Why Are Games Considered To Be Art?

This is something I never really understood. I first heard people refer to games as art on GS years ago. I'm not sayiing I disagree or that people who think games are art are fools or anything. I just simply don't understand why people think this.

So please post your thoughts on this subject here.

Some games are truly beautiful experiences, some are used as a mean of expression and some require true mastery and a very high amount of skills. (And of course, you have games that are combos of those three elements).

Games like The Longest Journey (and especially Dreamfall), Ikaruga, Shadow of the Colossus, Aquaria, Still Life, etc. are as "artistic" as any painting or piece or whatever.

Video games are art mainly because so much effort goes into it. many people who play games don't realize how many hours of sweat, blood, and tears goes into making these games that everyone want to play. This games come from the mind of developers who used there imagination ideas for there games, so since games are created mass amount of sequence information put onto a disk, it consider a form of art.

well some people anyways :-)

why is art even considered art?Chogyam

Some games are truly beautiful experiences, some are used as a mean of expression and some require true mastery and a very high amount of skills. (And of course, you have games that are combos of those three elements).

Games like The Longest Journey (and especially Dreamfall), Ikaruga, Shadow of the Colossus, Aquaria, Still Life, etc. are as "artistic" as any painting or piece or whatever.

ReddestSkies

Games can be used as a media for expression, as such they can be used to convey art. They are something that are created, but not for pratical reasons. I'm not sure how you define art as such, but games can definatly be used as a medium to convey it, and a unique medium at that.WasntAvailable

Some games are definitely art. Shadow of the Colossus and Bioshock come to mind. I think when a game is art, it has to make an impression that you're playing something more than just a game. Okami for example, although artistic in its design, isn't really art to me because underneath it all, it's just a good adventure game. SotC and Bioshock on the other hand, evokes something more like the way art does even though you're playing a game. It's hard to explain, but you just know when you play it.ASK_Story

Games just like movies, are very much an art form. The video game industry in general is a medium that delivers entertainment on a different level. NYCKing87

Basically anything can be considered art, so long as it is more interesting as an intellectual contrivance, than as a practical, useful or aesthically pleasing thing.

for example a pair of garden shears can never be art, as they are a practical item, but if instead of blades it were equipped with say, rubber chickens, than it would become an artistic creation, because it would no longer serve any function, and perhaps when people would look at it they would contemplate deeper meanings of life. Perhaps not, but that would be because it would be really stupid art.

In the case of games, many of them have no practical reason for being (certainly some games have been used by militaries to train techniques, as well as for instance that new DS "game" that is actually only a talking recipe book). Many games also have pixel drawings that are also oblique, unappealing and striking. Therefore many games can be considered art.

Why is Damien Hurst considered to be art? Many people would not know

what art was if it fell on their heads including that animal abusing,

evil exploiter of popular ignorance. Art can be found in games, art can be

found in paintings. We use the term art far too broadly in society.

Art occurs when something is created which is inspiring, original, deep

and through which the 'spirit' shines through. Everything else is just

graphics. Some games can be compared to literature; Thief Dark Project as

a classic novel, Max Payne as a dark thriller, but neither of them are 'art'

but both are good graphics.

As to the shears you mention with chicken bits attached that is not art,

that is the sort of contrivance that was art for the first few minutes of

Marcel Duchams declaration of a urinal as art. Anyone who proceeded from

that point was simply engageing in the mish-mash of trickery which

includes all video installatiions and Tracy Emin's bed.

Omar Sharif recently said that Hollywood has not produced a film as art for

years and that the prizes for films at Cannes are mostly going to Iranains or

Chinese directors. Art has ceased to be an ambition of Hollywood. and graphics;

particularly computer graphics, have replaced art in Hollwood. That is why there

are so few memorable and classic moments in modern film.

Art is mainly a function of the male immigination as males more easily

can transcend gender while females find it hard to rise above human

biology and relationships. Some female artists are original like Brigid Riley

but most have always tagged along behind movements created by men.

A good definition of art is that it elevates the immigination while graphics simply

surplant it. Art is of the spirit and graphics representations of the material.

Games just like movies, are very much an art form. The video

game industry in general is a medium that delivers entertainment on a different level. NYCKing87

An 'Art form' does not mean it is Art. Most of you are still confusing the the production of images

with art. As I said before Art is that which elevates the immigination and the spirit, all else

is graphics or crafts. Bioshock is certainly not art but it is comic book style graphics. Art occurs

when something original occurs. Bioshock is simply like Prey; another way to sell the same

old stuff in slightly crazy looking new bottles.

[QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]

Some games are truly beautiful experiences, some are used as a mean of expression and some require true mastery and a very high amount of skills. (And of course, you have games that are combos of those three elements).

Games like The Longest Journey (and especially Dreamfall), Ikaruga, Shadow of the Colossus, Aquaria, Still Life, etc. are as "artistic" as any painting or piece or whatever.

gunswordfist

The Longest Journey, and its sequel, Dreamfall, are adventure games for the PC (and they both probably run on your grandma's computer because they're a bit old). They have very heavy emphasis on story, dialogue and exploration, and their worlds are very creative and downright beautiful. Their stories are so detailed that they would probably need a trilogy each if to make a proper transition to movies. The games deal with a lot of different topic, including the invasiveness of organized religion, some issues involving the misuse of governmental and corporate power, etc.

Aquaria is an indie 2D sidescroller (PC, runs on anyone's emachine too) that ressembles Symphony of the Night a bit, the main differences being that you're always swimming underwater and the combat is magical instead of being melee. It is truly beautiful in its art styIe, storytelling and music, and it has heavy emphasis on exploration. Its combat feels more like dancing sometimes than actual fighting, as the main challenge is movement-based: doding is harder than attacking. It also happens to be my favourite game of 2007, and I'd recommand it to anyone (try the demo!).

Still Life is also a PC adventure game with heavy emphasis on its story. The main theme of the game actually is art, and the game uses very interesting storytelling devices and overall feels very much like a work of art. It's easier to link to that trailer than to actually describe those devices, so just watch this.

There are a lot more truly artistic games out there, of course. Grim Fandango, Panzer Dragoon Orta, Perfect Cherry Blossom, Fatal Frame, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, the list goes on and on. I wouldn't necessarily say that all games are art, but at least some of them most certainly are.

[QUOTE="gunswordfist"]
[QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]

Some games are truly beautiful experiences, some are used as a mean of expression and some require true mastery and a very high amount of skills. (And of course, you have games that are combos of those three elements).

Games like The Longest Journey (and especially Dreamfall), Ikaruga, Shadow of the Colossus, Aquaria, Still Life, etc. are as "artistic" as any painting or piece or whatever.

ReddestSkies

The Longest Journey, and its sequel, Dreamfall, are adventure games for the PC (and they both probably run on your grandma's computer because they're a bit old). They have very heavy emphasis on story, dialogue and exploration, and their worlds are very creative and downright beautiful. Their stories are so detailed that they would probably need a trilogy each if to make a proper transition to movies. The games deal with a lot of different topic, including the invasiveness of organized religion, some issues involving the misuse of governmental and corporate power, etc.

Aquaria is an indie 2D sidescroller (PC, runs on anyone's emachine too) that ressembles Symphony of the Night a bit, the main differences being that you're always swimming underwater and the combat is magical instead of being melee. It is truly beautiful in its art styIe, storytelling and music, and it has heavy emphasis on exploration. Its combat feels more like dancing sometimes than actual fighting, as the main challenge is movement-based: doding is harder than attacking. It also happens to be my favourite game of 2007, and I'd recommand it to anyone (try the demo!).

Still Life is also a PC adventure game with heavy emphasis on its story. The main theme of the game actually is art, and the game uses very interesting storytelling devices and overall feels very much like a work of art. It's easier to link to that trailer than to actually describe those devices, so just watch this.

There are a lot more truly artistic games out there, of course. Grim Fandango, Panzer Dragoon Orta, Perfect Cherry Blossom, Fatal Frame, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, the list goes on and on. I wouldn't necessarily say that all games are art, but at least some of them most certainly are.

Once again you are mixing up art and graphics, Myst and Longest Journey are graphics. Essentially Art always has to be original. Just doing the same as others before you is graphics or copies.blenakarnieroad

EDIT: That being said, I generally agree with what you said earlier regarding the difference between 'graphics' and 'art,' but I'd argue that even the graphical side of things is less related to something being art than many other factors.

Once again you are mixing up art and graphics, Myst and Longest Journey are graphics. Essentially Art always has to be original. Just doing the same as others before you is graphics or copies.blenakarnieroad

I didn't even mention The Longest Journey's graphics, as they are very, very, very secondary to its story. TLJ and Dreamfall are very original in their writing, especially in the gaming world.

Art is so much more than pure originality though. It's also about expression, it's about skill, and it's about beauty.

