Do you consider videogames an artform?

[1Destro3456]

I was watching a YouTuber that had a TED Talk about videogames from 2012, he said that videogames are in the spot that movies were a century ago, a moment that would decide if it was an artform or just a way of entertainment. This begs the question, are videogames art, or just simple entertainment? 

 

I say it is art, because of the awesome videogames coming out like Celeste that uses its difficulty as a means of giving you an emotion of how the character is feeling plus the music makes an incredible mix that ends up in a great indie game. But there are some purely commercial games coming out each year. Games like most EA Games (FIFA, Madden, etc.) that just copy the last game and paste it to the new one, even an oversight happened once were the past game's logo passed at a point in one of these franchises.

 

At the same time some commercial-only stuff is coming out in the movies too. Like the Transformers and Fast and the Furious franchises, yet it is still an art. It's true, we can't deny that.

 

Though, what makes us think that it is purely commercial and doesn't have any artistic value? Is it because of the nonsensical story? There are some nonsensical stories that are consider good movies, is it, because they make money? That can't be true, Tarantino movies make money because they're good.

 

In videogames we can see those predatory and commercial stuff more clearly, right? Loot boxes, microtransactions, gacha games, etc. The thing is, when is the DLC fine and when is it wrong, I guess when it is promised that there won't be any or the DLC is just bad and overpriced. When is a gacha game main mechanic good? When it's optional and you don't need to grind to get the gacha prices for free. 

 

Even if we know all of that, we still won't know if the rest is art, I mean it has art elements, animation, 3D modeling, music...

 

So, videogames have another element to it, the ability to interact with the environment of the game, be that shooting demons with metal on the background, or dodging and climbing on platforms. That basically transcends any other art form, in a painting you can see what is on that painting, you can't move in first person in there, in an animation neither, you can only see what is visible on that animation. That ability adds a whole new dimension on this form of art, and the decision of how the developers let you interact with it can change so much the feeling of the game in ways that we can't even imagine. Imagine if FNF let you do whatever you wanted or it was in first person or a lot more shit I can't even start to imagine because my brain would get fried.

 

In conclusion, to me, videogames are an art form because of the emotions and the different ways it can express itself even if there are some sour grapes out there that could end up consuming the industry and change on how I think of them. 

 

Now, I want to know your opinion on this topic.

 

 

Edited May 2, 2021 by 1Destro3456

[Hawk of The Crystals]

I think it depends on the game, personally i'd call a game like final fantasy X art, but that's just me; many people have different ideals on what art is, some believe that some paint on a canvas is art, others believe that music is as well, but the main question is who legitimately considers video games to be an artform. In fact, many people consider them an artform, you even asking this question adds to making the question it's self valid, but hopefully more people lend their ideas on the subject.

 

[xX_Lol6_Xx]

Yes

[Hawk of The Crystals]

1 minute ago, Reelvonic said:

some were 

a canvas just painted black

a blank canvas with a small red dot in the center

and stuff like that

Probably what some people would call 'post modernist art', personally I think that some paintings can be pretentious, but that probably depends on what said painting is trying to do.

[1Destro3456]

2 minutes ago, Reelvonic said:

lol that reminds me of the time i went to an art museum is dc, there were many amazing paintings that were beutiful.

and then there were just straighup WHY ones

some were 

a canvas just painted black

a blank canvas with a small red dot in the center

and stuff like that

Sadly that stuff happens, even a Spanish YouTuber made-up a term to name stuff like canvas painted in black or a banana with duct tape on a wall

[Eric Claus]

Yes

[1Destro3456]

1 minute ago, Reelvonic said:

a bannana taped to a wall. if that is a actual thing then i have lost faith in the art industry

https://www.foodandwine.com/news/banana-duct-tape-art-basel-maurizio-cattelan

yeah...

[out_of_service]

Yes I do consider it an art form. Visually there are lots creative designs as well as audio and I always make sure to play through my favourite games and really gawk at everything. 

[1Destro3456]

Also, on the TED talk he talks about how videogames have it bad even on the name, I mean it’s called videogames so somebody dedicated to journalism like that YouTuber sounds like they’re just playing some games and that’s it not an art form just that a game 

[Eric Claus]

2 minutes ago, Reelvonic said:

a bannana taped to a wall. if that is a actual thing then i have lost faith in the art industry

 

Honestly I think most of that shit is part of the usual human tendency to want attention, and be "different".  Naturally you get impressionable/bored people who are eager to fulfill it.

