Gaming as an art form.

[Bodhesatva]

Mnementh said:

Bodhesatva said:

Mnementh said:
I don't think, that a videogame needs to stress the interactivity too much to be counted as arts. Other art-forms restrict often themselves: (modern) black-and-white movies and photographs or poems for example. So a game like final-fantasy that restricts interactivity can also be art. But true is, interactivity is the thing that separates games from other arts.

The black-and-white movies is worth discussion, but how are photographs and poems "limited?" You don't actually name a restriction on them.

I'd argue that black-and-white film isn't a restriction these days either; it is, just like color films, a deliberate and important visual choice. Consider Schindler's List for example; the entire movie is in black and white, save a single girl's brilliantly red dress. Instead of being a "restriction," as you put it, I'd say that's putting the film medium's great strength -- visual representation -- to important use.

A restriction of the type we're talking about would be like a movie literally having no visuals at all to highlight the audio. See the difference? Black and white only alters the meaning of the visuals, it doesn't actually limit them, while story telling automatically does limit interactivity. And guess what a movie with no visuals is? A crappy book-on-tape. Just like a game with little interacivity and tons of story is a crappy movie.

First, I meant also black-and-white photography. And poems are restricted, not all ways to put down words are poems. A sonett for example is even more restricted in it's form. If you decide to write a poem, you restrict yourself in the way, how you set the words. Anyways, it's an interesting viewpoint, that the restrictions I talk about are no limitations but alternative ways to use the medium. You may be right on this, I need more thinking.

 Just so it's clear we don't have to be point-counterpoint here:

I absolutely would agree with your position if the act of story telling did not automatically limit interactivity. That is the problem here. If a story is being told -- emphasis on the word told, as disctinct from made -- then the designer is deciding how the game is played. As a supreme example, when a game developer makes a Full Motion Video sequence, he is saying: "I will show you what has happened. You do not decide. The result of this FMV has been decided by me, and there is no way for you to change the character development or choices made in this sequence."

So, if we can agree on that (and you can argue against it), then let's make clear what we're saying here: storytelling works directly against the defining characteristic of video games, interactivity. 

And if you're going to make a video game that is only mildly interactive, you might as well have made a movie -- just as if you made a movie with tons of internal dialogue and zero visual imagery, you might as well have made a book, or if you have a sculpture that's just an millimeter-inch thick fresco (if you aren't familiar with them, google provides example), you might as well have made a painting.

Or, put simply -- if you're just going to tell a story, why not use an artistic medium that's built for storytelling? One that has no interactivity, and allows the artist to tell precisely the story he wants to?