Art in Videogames

[QUOTE="goblaa"]

FF6 is art, but it's play is not.

And while paintings do have formal techniques, thats not the same as a gam'es system...not even remotley the same. And yes stories are often organized into chapters.

BUT, neither have to. If you make a game, that is missing either its system, it's competitve structure, or it's unequal outcome, it's by definition no longer a game.

If you take the technique out of a painting, it's still a painting, if you choose to organize your story with some crazy system, it's still a story. If when writing music, you break out f allsystem of music, it's still a music. That's why art is not the same as games.

VoodooHak

FF6 isn't FF6 without it's gameplay.

I disagree with you... literature, paintings and music do have to adhere to specific conventions or they're no longer what they claim to be. Techniques define the medium.

What is a story if its incomprehensible? If the plot isn't conveyed well because it's not organized or even in chronological order? Is it still music if the notes don't make sense?

In cla55ical terms, it's called form.

Videogames follow their own sense of "form".

FF6 without it's gameplay is either a different genre, or no longer a game.

And music that has notes that make no sense is still art...especially if the artist purposely chose those notes. That's their expression.

Which brings me back to my orginal point. For something to have the term "game" attached to it, it must follow the definition of a game, be it a video game, a board game, or a sport. There is a reason we call something a game. And if fianl fantasy and solitare share that exact same fundemental definition at their core, and if as you say "solitare and minsweeper are not meant to be art" then no game is art.

If you add a story, characters, and setting to mine sweeper, it still has that same core defintion of what makes it a game to begin with. It's the artisitc elements added on to that core that is art, not the core itself.

goblaa

And yet music is essentially just a string of sound waves, with a subjective twist it becomes "art". You speak as if art is factual when it's everything but. The core of what makes a game is that you can play it, everything past that is just subjectivity being passed onto it by a viewer. If a gamer views what they play as art, you can't say they're wrong.

It's their opinion, who are you to say it's false?

When entire ecosystems are created in a game like Metroid Prime, I'd call that art. You could have the same gameplay with concrete walls, and monochromatic scenery, but instead it has predators and prey, environments that are simply there, to make a real world. Sounds like a type of sculpture to me.Tylendal

Indeed, the graphics are art.

Because that texture is a expression, those parts are expression...just not the gameplay they are attached too.

goblaa

To whom you? You don't think leads exist in game development that aim to pull together portions of expression into one whole expressive theme? And you don't think gameplay can play a role in that? You don't think developers place effort into making gameplay be expressive of what they hope you feel?

[QUOTE="Sooshy"][QUOTE="goblaa"]

But I haven't been talking about medium at all. Being on paper or on a screen is not what made that pic art. It's an exspression. That's what made it art. Your talking to a graphic artist here.

Games are not art, becasue they are not expression. Baseball is not a for of expression.

-RPGamer-

To quote (or paraphrase) EGM and it's Bioshock review. "The thing that Bioshock does right is that it makes you feel."

The terrific Eurogamer says it best, regarding Bioshock (and it relates to gaming/art as a whole):

"The hours spent playing this masterpiece were the perfect encapsulation of why videogaming is such a favourite waste of time for so many of us. Thrilling, terrifying, moving, confusing, amusing, compelling, and very very dark. BioShock isn't simply the sign of gaming realising its true cinematic potential, but one where a game straddles so many entertainment art forms so expertly that it's the best demonstration yet how flexible this medium can be. It's no longer just another shooter wrapped up in a pretty game engine, but a story that exists and unfolds inside the most convincing and elaborate and artistic game world ever conceived. It just so happens to require you to move the narrative along with your own carefully and personally defined actions. Active entertainment versus passive: I know which I prefer."

Indeed, the graphics are art.

goblaa

[QUOTE="goblaa"]

Which brings me back to my orginal point. For something to have the term "game" attached to it, it must follow the definition of a game, be it a video game, a board game, or a sport. There is a reason we call something a game. And if fianl fantasy and solitare share that exact same fundemental definition at their core, and if as you say "solitare and minsweeper are not meant to be art" then no game is art.