[DaAndroid614]

1 minute ago, 1Destro3456 said:

https://www.foodandwine.com/news/banana-duct-tape-art-basel-maurizio-cattelan

yeah...

wait I thought that was a joke, are you kidding me? $120,000??????

 

anyways back to the relevant topic, yes, I think games are art, I think of art as any creative work with a lot of genuine passion put into it, which is why really good indie games (like celeste, which was already mentioned in this thread) are so uniquely charming

 

a banana taped to a wall, for contrast's sake, is not art because it exists simply for the sake of existing, and for the creator to be pretentious and say "it must be art because it inspired a strong reaction from people"

[continuum.mid]

Art is a broad and difficult to define term, and artists are always trying to push the boundaries of the term (by, for example, taping bananas to walls), so it's hard to say what is and isn't it. Regardless, I'm certain that video games can fall in that category.

[Eric Claus]

6 minutes ago, DaAndroid614 said:

wait I thought that was a joke, are you kidding me? $120,000??????

 

anyways back to the relevant topic, yes, I think games are art, I think of art as any creative work with a lot of genuine passion put into it, which is why really good indie games (like celeste, which was already mentioned in this thread) are so uniquely charming

 

a banana taped to a wall, for contrast's sake, is not art because it exists simply for the sake of existing, and for the creator to be pretentious and say "it must be art because it inspired a strong reaction from people"

 

Well a fool and their money are soon parted.  And honestly these are people with more money than sense looking to chase any hint of "status" or appearing "avant garde" and that has been a fact through history sadly.  Honestly it's like people who buy a Lamborghini just to have it sit in a garage forever, or maybe drive 70mph down the highway, whats the point? (he says after buying a sports car himself albeit nowhere near no Lambo)

[omx32x]

 depends on the game

 im a beliver that not every things is created equal and just like movies i belive some can be art and some are just entertainment

 some games like silent hill, celeste, castlevania symphony of the night, omorii, earth bound, etc are 100% art

 but there are also games like varolant, cs go, duke nukem, and the classic series of megaman that i would say are just entertainment but of course thats just my opinion and i know that there is a thin line between what is or isnt

 i think the best example i can give for my point is the diference between castlevania 1 and symphony of the night:

 the first one is just some fun platformer wit cool music and visuals inspired by horror movies though in a comical way while the other is a massive game with some amazing visuals , some of the best music in the medium that not only sounds good and is memorable but it also help to elevate the feeling of the areas and an story that takes itself more seriously (even if it is not the focus) all of that in a game that was supposed to just be a spin off

 im not saying that games that are just entertainment are bad btw just that i dont see them as art in my eyes just some fun thing to play

not everything needs to be hanged on a museum wall for me to like

[UnknDoomer]

Quote

MandaloreGaming
The logical conclusion to art

Shammy
Art is cancelled

 

 

But, if talk seriously, yes. There are plenty of games out there which can be count such also in case of abstract form and things, i.e. if we talk not about AAA titles.

 

http://old.igromania.ru/blogs/mainblog/224521/Igry_i_kultura_Izvechnaya_vrazhda_ili_krepkaya_druzhba.htm

[Dweller Dark]

Video games should be considered as a form of artwork, pretty much every form of art goes into making one, from music to drawings to videos to everything. 

[spineapple tea]

Find one reason to not consider it an artform.

[roadworx]

1 hour ago, Reelvonic said:

a bannana taped to a wall. if that is a actual thing then i have lost faith in the art industry

tbf it was intentionally mocking how much people would pay for stuff like that

[UnknDoomer]

tbf it was intentionally mocking how much people would pay for stuff like that

At the end point, as I have heard, another "artist" eat this banana and called it "art-perfomance".

[Capellan]

Art: "the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination to produce works to be primarily appreciated for their beauty or emotional power"

 

 

So yes.  Seems pretty clear to me that there are plenty of games that qualify for this.

[Wavy]

I don't see how they wouldn't be

[Bauul]

It depends on your definition of "art". The one I always liked was "The application of visual or audio stimuli that evokes an emotional response beyond its immediate application". In other words, the emotional response to the medium needs to be more than simply the recognition of the medium. For example, a response of "there is paint on this canvas, and I recognize it as such" is not art. But "the specific application of paint on this canvas makes me feel longing and melancholy" is.

 

It is undoubted that games are made up of art. Textures, sounds, music, vistas, animations etc. etc. are all pieces of art unto themselves. The question is whether when put together they represent additional emotional response beyond their individual intonations. Is the emotional response more than the sum of the parts? And I would say absolutely many games do. While it could be hard to find the art in something like Call of Duty, there's no way anyone could play through something like Dear Esther or The Graveyard and not find it art.

