| Metallicube said: My take is that society at large is what ultimately decides what art is, and it has to stand to test of time to be true art IMO. I see it as a commentary of society that acts as both a reflection of society and helps to shape it. But I agree, no individual can necessarilly claim something to be art as if it's fact just because they think so, the same way somebody claiming a game to be quality, or crap, doesn't make it a fact. |
The problem with the entire discussion about art is that art is so individual. I agree that stating that something is art as a fact is pretentious, but I think stating the opposite is equally pretentious. My personal definition of art is that it is a piece of work that moves you emotionally. We have "art" because we want a term for the things that wow us, and while art itself may be considered pretentious to like, because of people who think they know better than so many others, we really ought to appreciate art more.
I don't get why some people are so against the idea that games are art, because games are really no different in that aspect from movies or books. Yes, games must entertain because that's what they do, but it's not wrong of someone to wish for a game to be more artistic, that's their right after all. If they are reviewing games and doesn't find it artistic enough to their liking, then they can rightfully mark the game down for it. Reviews are just personal opinions, nothing more, nothing less, and if the game isn't to the reviewer's liking for one reason or another, then the score should reflect that, so long as the review itself reflects it too. The developers can then take the critizism on board or leave it be.
I can understand fearing that artful games are too focused on being art rather than being entertaining, but a game that isn't entertaining will be shot down by reviewers and consumers, regardless of how artful it is. The reason I consider Flower art is because it's a great experience all around for me, and while it's not "fun" per se, it's still entertaining, while evoking deep emotional responses in me. I don't think it's wrong to want other games to reach for the same standard (not that every game should, but I would like for more games to do it still).
As for the people who think it's wrong to want games to be artistic... why? I don't have any illusions about gaming, I don't need to defend my hobby from the nay-sayers of the world and I certainly don't need it validated by some random critics who disagree with me. What I want is for people to acknowledge that games can be more than "just" entertainment and that they can be more than "just" fun. I want to create games that are artful, and it's hard to talk about those games if they are not acknowledged as proper ways of creating emotional experiences.