Firstly it is comforting to know that someone out there is looking for art in games,

that is fantastic and gives me hope for the future of gaming. I was not meaning to

be pedantic but it's just that I have never had an 'art moment' in any of the games

I've played where I have thought "That should be shown in an art museum. But I have

had literary moments when I have thought; as with Thief: The Dark Project, where I know

as a bookseller I would be happy to put the game on the bookshelves alongside the

old classics like Ivanhoe or Treasure Island. Perhaps like me you are fascinated by the

whole concept of the alternative environments created in games and I think it will be

through a game like Myst or Longest Journey that some truly breathtaking experience

may be eventually achieved.

Really we have a lot more in common than difference on this one.

[QUOTE="gunswordfist"]
[QUOTE="ReddestSkies"]

Some games are truly beautiful experiences, some are used as a mean of expression and some require true mastery and a very high amount of skills. (And of course, you have games that are combos of those three elements).

Games like The Longest Journey (and especially Dreamfall), Ikaruga, Shadow of the Colossus, Aquaria, Still Life, etc. are as "artistic" as any painting or piece or whatever.

ReddestSkies

The Longest Journey, and its sequel, Dreamfall, are adventure games for the PC (and they both probably run on your grandma's computer because they're a bit old). They have very heavy emphasis on story, dialogue and exploration, and their worlds are very creative and downright beautiful. Their stories are so detailed that they would probably need a trilogy each if to make a proper transition to movies. The games deal with a lot of different topic, including the invasiveness of organized religion, some issues involving the misuse of governmental and corporate power, etc.

Aquaria is an indie 2D sidescroller (PC, runs on anyone's emachine too) that ressembles Symphony of the Night a bit, the main differences being that you're always swimming underwater and the combat is magical instead of being melee. It is truly beautiful in its art styIe, storytelling and music, and it has heavy emphasis on exploration. Its combat feels more like dancing sometimes than actual fighting, as the main challenge is movement-based: doding is harder than attacking. It also happens to be my favourite game of 2007, and I'd recommand it to anyone (try the demo!).

Still Life is also a PC adventure game with heavy emphasis on its story. The main theme of the game actually is art, and the game uses very interesting storytelling devices and overall feels very much like a work of art. It's easier to link to that trailer than to actually describe those devices, so just watch this.

There are a lot more truly artistic games out there, of course. Grim Fandango, Panzer Dragoon Orta, Perfect Cherry Blossom, Fatal Frame, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, the list goes on and on. I wouldn't necessarily say that all games are art, but at least some of them most certainly are.

There are a lot more truly artistic games out there, of course. Grim Fandango, Panzer Dragoon Orta, Perfect Cherry Blossom, Fatal Frame, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, the list goes on and on. I wouldn't necessarily say that all games are art, but at least some of them most certainly are.

for example a pair of garden shears can never be art, as they are a practical item, but if instead of blades it were equipped with say, rubber chickens, than it would become an artistic creation, because it would no longer serve any function, and perhaps when people would look at it they would contemplate deeper meanings of life. Perhaps not, but that would be because it would be really stupid art.

super_police

you have to be careful here. One of the most influential pieces of art is DuChamp's "Fountain." It's a urinal. Plain-old, every day, just that it's sitting upside down. To understand why it's considered art involves a long conversation about what was going on at the time, which I'm sure you can find online somewhere. You can choose to deny it as art, but I think when you know the context, you won't. The gist of it is a battle between artists and the academics who would try to confine art to a definition. Some might suggest examples like the "Fountain" are saying that art is not something intrinsic to a thing or something that comes about as a result of making a thing, but rather art is actually made in the perceiving of an object..the way one looks at a thing. Take the fact it's not called "piss-pot." It's certainly not a fountain, but calling it a fountain and placing it upside down forces you to look at your every day garden variety john in a new way..and hence "the Fountain" is born. I think, though, that DuChamps was ultimately trying to say art is beyond definition.

Really, when you look at it, you can't come up with a list of things that qualify or disqualify something as art. It's an issue of family resemblance. We call something art because it bears some, but not necessarily all, similarities to other things we call art. As much as we'd like to define the word art, the correct usage of the term is really a matter of social convention. I think a corollary to the message DuChamps was trying to send is that the very attempt to define art declares one's ignorance of art.

Practically speaking, I think in the US we've come to associate art with free speech, under which art is protected. Sometimes the way people talk it almost seems as if they think of the two terms as synonomous. This sorta results in a "legal definition" of art as anything that exists primarily as a vehicle for the expression of an idea. Games express ideas, so games are art. Anything that expresses an idea will find a group of people advocating for it as an art form. Basically, it's art because we say it is, but mostly because nobody in the long years of human history has found a way to irrefutably say a thing is not (art).

