Do you consider videogames to be art? (poll)

Are video games an art form? Some say yes, some say no. Those within the game industry say so, but those outside of it feel the opposite. But what do you, the gamers, think? Do you think video games are art? Vote in the poll or post your thoughts.

(In the case you believe that only certain games are art, please say or vote yes since "no" means that you consider no games to be art.)

IMO videogames can be art

the best examples IMO are the cel-shaded games, like okami and wind waker

Just a comment to add what I already stated. Art for games is perhaps more valueable than any artform there is. People interact with your art in a game. Say you want players to feel a certain way, well you can make the room a smaller space and light/color the room with red tones; This will raise the player's tention and keep them on edge. I would say the way things are moving in the game industry, art is more important than ever, helping shape player desicions, changing player's moods, structuring game flow, and driving for the ultimate experience. I guess since people experience a game, they don't see it as art. What they really don't realize is that it is the art that makes the experience. That's my two cents.

I agree with Keiji Inafune of Capcom, games are a product. But with every product, there is always a passionate side to it. I think the games industry is very comparable to the film industry -- most of the time it's just about making money, but there are some who want to innovate and make the best thing they possibly can. As a summation, I would consider games a product with an artistic element.

They can be artistic. I don't think they can be art, as you make changes within them... which means you're interfering with whatever the artist would have wanted you to see, or something, right?Jandurin

Not necessarily... in FFVII for instance, everything is set on a linear course. Sure you can chill out and do chocobo racing for a while, but ultimately you are going to see the ending and the events that the dev wanted you to.

Many games have the illusion of freedom, but are, in fact, quite linear, and therefore can be qualified as art.

I agree with Keiji Inafune of Capcom, games are a product. But with every product, there is always a passionate side to it. I think the games industry is very comparable to the film industry -- most of the time it's just about making money, but there are some who want to innovate and make the best thing they possibly can. As a summation, I would consider games a product with an artistic element.

-Spock-

Though, it's somewhat opposite in development.

To make Blockbusters, they generally spend a LOT of money to make a lot of money.

While, in games, it seems like the niche games cost the most to make.

Many games have the illusion of freedom, but are, in fact, quite linear, and therefore can be qualified as art.jetthrovegas

Is whether I get Knights of the Round/Gold Chocobo a choice?

Can I dispense with enemies however I see fit?

The only thing truly linear is the path from movie to movie. Which supports your argument.

i was actually asking myself this earlier. imho yes they are in a very unique way. its not just the visual side that defines games as art or the audio...its the way we also interact with the game that is an artform in itself imho. the way the game plays and how the dev defines controls and interaction is as much art as it is science.

however another question: are computer games also a sport? and could something that is considered a sport also be considered art. thats the poser im thinking of at the mo.

the best examples IMO are the cel-shaded games, like okami and wind waker

akif22

The art argument concerning videogames is not literal in the graphic sense. The debate is more concerned about the abstract qualities of art.

Videogames are not art. They can have great art in them, they can have amazing stories, they can have orchestrated music, but no... videogames are not art. They are a form of entertainment such as movies, music, and even books. kansasdude2009

Butarent music, books and movies all considered art?

Well, my opinion is obviously going to be biased, since I create ART content for games. Following the ART direction, it is my job to make sure the ART for the current project meets ARTISTIC demands. I didn't just wake up one day and started to create graphics, it takes a lot of dedication from many collective minds to technically and ARTISTICALLY pull off a game. Games are cinematically equal to blockbuster movie standards, and gameplay is also reaching that level. Saying that a game is not art is like saying a game ARTIST is not an artist at all, and therefore does not matter. Those that say games are not art have no idea what goes into making games.-Wheels-

your art in the game is art, dont get me wrong... but the entire gaming experience is not art. It's merely an entertainment to people. Gaming is not an art form at all, just like how movies is not an art form.

its the way we also interact with the game that is an artform in itself imho.

osan0

excellent point

The definition of art is as follows. "Art is a (product of) human activity, made with the intention of stimulating the human senses as well as the human mind; thus art is an action, an object, or a collection of actions and objects created with the intention of transmitting emotions and/or ideas."

Going by that definition, I would say that video games are art.

Just a comment to add what I already stated. Art for games is perhaps more valueable than any artform there is. People interact with your art in a game. Say you want players to feel a certain way, well you can make the room a smaller space and light/color the room with red tones; This will raise the player's tention and keep them on edge. I would say the way things are moving in the game industry, art is more important than ever, helping shape player desicions, changing player's moods, structuring game flow, and driving for the ultimate experience. I guess since people experience a game, they don't see it as art. What they really don't realize is that it is the art that makes the experience. That's my two cents.

-Wheels-

Nice post and i agree that games can be art.

[QUOTE="kansasdude2009"]Videogames are not art. They can have great art in them, they can have amazing stories, they can have orchestrated music, but no... videogames are not art. They are a form of entertainment such as movies, music, and even books. web966

Butarent music, books and movies all considered art?

music sometimes is considered an art form, yes. Movies have artistic qualities but a movie in it's entirety is not art, just like a videogame. I wouldn't know about books... I would guess that they are not an art form.

But really... the word "art" can probably be used for just about everything if you can justify it. I, a person who is largely into orchestral music, find myself only using it to mean "the arts" which include pictures, music, and drama. But really... drama is an entertainment, so... I will say that videogames are a form of art... but not an art form. :D

I will say that videogames are a form of art... but not an art form. :Dkansasdude2009

Win.

