Games as Art?

boabyfett · Post by **boabyfett** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 8:02 am

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/games/archi ... brawl.html

vaguely interesting.

personally i think there are hints of it. but commercial viability always comes first.

but i need to head to work

debate later

b

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 8:14 am

Definitely they can be art.

They are a creative medium, aren't they?

Corm · Post by **Corm** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 11:48 am

Just about anything is classed as art these days. You only have to look at the shite that Warhol dude shat out a few decades back for ref.

Whether something is art or not depends on how much of a wanker you are. The more of a wanker the more likely you are to see artistic merit in something.

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 12:00 pm

Corm · Post by **Corm** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 12:18 pm

Yeah what? You may not like it but I'm no wrong am I?

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 12:24 pm

I would say that defining whether something is art or not is 'in the eye of the beholder.'

Which supports your hypothesis for everyone that disagrees with me

boabyfett · Post by **boabyfett** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 5:20 pm

see i think a better definition of art is a creative process which produces things of value which enrich our society culturally. rather than a ten million cgi budget or a laborious plot where a boy wizard doesnt die cause that would ruin any sequals.

And very few computer games push past that boundary. half life 2 and deus ex are close. but start relying on wow factor too. the indie market is probably where art is strongest.

Actually one point recently was lord of rings online. where the characters who helped me in the prologue died. and the ranger became evil

. i wish i was evil. probably what sold the game to me.

There getting close. Art will out probably when production costs crash. and EA will never produce art ever, especially in a SIMS game.

b