AngryLittleAlchemist said:
I know it's a little bit more complicated than that ... that's why I wrote an extremely long response to vivister. In every instance I can think of where Dark Souls compromised itself, I've been against it. That might be a little bit unfair though, because the word compromised is associated with bad, whereas making something more mainstream is not always bad. So I'm not saying dark souls is perfect or hasn't been compromised, in fact I have a pretty big problem with the Souls sequels as a whole. Whether you use "art" or "game" doesn't really matter too much to be honest....that's kind of just semantics. I said art because people generally don't care about the intent of devs unless you pull out the "art" argument. If you want to say that the devs artistic integrity is compromised by lessening the difficulty, but then go on to say you don't agree that video games are by definition art.....then that creates a scenario where whether or not you consider video games art doesn't matter, since we're talking about the artistic integrity in relation to the product. I would ask why you don't think video games are art but think they have artistic integrity ... but again you could remove art from the entire sentence and nothing would change - using art is just an easier way to describe it. Just to be clear, i'm not commenting on Horizon. |
Uhmm...yes, you're right its contradictive. That's why I said it's a complicate matter.
Well I think videogames are a medium or a mean of expression (just like movies, books, cinema), I think it's hard to debate that. Art is the not the medium itselft but it's more about the intent or attitude of the author thowards the medium. The distinction here is whether the author is expressing himself or not (his own ideas, emotions, state of mind) so I belive any kind of abstract concpect can be considered art as long as it's coming form the author (or in other words it's personal). The opposite case is when the author is using a medium not to express himself but to appease the expectations of its audience; in that case I wouldn't consider the author an artist but an entertainer (but I'm not implying there's anything wrong with sheer enetertainment).
Now the line beetween the two concepts is thin beacuse you'll always have a certain degree of both in any work, but you can most times tell which one prevails over the other: some games are moslty built around players expectations, some others are the like result of the development of an idea the developer wanted to express. That's why I believe my statement about games are not being art by definition and artistic integrity can coexist.
Of course that's my point of view, I don't belive there's a purely objective way to define art since I don't believe art is about objectivity.