The definition of art is as follows. "Art is a (product of) human activity, made with the intention of stimulating the human senses as well as the human mind; thus art is an action, an object, or a collection of actions and objects created with the intention of transmitting emotions and/or ideas."

Going by that definition, I would say that video games are art.

web966

ok, so yes. A form of art, but not "art form". That makes sense... :)

Video games are not art. There may be artistic elements, but the technical aspect of gameplay overshadows them. You would not call soccer or hockey an art form. Both video games and sports games are more skill and action-based more than they are imagination-based.

[QUOTE="kansasdude2009"]I will say that videogames are a form of art... but not an art form. :DJandurin

Win.

lol, it took some time, but I would like to state that this is the first forum where my opinion about something has actually completely changed. :shock:

Video games are not art. There may be artistic elements, but the technical aspect of gameplay overshadows them. You would not call soccer or hockey an art form. Both video games and sports games are more skill and action-based more than they are imagination-based.

Boomarley

you are right. Gameplay is probably the one thing keeping videogames from being an "art form" by itself. But because videogames do give of emotions to the player, and that is the ultimate goal of art, then I have to keep to my "form of art" argument.

Video games are not art. There may be artistic elements, but the technical aspect of gameplay overshadows them. You would not call soccer or hockey an art form. Both video games and sports games are more skill and action-based more than they are imagination-based.

Boomarley

What about the person making the games? Making video games takes alot of imagination. Making the game is the art form, not playing throughit. When playing through a game you are simply enjoying the artists creative work.

[QUOTE="Boomarley"]

Video games are not art. There may be artistic elements, but the technical aspect of gameplay overshadows them. You would not call soccer or hockey an art form. Both video games and sports games are more skill and action-based more than they are imagination-based.

web966

What about the person making the games? Making video games takes alot of imagination. Making the game is the art form, not playing throughit. When playing through a game you are simply enjoying the artists creative work.

ARG! Too many factors to deal with! I have to disagree... a bit. Making games does take imagination just like a painter with his/her picture or a composer with his/her music. But what ultimately makes it art is the impression that it makes on the "user". Which is why I think videogames is a form of art by the sense that it does make an impression upon the user.

There's currently a thread on GGD about this same topic.

I won't repost what I said in its entirity (you can go look for yourself), but no, I don't consider games in general to be art. A few can make a good argument, but the vast majority of games are not art.

I think it depends on the game. Like the definition posted before, art is more about making people think or feel certain emotions than the look of a game or whatever. By the definition of art most games really aren't "art", they are more created just to make a buck. More often than not even the better games really aren't anything more than a means to an end, with the end being a nice fat pay check. But for some of the developers out there, ones like Bioware, Miyamoto,Blizzard, Kojima and Valve to say they are making games to make money is an insult, they're making games because they love it, and they want to share their visions and ideas with others. Its like comparing music, most of the game industry is justlike Britney Spears or Fall Out Boy or hundreds of other musical acts that really don't do anything than entertain. All style and no substance. But there's always a couple of gems that do it because they love it.

This reminds me of a story Ben Harper (one of the most respected musicians in the world,google him) told on Carson Daly's show about meeting Phil Jackson (coach of the LA Lakers) to paraphrase:

"So the he asked me why I play music, why I record records. Is it because of the money? Do I do it for the fans? For my parents? So I thought about it and I said 'I do it for myself", and Phil said "good, then there isno limit to what you can do."

That right there is the definition of art.

If you don't consider videogames art, then you don't know what art is.LanDC77

Isn't art somewhat subjective?

certainly

actually, its the best type of art. it requires music, art designs, and movies (cutscenes). i think FFX is probably the best example of games being art

It is a fact that video games require some level of artistic expression in their production. Whether or not the quality is good or not does not matter. There is such a thing as crappy art. Many videogames fall into this category. But many are quite good. Anyone that wants to toss around the term "High-art" is just being pretentious and trying to split art into categories that make them feel better about themselves.

Ico is most definitely art.

[QUOTE="LanDC77"]If you don't consider videogames art, then you don't know what art is.Jandurin

Isn't art somewhat subjective?

Art goes in to making games, with out art most games can't be made, and see how I said most.

[QUOTE="LanDC77"]If you don't consider videogames art, then you don't know what art is.Jandurin

Isn't art somewhat subjective?

The quality and value of individual pieces are Art are subjective, not the state of being Art.

All paintings are Art. Some of them are just crappy Art, but that doesn't remove them from being Art.

storys are a form of art.

art can be manifested visually.

and art can also manifest itself as music.

i'd say that certain games that manage to evoke your emotions just as music or a painting would, can be considered an artwork. zelda is a prime example. resident evil, some racing games like PGR where you get a massive thrill from feeling the car's power and drifting as well. examples of non-art games are quick-buck film based games, certain sports games, and in general, most crappy games.

storys are a form of art.

art can be manifested visually.

and art can also manifest itself as music.

i'd say that certain games that manage to evoke your emotions just as music or a painting would, can be considered an artwork. zelda is a prime example. resident evil, some racing games like PGR where you get a massive thrill from feeling the car's power and drifting as well. examples of non-art games are quick-buck film based games, certain sports games, and in general, most crappy games.