[QUOTE="super_police"]

for example a pair of garden shears can never be art, as they are a practical item, but if instead of blades it were equipped with say, rubber chickens, than it would become an artistic creation, because it would no longer serve any function, and perhaps when people would look at it they would contemplate deeper meanings of life. Perhaps not, but that would be because it would be really stupid art.

Ish_basic

you have to be careful here. One of the most influential pieces of art is DuChamp's "Fountain." It's a urinal. Plain-old, every day, just that it's sitting upside down. To understand why it's considered art involves a long conversation about what was going on at the time, which I'm sure you can find online somewhere. You can choose to deny it as art, but I think when you know the context, you won't. The gist of it is a battle between artists and the academics who would try to confine art to a definition. Some might suggest examples like the "Fountain" are saying that art is not something intrinsic to a thing or something that comes about as a result of making a thing, but rather art is actually made in the perceiving of an object..the way one looks at a thing. Take the fact it's not called "piss-pot." It's certainly not a fountain, but calling it a fountain and placing it upside down forces you to look at your every day garden variety john in a new way..and hence "the Fountain" is born. I think, though, that DuChamps was ultimately trying to say art is beyond definition.

Really, when you look at it, you can't come up with a list of things that qualify or disqualify something as art. It's an issue of family resemblance. We call something art because it bears some, but not necessarily all, similarities to other things we call art. As much as we'd like to define the word art, the correct usage of the term is really a matter of social convention. I think a corollary to the message DuChamps was trying to send is that the very attempt to define art declares one's ignorance of art.

Practically speaking, I think in the US we've come to associate art with free speech, under which art is protected. Sometimes the way people talk it almost seems as if they think of the two terms as synonomous. This sorta results in a "legal definition" of art as anything that exists primarily as a vehicle for the expression of an idea. Games express ideas, so games are art. Anything that expresses an idea will find a group of people advocating for it as an art form. Basically, it's art because we say it is, but mostly because nobody in the long years of human history has found a way to irrefutably say a thing is not (art).

I think of video games as art and vieo game creators as artsists. The game is the canvas, and the game creators let all their ideas and creativity flow into the game they are constructing. In the end the game will evoke are emotions in various ways, if any. And sometimes thee games will get our minds going and let out creativity come out.

And then of course if you consider music art, then many video games have fantastic musical scores that can, again, evoke your emotions.

and then the graphics/style of the game can be plain artistic looking itself, such as Okami.

In the end, though, it depends on how you define "art". Depending on the defintion, you could consider gam,es art or not. I do, others do not, it is all subjective. and really, anything can be considered art depending on how you look at things.

i don't know how many people could consider games 'art'. i don't think it has anything to do with quality...if games were art, they would be 'bad' art by any measure, even with supposed great story games like metal gear solid, bioshock, grand theft auto, ect...as while these games have great stories for video games, they would be considered cheesy in almost any other medium.

basically, the goal of a video game is to give the player a fun experience. there's alot of things in life designed this way. some games try to make you think, i guess, but alot of life experiences do this. in a way, instead of making you think, most games are designed to do exactly the opposite...to give the player an escapist experience. they are collaborative efforts between many creators, many of which have nothing to do with art. most art is a single-person creation done by one person with an artistic vision. movies, the form that most people try to link to games to prove gaming as art, usually begins with a script. video games starts with a plan by a collaborative team who try to use technology to achieve that plan. there is the occasional game, such as the aforementioned metal gear solid, created by someone like hideo kojima who had a vision. but even he admits games are not art...he maintains games may have alot of artistic qualities, but are not art as a whole.

in the end, it doesn't matter...games are meant to be entertaining, and there's nothing wrong with that. no need to be pretentious when trying to give the user a mindblowing experience.

I got to say that it seems like a lot of people call games art just because they love games so much.gunswordfist

Well, yeah. If there are paintings that we love, we call them art, like-wise, if we hate them, we don't consider them art.

The way I look at it, something being "art" means that is is beautiful and/or majestic and gets your mind going, and plenty of video games acconmplish this, so therefor I believe video games are art.

Again, whether something is art or not is completely subjective. "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" I think relates to this topic; "art" being the "beauty."

Story Telling is an Art.

Visual Design is an Art.

Why shouldn't something that can incorporate BOTH of those things be considered art?

Who says that? Cheating the casino is art ! learn how http://www.rockyslots.com/cheating-at-slots/