Video Games Aren't Art (Yet)

[Jeff AMN]

I didn't write this, so I think it's fair to share it with you all. Here's an intelligent editorial claiming that games are yet to the point in their maturity that they can be considered art. Whether you agree or not with the claims here, it's a fascinating read for a gamer.

So, do you guys agree with him or not? I tend to think he's right, even if my reasoning is a tad different.

Here's the link: http://ds.advancedmn.com/article.php?artid=4711

[Glaine]

Well, there are always laser disk games, adventure games, and other games that use so much motion picture in them that you wonder when you will get to start playing again  . But I know where you are going with this.

Theres this one book I loved - "Everything bad is good for you".
It states that, in general, trends in TV and games has become increasingly complex and demanding. I suggest it, fun read.

For example, the number of simultaneous mission threads in games like Zelda and the number of simultaneous plot lines used in a TV episode are both way up. And while there are a whole lot of stupid shows out there I can't stand, there are also now forums for almost all of them for people who compare notes and ponder about their favorite shows - which shows a sort of TV watching evolution.

The book also talks about how involving game playing is now - how you have to explore just ho far a game goes with things and how everything works. I for one always play with the console commands window or source code on the games I play a whole lot of until I'm utterly intimate with the game, so far as to making amateur mods every so often.

Not to say 80's games aren't involving, they still rock hard.

Sorry to rant, but I love that book. 

[Loki]

Benoît Sokal's Amerzone or Syberia anyone?

Anyway, If Picasso sneezes on a canvas it's also art ^^;

[Glaine]

Thats true too, although it depends on the show.

The point was that the first shows they tried plot branching, people rejected it, they didn't like following that much - which was compounded by the fact that if you missed an episode you were hard pressed to see it until it ran again, unless you had a friend who taped it that night.

So there were shows like most of the A-Team episodes which had nothing to do with each other (no plot building except we learn just how much Mr T hates Murdock, that crazy foo).

But because of BitTorrents, Boxset Dvd, etc, people can watch all the episodes when they want as much as they want, entertainment oversaturation if you will.

Speaking of plot drift, this thread is supposed to be about video games being supposedly incapable of being a match for movies, etc.

I see it like this: Anime is a valid format for TV, some say it isn't. It can elicit laughter and tears just like live action TV. And while a FPS video game won't tear me up (because they don't try to build that in you and it is hard to set a drama and mood when you are shooting monsters), I have played a few adventure games and such that made me really feel for the characters. There was emotion and deep plot. I feel that puts some video games on equal footing. It all depends on the game, of course. Solitare and Super Mario Bros isn't likely to win a grammy though, use common sense.

I'm just sick of people dismissing things because it isn't in the format they like.
If Heroes was a cartoon, people wouldn't watch it as much I bet (by the way, did anyone notice that Stan Lee was the bus driver on last weeks episode? I was laughing so hard, no one else even knew who it was).

[Howard_Casto]

Well I took enough art classes in college to be able to understand the following:

ANYTHING is art.  Scholars are fellow artists can categorize dfferent styles, but it's nearly impossible to say that one thing is art and another isn't.  The only requirement for something to be art is it has to be a created work intended to provoke some sort of response or to represent some type of idea or object.  Note the intended bit, if it's successful or not is irrelevant.  It's still art, just "bad" art.

An artform doesn't have to mature, the viewers do.  Most art styles and mediums evolve rather slowly, but they aren't accepted by the art community for a while.  The reason isn't that they evolved into a more complex form, the reason is that the community was too dumb to "get it" until then. 

Critics ALWAYS miss the mark.  Why?  Well they are paid to be jerks that don't like anything (so only the really great will be recognized) and as much as they'll fight it, they will eventually settle into that role.  Ever wonder why most of the great artists died penniless?  Because art collectors listen to the stupid critics and they don't like anything different.  Also note that the poster doesn't mention any story-driven games produced after 2001... that is because he's a critic and no longer plays the games.  He is out of touch. 

We aren't getting "Hamlet" from videogames yet, we are getting "Heroes", but still, they are art.  What's holding them back isn't the story-telling, but the technology  (space limitations prevent lengthy plot branches and excessive dialog from being practical), and that is about to change. 

Also need I remind you all that god's gift to literature, Shakesphere, wrote common plays for the common man.  Sure he's all hailed NOW, but he was really the equivelent of a sit-com writer in his day.  Things are better appreciated when they aren't available anymore.  Plays are only considered "artsy" now becaues nobody goes to plays anymore.  The same thing with books. 

Years from now, as has been the case in the past, the works of our pop-culture will be preserved as our great works of art.  So forget about novels, broadway musicals and ground-breaking documentaries, stuff like spiderman, Heroes, internet blogs and video games will be our great works. 

Hmm... maybe I should spell-check more often... Afterall, I'm sure to be considered a famous internet artist someday. 

[RTSDaddy2]

Loki,

I'll second Syberia.  That was the first PC roleplaying game I worked all the way through....and half the reason I stuck with it was I couldn't wait to see what incredible scene awaited me next.  The final cut scene is just to die for, in my opinion!

[Loki]

The cut scenes were incredible! I loved the first one of the funeral with all the automatons.. amazing scene! 

