I can't agree with that. Just expressing something doesn't make it qualify as art.
You don't have to agree with it, look up the definition, that is what it is.
And who decides what 'the' definition is? Could it be wrong?
Whether games are art is subjective based on what you think art is. It's useful to have a common definition of, say, a table, but people's likes and dislikes will not match up no matter how much you argue.
Who decides the definition? Lets not start down the path of questioning established definitions because then the conversation might get too philosophical.
"established" by WHOM? A good answer is, by a rough and undirected agreement of those using the term. And not by a dictionary, is the important part.
I think this is a good point. I looked up the definition in different places and noticed that they were all different. Wiki even commented that the definition of art has been debated for centuries. So I guess disagreements on this stem from a different starting point of "defintion of art".
let me give you another scenario. ....
Or, you realise that they think it's art and you don't think it is and that isn't contradictory and it we should instead focus on what art means: how can we make beautiful things, is it worth doing so, should art be protected speech under a First Amendment like law, and so on.
the two peopl in question have contradictory ideas. So that kinda is contradictory. But I'd rather move past this scernario.
Real life example: I went to a south Florida museum of modern art. One exhibit was literally just steel wool. I could not believe what a piece of crap it was. Literal steel wool on a podium. While I hate it and mock it. That piece was made, bought, donated, accepted and displayed. So someone enjoyed it.
The viewing of art is subjective but not it's definition.
You are claiming the definition is objective? If that was so, arguing against it would be irrational. And yet, any definition you could present has obvious weaknesses. And there isn't one clear choice.
My whole arguement is based on Art as an expression of its creator. Given that defintion, I believe my arguements are spot it. Now if we change the defintion then yes, Not everything qualifies as Art. I guess the first post on this thread should have been "define art."
Now, the interesting part. You went to a museum of art? Yes Do things have to be in a museum to be art? Not at all Games are in art museums. I believe games are art.