If you add a story, characters, and setting to mine sweeper, it still has that same core defintion of what makes it a game to begin with. It's the artisitc elements added on to that core that is art, not the core itself.

-RPGamer-

And yet music is essentially just a string of sound waves, with a subjective twist it becomes "art". You speak as if art is factual when it's everything but. The core of what makes a game is that you can play it, everything past that is just subjectivity being passed onto it by a viewer. If a gamer views what they play as art, you can't say they're wrong.

It's their opinion, who are you to say it's false?

you need to define art then because the way you use it anything can be art if the viewer believes so. but i don't think that's correct. it's because of the artists and there objective through the creation that makes something art in the higher sense.

[QUOTE="Tylendal"]When entire ecosystems are created in a game like Metroid Prime, I'd call that art. You could have the same gameplay with concrete walls, and monochromatic scenery, but instead it has predators and prey, environments that are simply there, to make a real world. Sounds like a type of sculpture to me.goblaa

Indeed, the graphics are art.

I've heard games described as, simply, trying to get your attack pixels to overlap with your opponent's defence pixels, hile trying to avoid the opposite. The atmosphere created, when going above this necessity is art. A picture could be a form of communication, but a well done picture, with meaning, and enthusiasm is art. Games can easily be considered an art style. Their story, graphics, environments, thought, and the emotions that these provoke, can all be considered art.

[QUOTE="VoodooHak"]

Of course there are no rules on how to interact with movies, paintings or music... because there's no interaction. That's a fundamental difference with videogames. There have to be rules for interaction with a game. I don't understand how that difference bars games from being art.

goblaa

Because if art has a single definition, and games do so as well, and if games have a "fundamental difference" as you say, then games cannot = art.

I'm saying that art as a whole does not have to have a single definition. Traditional disciplines do. Games have a different definition. Games are now forcing people to think differently about those "rules". This is why we're having this conversation.

And depending on who you talk to or what stage of evolution the medium is in, those rules bend and change. Dear lord, if it weren't for the artistic revolution in the early 1900's, many of the things we see now wouldn't be considered art either.

It's interesting how you try to boil it down to mathematical equation. Art simply can't be bound by pounding it into a mold. It's personal and organic. There is no mold.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Well, sadly I have to leave this wonderful argument, I have things to do.

And it really is a wonderful debate, so many points of view.

[QUOTE="goblaa"]

Indeed, the graphics are art.

Sooshy

Which is really no different than how candyland's board desing interacts with it's gameplay. But they are both still games. Just becasue a visual interacts with the gameplay does not change their definition.

The act of competing to acomplish an objective is not art.

[QUOTE="-RPGamer-"][QUOTE="goblaa"]

Which brings me back to my orginal point. For something to have the term "game" attached to it, it must follow the definition of a game, be it a video game, a board game, or a sport. There is a reason we call something a game. And if fianl fantasy and solitare share that exact same fundemental definition at their core, and if as you say "solitare and minsweeper are not meant to be art" then no game is art.

If you add a story, characters, and setting to mine sweeper, it still has that same core defintion of what makes it a game to begin with. It's the artisitc elements added on to that core that is art, not the core itself.

Ontain

And yet music is essentially just a string of sound waves, with a subjective twist it becomes "art". You speak as if art is factual when it's everything but. The core of what makes a game is that you can play it, everything past that is just subjectivity being passed onto it by a viewer. If a gamer views what they play as art, you can't say they're wrong.

It's their opinion, who are you to say it's false?

you need to define art then because the way you use it anything can be art if the viewer believes so. but i don't think that's correct. it's because of the artists and there objective through the creation that makes something art in the higher sense.

That's what art essentially is. You don't think that's correct? Again who are YOU to correct someone else on what THYE think is art? It seems like many people here like to pass their opinions off on other. Sure not all opinions are created equal, but that does not give the right to any here to say "hey that's not art b/c well I don't think it is."

