interactive Art Gallery, where it is all video art. A character on a screen which you can create your self then try it out on a terrain, they even set up a game play area where you can try out your character. This is what a video game is in essence.

Although this new Art Gallery did bring up the question is this reallyart? and most answered no, but then the area that it is in, is not very cultured, they didn't seem to like the idea ofthis being built in the first place. But it is only because we are so used to the conventional meaning of art, something taht is drawn/scupltured. But art is an expression, meaning however, we see fit, we can express what we want wihtin art. Whether that be a portrait, painting, sketching, film, performance or a video game.

To be able to produce something from a creative idea is art.

[ccontinisio]

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/featur...games_the_.php
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/featur...arty_party.php
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20...halla_01.shtml

I don't know in which of the three I read this, but one of the article says something like: "don't worry about answering the question, when games will be part of the mainstream culture, and then some time later, they will be seen as art by the majority of people. It's just a matter of time, but in the meanwhile, don't bother about it."
And I generally agree with him, it's too soon to ask ourselves this question.

[Halo Girl]

Originally Posted by ccontinisio

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/featur...games_the_.php
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/featur...arty_party.php
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20...halla_01.shtml

I don't know in which of the three I read this, but one of the article says something like: "don't worry about answering the question, when games will be part of the mainstream culture, and then some time later, they will be seen as art by the majority of people. It's just a matter of time, but in the meanwhile, don't bother about it."
And I generally agree with him, it's too soon to ask ourselves this question.

I disagree with that. It's never too soon, and will never be too late to ask it. This question I feel is more about how one sees it themselves, not everyone else, Or mainstream culture/art. It is true though that eventually more and more people may see video game as an art. But in saying that some people don't think expression is art, or the work put on show at The Tate Modern is art. But to others it is.

It is all down to a persons view on art and what they see to be art. Those less into it will probably say no whereas those with some arty background may say yes.

But this is one question that will most likely be debated over and over but never actualy reaches a final answer/conclusion.

[dmcclure]

I think that the act of creating games and the resulting product are art but I would also like to suggest that the player's actions in the game are not art. I come to this conclusion due to the following logic; games are a cultural artifact and they are, generally speaking, born of collaborating people's creativity and work, akin to a film or a renaissance frieze; the game world itself and it's interactivity is also a form of art which could be considered to be paralleled by installation based artworks - for myself I particularly see echoes between the work of Cildo Mereilles and the worlds that games create; ergo, the intention of both games and other art forms is to spur emotions, cause pleasure and give food for thought. However, the player's actions and decisions within the game are closer to those of a sportsperson than those of an artist as they involve the following of rules; although at times these rules may be oblique they are insurmountable within the unmodified game world, in that any kind of technique which bypasses the normal flow of the game is still within the limits which game worlds enforce by their very nature.

Two further questions, neither of which will use my beloved semi-colon:
1.) Why is it that as artists in a digital field we are so keen to seek the approval of those who feel they can dictate what is culturally important and what is not?
2.) Why is it that when artists who are exhibited in galleries use digital or audiovisual mediums the result is inevitably underwhelming?

[Zooch]

I can answer your first question (I think): The people who feel they can dictate what is culturally important are also the people who will make or break you in every aspect of life. Take a look at the past - people who spoke out in various art forms and went against the grain were often forced to move out of their country and/or were at the very least flat broke. Public ridicule was so common some artists refused to go outside for fear of being hurt/killed and others started removing their names from their work and posting as anonymous.

All of that is still happening with today's controversial artists as well. People wanted Rockstar dead for the longest time :P