Computer Games as an Art Form

Claudius · Post by **Claudius** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:01 pm

I meant that a concrete definition of art is merely mental labeling.

Yogge Sothothe · Post by **Yogge Sothothe** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:03 pm

But that exactly is what is under discussion here. Academic labeling. Which is why I stated previously that this debate concerning whether or not games are art or not is moot to begin with.

Or, if i misunderstood your last post, you are stating that you can label anything art if it fits an arbitrary set of mental conditions. And again, this simply isn't the case. It not just a matter of opinion. There are concrete, defined conditions which need to be met.

Now, whether or not something meets those conditions can be subject to debate. But art as a concept has been and is defined. It is not abstract and nebulous.

Claudius · Post by **Claudius** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:16 pm

Ok so you believe that art is something recognized and described within academia. That is what I disagree with and what my ivory tower comment referenced.

I am not entirely swayed by what the art critic community thinks about art. Sure I listen to them with interest when I get a chance. I like to hear about their oppinion.

But the buck stops with me. What do I think? So if academia recognizes the mona lisa as great art I certainly listen to them. Of course. But in cases where the opinion of antiquity (or novelty) does not agree with my own discernment then I have to make up my own mind.

And due to my influences in studying Buddhism I believe that art as a social convention is stamped by the 3 marks of conditioned existence: impermanent, non-self, and unsatisfactory (merely labeled - cannot be grasped). Art as an expression of buddha nature is a different story but in that case we are sort of borrowing the word art from its social context - shoplifting it. The reason we would borrow the word is simply because it is a stirring word...we might have experiences in our own life producing art. Just as the word heart or clarity might be relevant to buddha nature although it also has a conventional meaning.

So why is my views on art/buddhism relevant to you? Because buddhism is a response to the same world. A buddhists same observation can be communicated to a non-buddhist they simply have to learn eachothers language. Its all about examining direct experience rather than getting caught up in appearances.

fable · Post by **fable** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:19 pm

Guys, this thread is about "Computer Games as an Art Form." I have no objection to any other mini-discussion, but I think the thread should basically reflect the content created by the person who started it. If anyone wants to argue that there should be no criteria for art, the best thing to do is start up a new thread.

I had no idea this would go on for so long, or I would have written something about that, before. Which is why I took a brief part, and obviously shouldn't have.

Please, let's go back to the theme at hand.

Claudius · Post by **Claudius** » Sun Mar 23, 2008 10:29 pm

In that case I think computer games are an art form but I suspect I have a different basis for saying that than the OP desires.

I think that based upon the assumption that art is a mental construct they can certainly be held to be art.

I am indifferent to whether Planescape Torment will be on display in a museum

So to me I think its not of high importance that it be recognized on par with say classic literature or popular music. In short I respect the creators of video games for producing good gaming experiences which might include thought provoking content. But I don't care if the media is given props or not (slang for respected*).

*universally

Ode to a Grasshopper · Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:14 am

I've looked upon video games as art for a long time, think it was playing Return to Zork as a kid that did it.

@Fable - if you haven't done so, I recommend giving the original Super Mario Brothers a try if you can find a copy (since emulators are a no-no), it's mathematically (if not artistically) brilliant.

C Elegans · Post by **C Elegans** » Fri Mar 28, 2008 1:51 pm

Sorry for the OT post, thanks for creating a new thread, Fable.

Just to repost the part that was about computer games:

Regarding computer games in general, I think their characteristics as a media makes the qualify as art easily, in the same as as film does. This is however merely theoretical. Computer games still have several steps to take to be art, there are several missing factors, but it could be included if one wanted. In the same way as I don't view "Rambo" as art, I don't view PS:T as art, but if someone defines "Rambo" as art (rather than "entertainment", which I view as a separate category from art), I would argue that that position would have to include PS:T as art, too.
However, from what little I know about video games, I think that if there is any computer game that really could qualify as art, it is not PS:T but Ico and Shadow of the Colossus.

Dottie · Post by **Dottie** » Sat Mar 29, 2008 1:23 pm

C Elegans wrote:However, from what little I know about video games, I think that if there is any computer game that really could qualify as art, it is not PS:T but Ico and Shadow of the Colossus.

Its interesting that you should mention Ico. The creator, Fumito Ueda, has an art education, and have also stated that if it wasn't for video games he would probably be an artist instead. I don't think this is a coincidence. To say something relevant, original and substantial you need knowledge about the context in which you want these properties. You also need a language that can transmit whatever you want to say. Currently game designers does not typically have the kind of background and education that would enable them to have those two things.