The objective of an "artist" can be as simplistic as a four year old scribbling down on some paper to show his/her parents. It doesn't need a "higher sense" to be art to someone.

Just so were clear, all you guys saying games are art feel that Go Fish is art.goblaa

Again, you guys feel this way, right?

Just so were clear, all you guys saying games are art feel that Go Fish is art.goblaa

No. Because Go Fish doesn't express anything. A videogame can express things in a manner unique to its form, through the intention of the game designers.

Take Shadow of the Colossus, for example. Sure, the music is fantastic. Sure, the colossi and the environments look amazing. But the feelings the game conveys don't exist because of those elements on their own, they exist because there is a player-character played by the user.

You could say, "Sure, the graphics in that game are art. Sure, the music in that game is art." But the game is not art because of the elements; it is art because of the whole, because of the way the gameplay experience itself is used to communicate the ideas and feelings of the game.

If Shadow of the Colossus were not a game, it would still be art at some level, but the artistic message would be significantly diluted.

[QUOTE="goblaa"]Just so were clear, all you guys saying games are art feel that Go Fish is art.goblaa

Again, you guys feel this way, right?

Again it's subjective. I never said I feel all games are art, nor did I say that games I wouldn't consider "artistic" couldn't be.

Art is NOT a boolean. You don't just have true or false. It's subjective.

[QUOTE="Sooshy"][QUOTE="goblaa"]

Indeed, the graphics are art.

goblaa

Which is really no different than how candyland's board desing interacts with it's gameplay. But they are both still games. Just becasue a visual interacts with the gameplay does not change their definition.

The act of competing to acomplish an objective is not art.

FF6 without it's gameplay is either a different genre, or no longer a game.

And music that has notes that make no sense is still art...especially if the artist purposely chose those notes. That's their expression.

goblaa

FF6 without its gameplay loses its interactivity, so is no longer a game. Just like a music without using any insturments is no longer music.

In both cases, you remove the element necessary to experience the whole piece.

I think ppl are confusing beauty, and entertainment with art. they aren't always the same thing. what makes something art is what the artist embues it with. some purpose and meaning. video games on the whole have 2 main purposes. to sell and be entertaining.Ontain

Here to play along with this concept. Music industry's "2 main puposes. To sell and be entertaining."

Oddly enough it's "art" tomany, and yet games aren't...

[QUOTE="goblaa"]Just so were clear, all you guys saying games are art feel that Go Fish is art.goblaa

Again, you guys feel this way, right?

Not saying it is or isn't. But I AM saying that it could be to whomever wants to see it that way.

[QUOTE="goblaa"]

[QUOTE="goblaa"]Just so were clear, all you guys saying games are art feel that Go Fish is art.VoodooHak

Again, you guys feel this way, right?

Not saying it is or isn't. But I AM saying that it could be to whomever wants to see it that way.

There's a reason for the saying, "art is in the eye of the beholder."

Videogames are works of art.

You can take courses for game design in an Art School

I'm guessing it goes along the lines with Character Design, Animation, and 3D animation etc.

Hopefully I'll get hired at one point once I apply to an art college

XD

If someone denies that Videogames are an art form, thenthey are pretty much denying all 3-D animation as an art form and everything inbetween.

I hate it when people foolishly deny those. :x

One word...

OKAMI

just look for anything on the game...that game is freaking painting in motion.

[QUOTE="goblaa"]Just so were clear, all you guys saying games are art feel that Go Fish is art.sonicmj1

No. Because Go Fish doesn't express anything. A videogame can express things in a manner unique to its form, through the intention of the game designers.

Take Shadow of the Colossus, for example. Sure, the music is fantastic. Sure, the colossi and the environments look amazing. But the feelings the game conveys don't exist because of those elements on their own, they exist because there is a player-character played by the user.