[Gez]

Yeah.

 

Now there are games that are absolutely devoid of any artistic merit, but the same can be said of certain movies, paintings, sculptures, songs...

[BaileyTW]

I think videogames are very obviously an art form. Like any art, it can be bad art or good, and I am no art decider so I won't try to label which is which unless I guess it's obvious. Celeste is art. The various yearly sports game releases, those are art too. It may sound dumb and post-modern(but in a derogatory way) but I think any noun could be called art when you are thinking about it in the way you think about art. Now that could be critiquing the thing as bad, and then it's bad art, but hey that's still art and you are still doing an artistic critique of it. Art is a state of thinking about a thing. (Banana taped to wall? Hell yeah that's art, and especially more because it pisses you off enough to define art in a way to exclude it from art or not)

[MFG38]

Video games, like movies, use a combination of image and sound in order to create an experience that stimulates the senses, with the added element of interactivity by means of a controller of some sort, whether it be a keyboard, mouse, gamepad or even the human body itself, that translates the given input and turns it into an action in the game world.

 

Therefore, video games are indeed art.

[Biodegradable]

Is the sky blue? Is water wet? Do chickens have teeth? Do farts smell bad? Is John Romero handsome?

[Gez]

Yes, yes, actually yes, yes, and yes.

[hybridial]

4 hours ago, Bauul said:

It depends on your definition of "art". The one I always liked was "The application of visual or audio stimuli that evokes an emotional response beyond its immediate application". In other words, the emotional response to the medium needs to be more than simply the recognition of the medium. For example, a response of "there is paint on this canvas, and I recognize it as such" is not art. But "the specific application of paint on this canvas makes me feel longing and melancholy" is.

 

It is undoubted that games are made up of art. Textures, sounds, music, vistas, animations etc. etc. are all pieces of art unto themselves. The question is whether when put together they represent additional emotional response beyond their individual intonations. Is the emotional response more than the sum of the parts? And I would say absolutely many games do. While it could be hard to find the art in something like Call of Duty, there's no way anyone could play through something like Dear Esther or The Graveyard and not find it art.

 

This point of view is quite similar to my own with one important difference. Call of Duty is a videogame, Dear Esther and The Graveyard are not.

 

The term "videogame" is used too inclusively. Maybe it's pedantic, but I don't consider visual novels to be videogames and I don't feel interactive artworks are either. A game is an activity done for entertainment. It really shouldn't be as a term used to describe certain interactive works. I'm not saying this in detriment to those works, but they deserve more accurate categorisation. 

 

Now when it comes to videogames that definitely have a game element but also place a great deal of time and energy on non-interactive elements such as cinematic cut scenes, well, they are games, they qualify, but if there's an overreliance on non-interactive elements then I feel that creates a fissure and if the interactive elements are simplistic and commercial then it just begs the question why is it not a movie? That fits with the intent a lot more. I've grown to seriously dislike games like that because I find them to be pretentious and dull to play.

 

And in general when it comes to most other cases, then it comes down to application for me, it's a coalescent grouping of different art disciplines. I find Amid Evil to be a visually striking game, and I get a great deal from it's visual expression. It is a fun game to play but the gameplay is definitely craft. But then there is Dusk where I do feel there is a little bit more going on of the elements working in tandem. Not so much the combat gameplay but more the encounter and level design, along with the atmosphere and the feeling of unearthing the meaning of the events occurring around you as you progress. I consider Silent Hill 2 to be one of the definite examples of a videogame that is also art, and I wonder if horror is a specifically suitable genre for videogames to be art because horror benefits from interactive and non-interactive elements in a way other sensations maybe don't. 

 

I also think role playing games whether they are videogame or not, can definitely be art. 

 

I'll also add that whether something qualifies as art or not, it can still be bad, and I mean that in the art sense. 

 

 

Edited May 2, 2021 by hybridial

[Azuris]

Games are Art, consider how they can touch you emotionally with their Music, visual Design and Storytelling.

 

17 minutes ago, hybridial said:

 

This point of view is quite similar to my own with one important difference. Call of Duty is a videogame, Dear Esther and The Graveyard are not.

 

Even if you compare it to such Games you have to conisder Call of Duty Art, beeing less "deep" doesn't count.

I mean, my teacher told me about Joseph Beuys Bath Tube, it was literally just a dirty Bath Tube and got cleaned up.

He also thrwe Fat in a Corner. (english link :) ).

If they consider that Trash Art, why not Call of Duty?

[SOSU]

Video Games aren't art you guys :/

They are magick! Read that down there and then tell me what you do in games again ;P