By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - The increasing popularity of games may hurt games as an art.

oh my goodness who cares about artsy games?

people who complain about people loving things that arent are just pretentious snobs who will always find something to complain about

im sorry not all of us can enjoy ICO while sipping on Merlot in an Armani suit on the skyline of Paris not all of us out there care about being artsy or cultured



Everyday I'm hustlin'.

 

Wii and DS owner.

Around the Network
DKHustlin said:
oh my goodness who cares about artsy games?

people who complain about people loving things that arent are just pretentious snobs who will always find something to complain about

im sorry not all of us can enjoy ICO while sipping on Merlot in an Armani suit on the skyline of Paris not all of us out there care about being artsy or cultured

I take it you don't like Merlot?



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

So tc, you didn't like Pac Man?



 

http://www.shanepeters.com/

http://shanepeters.deviantart.com/

Achievement is its own reward, pride only obscures.

HATING OPHELIA- Coming soon from Markosia Comics!

bdbdbd said:
@mai: Art actually describes the product of creative process. If someone draws a picture and calls it art, then it is art.
If someone makes a carbon copy of the picture, that isn't art, only a copy of art, because it lacks the creative process.

If someone says the original picture isn't art, the someone is using only ones personal preferences about liking or not liking it to downplay the actual art.

Basically when someone talks about artistic videogames, the someone is talking about creative videogames.

Creativity, as a process of creating smth new (standard definition), not that differ from categories of liking or disliking, 'cos it involves person's own experience (i.e. taste) to judge smth as new or not so new (to him\her). Actually a big part of creation is rehashing. Unless, of course, you have another definition of creativity, I'm eager to hear it.



@Reasonable: I haven't seen Ratatouille, but what you described, it's pretty much what i'm talking about.
To put into same context, food is what you can eat, but whether it's food for some specific individual, depends on ones own preferences. If you don't eat fish, you don't consider fish as food. Or snails for another example.

I don't think you're arguing about preferences, just having a debate whether art is something with universal definition, or something completely subjective?

Commercial success depends on the type of product, in massmanufacture products, volume relates to success and individual products depend more on price. Both, however, are about demand.
Something can be considered commercially successful if it's finally worth of owning (are you getting any profit by selling it, which is the case with paintings for example).

As for Kubric, when someone gains a cultlike status, the someone is universally credited as an artist just because he did something most of the others couldn't.

My point was, that art is completely something other that people are willing to think it is. Or maybe to put it another way, art isn't just something an individual likes and downplays what one doesn't like as non-art.
I may have done the same in this very thread, but i don't care about art, i only care about the entertainment value of the product.

@mai: No. It's about creating new from the artists perspective. Not the ones who's judging it.
This doesn't contradict rehashing in itself, since the creative process in rehashing is about whether you're able to create something new to the rehashed content, when the new part is the actual art. If a painter paints a tree, the tree itself isn't art, but the touch the painter gave to the painting is the art of the painting.



Ei Kiinasti.

Eikä Japanisti.

Vaan pannaan jalalla koreasti.

 

Nintendo games sell only on Nintendo system.

Around the Network

-continues to not care-



Pixel Art can be fun.

This is why digital distribution can save developers trying something new and can help preserve art in video games. Once DD becomes more main stream, each developer will be able to sell their own games directly allowing greater profits for independent developers. People who want to support a developer for making new and innovative games can do it a lot easier.



I like earth defense force 2017, that's all I have to say on the matter



I HAVE A DOUBLE DRAGON CAB IN MY KITCHEN!!!!!!

NOW A PUNISHER CAB!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SmokedHostage said:
-continues to not care-

and yet... you find... the energy... to post...

 

Sorry, couldn't resist.  Your post sounds like apathy - or 'whatever' at it's best.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

It's rare for a video game to fall into the high art category. Most video games that get praised for their story are popcorn entertainment. Not that it matters to me because lots of forms of high art (ie. classic literature) have put me to sleep. And I hate it when art snobs say that you are stupid for not appreciating the hidden messages and themes within their high art. And I'm not afraid to lose my e-art snob cred by admitting that. I much prefer popcorn entertainment that knows its place and doesn't pretend to be more than it is rather than pretentious arthouse crap that thinks it's god's gift to literature, cinema, gaming, etc. I game, read, watch movies/tv, listen to music, etc. to gain some sort of enjoyment, entertainment or knowledge (in the case of non-fiction books, documentaries and that sort of thing). Not to see some arrogant, pretentious writer/director relieve themselves throughout a novel, film, music album or game like a narcissist and expect us to believe we are witnessing a privilege.