You could say, "Sure, the graphics in that game are art. Sure, the music in that game is art." But the game is not art because of the elements; it is art because of the whole, because of the way the gameplay experience itself is used to communicate the ideas and feelings of the game.

If Shadow of the Colossus were not a game, it would still be art at some level, but the artistic message would be significantly diluted.

Right.

Not all games are necessarily art.

Just like all paintings aren't necessarily art. Books. Films. Etc.

[QUOTE="VoodooHak"][QUOTE="goblaa"]

[QUOTE="goblaa"]Just so were clear, all you guys saying games are art feel that Go Fish is art.-RPGamer-

Again, you guys feel this way, right?

Not saying it is or isn't. But I AM saying that it could be to whomever wants to see it that way.

There's a reason for the saying, "art is in the eye of the beholder."

It's cliche, but ultimately, very true.

Ok heres the story my art teacher is making me do a report on art stlyes and art or what. I chose video games and he tryed to prove me wrong in saying video games are not art. So my grade is on the line here. Show me some great art in video games(art stles). I can use to convie him and get me a A Miles0T0Prower

Your teacher is an idiot if he thinks video games have no art, just show him games like bioshock and he should get the idea.

[QUOTE="Miles0T0Prower"]Ok heres the story my art teacher is making me do a report on art stlyes and art or what. I chose video games and he tryed to prove me wrong in saying video games are not art. So my grade is on the line here. Show me some great art in video games(art stles). I can use to convie him and get me a A michael098

Your teacher is an idiot if he thinks video games have no art, just show him games like bioshock and he should get the idea.

And SotC

XD

All very good art

every game is art

your teacher is an idiot

tidus222

Hahaha...... Amen to that!

Okami

Eternal Darkness

Shadow of the Colossus

Bioshock

Guild Wars

Eternal Sonata

Zelda: Wind Waker

Pikmin

Killer 7

Your teacher is wrong, period.

DARWINIA.

DEFCON

WINNAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Any Art History people in here? No? Then allow me :).

I find this debate funny for several reasons, most of which I will not go into. I personally stand on the "Games ARE art" side of this debate, but I won't do much to prove or disprove any side.

Anyone who has studied the history of art all the way from the beginning (with the likes of the "Woman of Willendorf" in prehistory) to modern times should know about the many changes in what was defined as "art". Many of the accepted media today were very controversial back in there time. But time would go by and the art community would come to accept some new style as a legitimate form of art. The same thing will happen with video games and so the definition will change to incorporate that.

Art is in the eye's of the beholder though. I have my oppinions on certain styles or periods in art history, but nothing comes close to my distaste fora certain"accepted" work of art.

Duchamp's "Fountain". Readymade or found object...call it what you like, but I call it an upside down urinal. It's a joke to call it art, but that is merelymy oppinion. And if "installation art" can grow to become legitimate, so too will video games.

By the way, Art History is merely one of my minors. Graphic Design is my major.

its really really cool seeing fellow gamers in this thread giving games the necessary credence.

great examples are:

okami, shadow of the colossus, killer 7, wind waker

there's also this new game for the wii called Eternity's Child, which has completely hand-drawn backgrounds .. the art style is really good IMO

post pics if you can (please do):(Miles0T0Prower

hmm, lol, all videogames today require great art. your teacher was probably thinking of atari games when he told you that. anyway, you just look for game box covers and surely anyone can see the art in that

Video games have various examples of art - not just in the actual in-game rendering, but also in the cutscenes, box-art and concept art.

I mean, check out this truly amazing Guild Wars Nightfall concept art!

Or Psychonauts, where the artst-yles of the psychic worlds reflect the minds of their owners:

Yes, games have artistic elements. Anything can have artistic elements.

But they are fundementally not in the same vein as film and literature.

Okami is the first that hit my mind...but there are many other games too.

