richardhutnik said:
aikohualda said:
richardhutnik said:
aikohualda said:
richardhutnik said:
aikohualda said:
richardhutnik said:
aikohualda said:
games are science!!!! |
Game design is an art, not a science. Not set of rules will produce an entertaining game, because no set of rules can produce rules, which is what a game is. And a game very much can be consider a product of a craft actually. It is a toy meant to entertain. Whether it is an art, would depend on the intention of the designer and communicating a message.
|
a game design made possible by science
|
All technology used by art has some sort of science behind it today. However, there is even art in the formation of science and the development of hypothesis. There is just some things you can't use a recipe to generate. Science is all about repeatable processes. Art is not a repeatable process. Well, that which differentiates art from science, is non-repeatable processes to make it a work of art.
|
mostly science... since technology is the application of scientific knowledge for practical purposes...
|
Game creation is not the application of scientific knowledge towards any end, neither is most forms of innovation, and creation of things new. It is an art, because the creation is done by intuition of the designer, and thus is art. Now, you want to talk about actually producing a game, well that also has some technology, but the core innovation concepts is art, done by visionaries. The thing about games is that they are not practical purposes, but toys for entertainment. Entertainment is a very subjective thing, that is hard to pin down, and excessive use of the same patterns leads to boredom, which makes it hard to replicate. The fact the videogames industry can't be predicted to any certainty what will be the next big hit, and follow standardized methods has resulted in stupid concepts people don't want in the end (Dead Space is now dead, in part because marketing types, using scientific methods determined the game HAD to have multiplayer).
While one can find a bunch of science behind games, the spark of genius that makes something stand out, is art.
|
lol ok let me get my bachelors in arts in game design LMAO
innovation = art
creation of new things = art
thus the majority of games are ART not science.... yes!!!!!!!! hahahahahaha
one player = no scientific method....yes!!!!
i like this....
iphone was an art when it came out
ereader is art when it first came out
interner is art!!!!! LOL
yes innovation and creating new is = to ART!!!!! yessssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss!!!!
|
Innovation has an artistic element to it. The same impulse to create is there. One can rate the quality of it as an artistic piece, but it is. Scientific approach is repeatable in nature, and can make predictions. Innovation is not this. It starts, at best, becoming increasingly probabilistic in nature, to the extent where you can't even predict things. In this area, if it were more scientific, then the Pachters of the world would be far better at predicting than they are. And they aren't.
|