For those who don't know the game, check out this trailer

[MYX]

Video Games are art. Starting with just the pictures alone. The designer was given a canvas and a tool in which to make a design on the canvas that symbolized something. Many millions interpreted those symbols and understood those symbols, therefore the artists message was conveyed clearly. Sure, pong was more or less just a couple of rectangles and a square, so perhaps not much imagination needed there, but at the time, it was what the guy had to work with. Later, you look at games that went up to 8 bit (hi res... chuckle chuckle) and you started to see people going beyond the game. Look at stuff like Yie Ar Kung-Fu. someone thought to make the game somewhat environmental and threw in a waterfall and other little extras. Not too much "art" by todays standards, but it was pretty at the time. Then Nintendo came about and all the sudden there started to develop the idea that games needed to have story lines. So 1, you have a visual art, and now 2, you have the written arts. Granted that some of the "stories" were better than others, and some just plain sucked. Then the graphics on the games started to become more elaborate. Music is another place that took many people time and creativity to write. Someone mentioned Zelda. Ghaw, talk about a creepy thing, I can still hear that music in my head. Someone wrote that because they heard it in their head and made music. Art. And another which I completely forgot, but, there is art in the design in of the cabinet. For me being a graphic artist, I see so much talent and creativity that was put into these games. In so many situations the artist was completely limited by the tools. I feel so fortunate that I have the ability to work with the tools that I do, like photoshop and After Effects. Those guys would have given their left nut in order to be able to use these tools. Yet I feel confined I want more ability and freedom. But again it is the tools I have to work with. It is all art. In 5 years I will look back and say ghaw, I remember when I had to jump through hoops to animate that crap. Do you ever watch the news or ok many of you are sports fans. crap, the graphics that are thrown at you during a football game on tv  is insane. That is art too. It all goes back to someone had a vision in their head and found a way to express it. Art.

Alright that is my $.02 worth.

EDIT: More came to mind. I just watched that trailor. This is exactly it. Man, someone worked a heck of a long time to make that look like that. These games are not just a box that you push a button and poof a magical world appears. Sure, on many things like streets and mountains, you can applyu a texture and it will look like it has trees, but someone had to make the charactors, someone had to make the movement, someone had to make the story, camera movements, clothing, voices, story, sound, music, lighting, volumetric effects (fog / rain / water / smoke) someone had to build buildings, environments, structures, AI. It all boils down to imagination and the ability to make it come across to an audience. the video game audience is exactly the same as a person visiting a museum and standing in front of a painting. It provides a deep personal reaction that will be responded to by some sort of emotion. Whether it is the 5.1 kabooms or mono birk birk birks from pong. It is all art.

Ok I think I am done now. It was Kinda like puking. You puke once and hope you are done, but then there comes another heave.

[jbox]

Um, you could have just said "look at how movies have evolved" too. 

In particular, not just the rampant use of CGI in modern movies, but also the use of AI software for mob-rendering is moving the 'mundane' tasks out of the artists hands so that they can concentrate on things that are more central to the story. I was lucky enough to visit an art gallery in Karlsruhe (Germany) that took modern art seriously, and there is no doubt in anyone's mind there that computers are an obvious evolution in modern art. 

I think what offends critics the most is that as you get older and slower stuff like Rembrant works well for you because you're old and boring, while computer games are heading in the direction of sports (like tennis) where anyone over the age of 25 is considered "past their prime" with all but a few exceptions.   

[RTSDaddy2]

That trailer makes me want to play it again - maybe I shall!  I still have to finish Syberia II.

Also, the murder /mystery game "Still Life", while a bit gruesome in places, falls in to this category as well.

[MYX]

where anyone over the age of 25 is considered "past their prime" with all but a few exceptions.   

25?!?!?!!!!!! Prime???!!! HuWha??? When did this happen?

In particular, not just the rampant use of CGI in modern movies, but also the use of AI software for mob-rendering is moving the 'mundane' tasks out of the artists hands so that they can concentrate on things that are more central to the story.

Like the software used in LOTR (the name escapes me now) but they could make whole flocks of people battle, then just focus on camera moves and textures and lighting and the overall look. Our 3D guy, has done some really nice stuff. The problem with corporate America is they just assume they can ask for something and like a memo, it can be whipped out in 20 minutes. This stuff takes so much time. They just do not have a clue. I recently made a 8 minute piece that was very AE heavy. Photoshopped Paralaxed moves and all sorts of great high end stuff. Man I caught all sorts of hell for how long the piece was taking.  Then, when it was done everyone was like wow that is the best piece we have ever had. We can use it for this and this and this and this... Well if we do not take the time to go the extra mile, it looks like the same old corporate BS that we stamped out out last week. So they want more, but...it can take as long. 

Ok...How does this relate...[lame] Well games got art because someone took the time to make sure that there was art in the game. [/lame] But I tried to make it fit.

[Glaine]

I didn't even think about the music somehow, I love those crunchy 8 bit beats, so wonderful.

Movies in games, while a good blend, is conflicting because if you are praising a game's movies as meaning that this game is art, you are really just praising the game's movies. I certanly wouldn't argue that when a good game has a good plot, you get lost in it and become very involved. But you have to consider that if a game was horrible and the plot sucked, but you still said it was awesome because it had a good intro movie so that it was a good game - when really it just featured a good movie.

I'm just pointing out the paradox, I watched that clip on Syberia and now I gotta pick it up sometime.

And your job as an animator is no small feat, I'm certanly not bashing you. But games are for playing, ultimately.