Ok heres the story my art teacher is making me do a report on art stlyes and art or what. I chose video games and he tryed to prove me wrong in saying video games are not art. So my grade is on the line here. Show me some great art in video games(art stles). I can use to convie him and get me a A Miles0T0Prower

Videogames can and usually do contain elements of visual art (both beautiful graphics and detailed world designs), music (grand orchestral scores and engrossing situational based sounds and effects), stories (in both written and acted/dialogue forms), and they are also interactive (which none of the other mediums are).Videogames are the most inclusive, expressive and indeed greatest form of entertainment ever created, and if movies, music or paintings can be considered a form of art then so too must games be.

I have laughed and cried because of videogames. I have watched in awe as beautiful worlds presented themselves before me. I have stood afraid of what lurks in the darkness of a dimly lit room and the horrors that await me in the shadows. I have spent countless hours playing in these worlds of man's imagination.

A single game, Super Mario World, changed my life and inspired me (more so than any painting or sculpture, or book or film) to pursue a career in videogames. If that is not what true art is all about then I don't know art...and I have studied art for over 20 years.

You can quote me on all that.

I would actually copy and paste what I said into your report somewhere and use my tag and Gamespot as one of your references. It will score you extra marks for sourcing your material and show that you actually did some research and took other peoples input and opinions into consideration.

Use some concept art and then screenshots of in-game. He can't argue against that. It's art, imitating art, imitating nature.

[QUOTE="Sooshy"][QUOTE="goblaa"]

Indeed, the graphics are art.

goblaa

Which is really no different than how candyland's board desing interacts with it's gameplay. But they are both still games. Just becasue a visual interacts with the gameplay does not change their definition.

The act of competing to acomplish an objective is not art.

Hey! Candylandis art!

I mean, look at the board...

Interactive art: Wave of the future. :P

Use some concept art and then screenshots of in-game. He can't argue against that. It's art, imitating art, imitating nature.

[QUOTE="Miles0T0Prower"]Ok heres the story my art teacher is making me do a report on art stlyes and art or what. I chose video games and he tryed to prove me wrong in saying video games are not art. So my grade is on the line here. Show me some great art in video games(art stles). I can use to convie him and get me a A freeload

Videogames can and usually do contain elements of visual art (both beautiful graphics and detailed world designs), music (grand orchestral scores and engrossing situational based sounds andeffects), stories (in both written and acted/dialogue forms), and they are also interactive (which none of the other mediums are).Videogames are themost inclusive, expressiveand indeed greatest form of entertainment ever created, and if movies, music or paintings can be considered a form of art then so toomust games be.

I have laughed and cried because of videogames. I havewatched in awe as beautiful worlds presented themselves before me. I havestood afraid of what lurks in the darkness of a dimly lit room and the horrors that await me in the shadows. I have spent countless hours playing in these worlds of man's imagination.

A single game, Super Mario World, changed my life and inspired me (more so than anypaintingor sculpture, or book or film) to pursue a career in videogames. If that is not what true art is all about then I don't know art...and I have studied art for over 20 years.

You can quote me on all that.

I would actually copy and paste what I said into your report somewhere and use my tag and Gamespot as one of your references. It will score you extra marks for sourcing your material and show that you actually did some research and took other peoples input and opinions into consideration.

There. You said it in your first two words. Videogames can. Video games do not have to contain artistic elements for it to function, whereas film, literature, music and fine arts do.

Consider some of the first videogames ever made. For example, Pong, the most famous of the first generation of video games. Was it a game? Yes, of course. Did it contain any artistic expression? Of course not. Pong is simply a game which requires the player to overcome an obstacle and win the round, much like most major sports.

Now, was it an art? Yes. Games are a craft. It requires skill to make. Thus, games are fundementallyan art in the form of craftsmanship.

Consider the first film ever made, "Roundbay Garden Scene". That two second feature, despite those that had not accepted it in the past, showcased something which ring true in films today: that the medium fundementally evokes emotions, just like literature before it.

