rolltide101x said:
Rafux said:
rolltide101x said:
Rafux said:
rolltide101x said:
Rafux said:
Rogerioandrade said:
Videogames are not essentially art. They are basically just games, challenges for the player, they´re closer to board games in their essence than to art itself. But videogames are a form of entertainment that uses art to be produced, be it visual arts, music or interpretation. |
Yes! Finally someone who gets it, the rest are just bashing the art teacher.
|
If it uses art that makes it art.....
|
No, baby diapers tv ads use art and they are not art, potatoes snacks use art and they are not art, my house uses art on its walls yet I would not consider my particular house art.
|
The design on the baby's diapers were created by artist, artist created the designs on the chips, the way you have your house layed out could be considered art
Anything can be art. I agree with a good bit of people. If something was created with art in mind it is art. If I take a pencil and draw a picture it is art (crappy art mind you)
|
Thats exactly what I said, the designs in the diaper are art, the music in the jingle for the tv ad is art but the tv ad itself is not art neither is the diaper.
Games have art in them but that doesnt make them art because games are chained by the fact that they have to be fun and challenging first and then they can have artistic merits.
For example a painting can be sad, nostalgic, fun, enraging, inspiring, etc. It can be anything the artist wants it to be is not chained to anything but a video game is chained to be always a fun challenging product first and foremost then it can convey other emotions.
An artist can expose a painting which is just a black canvas and say that it represents the afterlife but Hideo Kojima can't release a game which is just a black screen and call the game Afterlife, even a movie director can release a short film which is just a black screen for 5 minutes and call it afterlife.
And if Hideo Kojima decides that he actually wants to release a game which is just a black screen for 5 minutes called Afterlife for free on IOS and Android then people would say "Its not a videogame"
|
I assume you have never played Journey, Flower, Okami, etc......... There is no way to deny those are art
http://hypercritical.co/2012/11/27/images/journey.jpg
http://techgeekgamers.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/flower_screenshot37.jpg
http://image.gamespotcdn.net/gamespot/images/2012/262/674775_20120919_screen001.jpg
So if somebody painted/drew those they are art but since they are in a game they are not? That sounds like non-sense to me.
|
I have played all of them, just because something is beautiful it doesn't make it art, art doesn't even have to be beautiful by the way.
Please read again my post. A video game uses art in them, it contains art but a video game in itself is not art, if you want to paint Super Mario that is art even the little sprite in Super Mario Bros is art BUT the game itself is not art like baby diapers contains designs that are artistic but the diaper itself is not art.
The most important part about why video games are not art is because at their most basic function video games have to be fun and challenging, Art isn't chained to anything it can be anything the artist wants it to be it can be an ugly painting yet it can express something deep, Video games on the other hand first and foremost have to be fun and challenging they can't just be an expression.
I'll repeat myself here: if Hideo Kojima decides that he wants to release a game which is just a black screen for 5 minutes called Afterlife for free on IOS and Android then people would say "Its not a videogame" but a painter can release a painting that is just a black canvas called Afterlife and a movie director can release a short film which is just a black screen for 5 minutes and call it afterlife.
EDIT: Back to your example a sunset in itself is not art is just Earth spinning but if an artist decides to paint that sunset and convey nostalgic feelings that is art.
