Video Games Can Never Be Art -Ebert

[DarkMaster]

Hey guys, maybe an actual video game developer knows more about this topic than we do.

Hideo Kojima said: "The thing is, art is something that radiates the artist, the person who creates that piece of art. If 100 people walk by and a single person is captivated by whatever that piece radiates, it's art. But videogames aren't trying to capture one person. A videogame should make sure that all 100 people that play that game should enjoy the service provided by that videogame. It's something of a service. It's not art. But I guess the way of providing service with that videogame is an artistic style, a form of art."

[Typhoid]

Phf, what does Kojima know.

[uber_paddler]

Originally Posted by DarkMaster

Hey guys, maybe an actual video game developer knows more about this topic than we do.

Hideo Kojima said: "The thing is, art is something that radiates the artist, the person who creates that piece of art. If 100 people walk by and a single person is captivated by whatever that piece radiates, it's art. But videogames aren't trying to capture one person. A videogame should make sure that all 100 people that play that game should enjoy the service provided by that videogame. It's something of a service. It's not art. But I guess the way of providing service with that videogame is an artistic style, a form of art."

I dunno that I agree with you on the assumption that he's more qualified than anyone else to make such a determination. In the end his view largely comes down to his own personal interpretation on what "art" is. Not that I'm trying to say he's wrong, I don't care whether games are considered art or not.

[Combine 017]

Dad is Dead: Rebutting Roger Ebert

Just found this on IGN.
Havnt actually read it but figured it tied in with this.

[TheSlyMoogle]

BaB: That's the funny thing. Scholars still haven't defined what art is. That's what I find comical about it. No one has a clear definition of what art is, so how in the fuck can you argue that something isn't art?

Also I can't believe the few of you that agreed with Ebert. Shame.

He's making these assumptions based on watching video clips of games on youtube.

Part of the beauty and art in games is experiencing them.

Like I actually felt bad when I was a kid for trading my pikachu because I spent a lot of time leveling it up and playing with it.

I was floored at the end of Shadow of Colossus and through most of the game I had this pain inside every time I took down another beast. Remember when Agro fell? Oh pain, so much love for that horse. Holy shit that game.

The huge amazing stories that some games tell. The intricate metaphors, and experiences? Video games aren't art. Bullshit. If they aren't art, then neither is film or literature.

Anything else in the art world can make you empathize with the characters, but video games actually have you make choices, as the characters, so when shit goes down, you feel that way. At the end it's your actions that did that shit. In some games at least.

[Fox 6]

See more funny videos and funny pictures at CollegeHumor.

[Dylflon]

Originally Posted by DarkMaster

Hey guys, maybe an actual video game developer knows more about this topic than we do.

Hideo Kojima said: "The thing is, art is something that radiates the artist, the person who creates that piece of art. If 100 people walk by and a single person is captivated by whatever that piece radiates, it's art. But videogames aren't trying to capture one person. A videogame should make sure that all 100 people that play that game should enjoy the service provided by that videogame. It's something of a service. It's not art. But I guess the way of providing service with that videogame is an artistic style, a form of art."

This doesn't deny the potential of games to be art. He's saying that games made today are more of a service than an art.


Saying games made today aren't art and games can never be art are two very different arguments.

[BreakABone]

PS3 Games - E3 2010 - Flower

Sessler pretty much sums up my thoughts better than I could.
Especially the last part about gamers wanting games to be art.

[TheSlyMoogle]

Adam Sessler is an idiot. I didn't even watch that. Always has been, always will be. He had that 1 cool video that 1 cool time, and pretty sure that someone brainwashed him that day.

This:

[uber_paddler]

That was another one of the cases where I actually enjoyed the news post more than the comic itself. Though that's often the case, now that I think about it.

[thatmariolover]

Cracked also did an article today:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/why-eber...-games-as-art/

[Typhoid]

I personally don't believe video games (as a whole) can be considered art.
As someone said, parts of games might be really artistic, or have artistic elements to them. The original Super Mario Bros. isn't art - but a painting/picture about that game would be.

I mean, if you want to actually look at the definition of what art is:

"Art is the process or product of deliberately arranging elements in a way to affect the senses or emotions. "

Really, anything can arguably be 'art'. I can fart in a cup, turn that cup upside-down, place it on a yellow piece of paper, and put a flower or two around it - and as long as you felt anything from seeing, feeling, or smelling it - my fart in a cup with a floral pattern is art.

I would like to see the word 'art' kept for traditional art-type things. If video games and movies are art, what's stopping some kid on youtube who makes a 30 second viral video of a monkey throwing shit at a banana to claim that he is an artist?

But, to be fair to art - I suppose that is why there are categories to art. Performing Arts, Plastic Arts (Sculpting), Decorative Arts (Ceramics, Textiles etc.) and Literature.

I don't view conceptual art as art, either. Duchamp was a terrible person in the eyes of what art always was. Soon, if we make enough categories everything will be art. I don't like that.

[Fox 6]

Someone said that the pint of art is that it has no other use or point besides itself.