Yes, it shows people walking around for two seconds. But how are they dressed? What is the setting? In a nice, lush setting, next to what seems to be a pavillion, correct? How is the man walking? He's walking in a way which emphasizes his state of being: he is happy, and he is socializing with the other people.

Now can you see the two fundemental differences there? Games can, but do not need, artistic expression to function. Film (which I use because it is the most comparable and most compared), by its very nature, needs it.

Video games are like houses. Like tables, like the latest televisions: they canall contain artistic elements, as directed by the designer, but fundementally they're made for other uses -- the house ot live in, the table to do work or eat upon, and the television to use for communication and what not.

So, there you have it. It doesn't make video games any lower than the other mediums however.

[QUOTE="freeload"]

[QUOTE="Miles0T0Prower"]Ok heres the story my art teacher is making me do a report on art stlyes and art or what. I chose video games and he tryed to prove me wrong in saying video games are not art. So my grade is on the line here. Show me some great art in video games(art stles). I can use to convie him and get me a A FrozenLiquid

Videogames can and usually do contain elements of visual art (both beautiful graphics and detailed world designs), music (grand orchestral scores and engrossing situational based sounds andeffects), stories (in both written and acted/dialogue forms), and they are also interactive (which none of the other mediums are).Videogames are themost inclusive, expressiveand indeed greatest form of entertainment ever created, and if movies, music or paintings can be considered a form of art then so toomust games be.

I have laughed and cried because of videogames. I havewatched in awe as beautiful worlds presented themselves before me. I havestood afraid of what lurks in the darkness of a dimly lit room and the horrors that await me in the shadows. I have spent countless hours playing in these worlds of man's imagination.

A single game, Super Mario World, changed my life and inspired me (more so than anypaintingor sculpture, or book or film) to pursue a career in videogames. If that is not what true art is all about then I don't know art...and I have studied art for over 20 years.

You can quote me on all that.

I would actually copy and paste what I said into your report somewhere and use my tag and Gamespot as one of your references. It will score you extra marks for sourcing your material and show that you actually did some research and took other peoples input and opinions into consideration.

There. You said it in your first two words. Videogames can. Video games do not have to contain artistic elements for it to function, whereas film, literature, music and fine arts do.

Consider some of the first videogames ever made. For example, Pong, the most famous of the first generation of video games. Was it a game? Yes, of course. Did it contain any artistic expression? Of course not. Pong is simply a game which requires the player to overcome an obstacle and win the round, much like most major sports.

Now, was it an art? Yes. Games are a craft. It requires skill to make. Thus, games are fundementallyan art in the form of craftsmanship.

Consider the first film ever made, "Roundbay Garden Scene". That two second feature, despite those that had not accepted it in the past, showcased something which ring true in films today: that the medium fundementally evokes emotions, just like literature before it.

Yes, it shows people walking around for two seconds. But how are they dressed? What is the setting? In a nice, lush setting, next to what seems to be a pavillion, correct? How is the man walking? He's walking in a way which emphasizes his state of being: he is happy, and he is socializing with the other people.

Now can you see the two fundemental differences there? Games can, but do not need, artistic expression to function. Film (which I use because it is the most comparable and most compared), by its very nature, needs it.

Video games are like houses. Like tables, like the latest televisions: they canall contain artistic elements, as directed by the designer, but fundementally they're made for other uses -- the house ot live in, the table to do work or eat upon, and the television to use for communication and what not.

So, there you have it. It doesn't make video games any lower than the other mediums however.

I'm not sure if you are saying they are or are not a form of art, or if that is really your main point, but I agree that some videogames are clearly not even trying to be art, in any meaniful sense of the word, and I most certainly agree that however you look at games (art or not) it does not make them any lower than any of the other mediums of entertainment.

I would reiterate that I personally consider videogames the greatest single form of entertainment ever created by man, and we are still in the very early days of the interactive entertainment medium that is videogames when compared to the hundreds of years that films, music and books have been around...