happydolphin said:
@bold. I don't need to, because you haven't demonstrated how gameplay can be objectively qualified. But I'll indulge you for a sec. Ever wonder why judges are selected for performances like dancing and figure skating? It's cause there's a way to tell if something was done with excellence when a standard or reference is set. Classes should be enough to make it clear that there is formal theory on these topics, and that isn't a subjective thing as far as I'm concerned. The lecturer will provide mathematical explanations for artistic phenomena (especially in music, what notes give what mood). The onus is on you I'm afraid (to demonstrate that gameplay is not subjective and is purely objective). |
I don't have to demonstrate that gameplay can be objectively qualified because I didn't make the argument that gameplay can be objectively qualified. But you made the argument that art can be objectively qualified, so you have to support your argument.
As for classes, that proves nothing. Art is to express and communicate feelings between the artist and receiver. That's it. If the artist had expressed himself/herself adequately then its successful art. If the receiver feels he/she has felt new feelings then it is successful art
You are right that there are some elements that can be studied which have shown to be desired by most people; but these elements are by no means objectively correct. They are still subjective but are very well regarded. Just as a chef may advise his students that a certain amount of a certain ingredient is ideal; his advice may be true for most people but it's still not objective. Other people may prefer more or less ingredients but their preference is not wrong or incorrect.







