quote:
Okay, I'm willing to experiment. If this thread doesn't stray into that territory, then I'm happy to leave it open. Otherwise...

this is gonna be hard

OK now lets see. IMHO playing is not an artform. like samosa said. playing a game is like looking at a painting. now the painting is actually art. so the real question here is "are videogames an art form?" well id say yes they are.....(Man now i have to back up my answer i suppose). well here me goes.

first of all game design is not obvious art. its not like a picasso where u go "oh look at that piece of art". if u see a painting, a poem, maybe a play, maybe even designer clothes, sculptures, pottery, youd think to ur self "Art!", but if u saw a videogame most people do not think "Art", they think "entertainment". the difference between videogames and the other mentioned "art forms" is that the role of the audience in all the "other" art forms is passive. whereas in videogames its active. thats why i think its less obvious for game design to be taken in as art.

(man its really hard staying away from what wavinator said to stay away from )

so yes games are art. why? because a lot of creativity is involved in designing a game (and the _bottom_ line is that art involves creativity some way or the other), whole new worlds are built from scratch! its even harder then making those little other paintings because there are just so many more factors at play in videogames. (no offence). its not just about the brush strokes (and how old the painting is, and who made it), its about the polygon count, the smoothness, the colors, the realism, the eye pleasingness, the fluid controls, the immediate responsiveness, the fun factor, the gripping story line, the "making this game work on as many hardware configurations as possible, and still achieving the goal", theres just so much at play when it comes to designing videogames. theres also the art part the programming part, and the music part. u have to design for both parts. you cant just slap together a game engine it probably wont be useful. same way with drawing, nothing will magically appear on ur white paper, you have to work at it.

-if u consider painting art. then yes videogames has that it just uses digital colors instead (based on paper sketches/drawings)
-if you consider sculpting to be an art form, then videogames have that too. (3d modeling and what not)
-if you consider music to be art, the videogames has that too.
-if u consider architecture an art form, then u have to build whole worlds in videogames.
-if you consider novel writing an art form, then for ur information i thought the story in xenogears was better then 99% of the "paper" novels ive read.

so u see. videogames has so much from the art world. it takes all the pieces of art (music, painting, sculpting..etc) and puts it all together to create a "new earth" if u will.

baboosh im tired. enough typing for me today. ive done a lot of typing today for some reason (on these forums i mean)

chow

EDIT: Incase anyone is intrested, there's an article on "the art of game designing" its not that great, but it has some (maybe useful) information. its on my old site. just keep in mind that I wrote it quite a while back. its in the videogame section, in menu, choose articles, and choose game design, and ull get it

EDIT: DOH! I forgot to give the address of my Old Site


"We call em 'natural disasters' but 'he' (or she?) calls them memory leaks!!"
Al
** MY HQ**

[edited by - alfmga on September 3, 2002 7:16:47 PM]

[edited by - alfmga on September 4, 2002 4:41:30 AM]

[edited by - alfmga on September 4, 2002 4:43:08 AM]

quote:Original post by Impossible
I really don''t want this thread to become a "what is art" thread, because those always go nowhere

To be honest, I fail to see how this thread can go anywhere else.

In order to decide whether something belongs in a category, you first need to define that category. Otherwise you are just wasting time.

''Art'' is an incredibly subjective term. Something that is considered art by one person could be considered a heap of useless junk by another. So attempting to define ''art'' to everyone''s satisfaction is also a waste of time.

I don''t think it is particularly important whether playing games are ''art'' or not. (unless the US government is considering banning games like Greece apparently has, and you are looking for a constitutional loophole to avoid it ) I''m not entirely sure what loftyideals is getting at, but a couple of important ideas seem to be lying just below the surface of what he is saying: namely, the concept of emergent complexity from simple rules, and another, perhaps less understood idea of giving the player the ability to play the game with style .

well i might as well post my 2cents...
IMO there are 2 sides to game development. the technical side and the artistic side. naturally the artistic side is to do with, stories, models, textures and sound. while the technical side covers what is needed to put all that artwork together to make a game. to some degree they need to know the details of the other side. but to call game design itself an artform...

game design effects both sides of development. it dictates what the programmers need to program and what direction the art team is going to take. so its sort of a mixed bag. i''d say 50/50.. there will always be those people who will disregard game making as an art form for quite some time.

but then again, game making has been around what 30yrs? mean while, the more mainstream artforms, painting, music etc, have been around for centuries. you cant expect acceptance in the art community straight away.

Computer games represent mathematical and procedural repeating patterns in most cases, which seems to be the opposite of art.

No, that is what computer programs are. In one aspect, computer games are computer programs, certainly. But they are also more than that. It''s like describing a book as "ink on wood pulp". I believe computer games are art, just as books or paintings or music is art. That doesn''t have to mean all computer games must be what you would think of as art. Just as books, music, and paintings can vary in quality and depth, so can games.

As for whether playing a game is art, this depends on the game, I''d say. I mean, you can call your game "Visual C++" with the goal "Make something fun!" and ''playing'' it would be art. It just depends on what the game is.

To use an example you can believe more, take a game like SimCity. Playing the game is sort of art. Right now I don''t think the game is sophisticated enough for the player''s city to be considered art, but the game could theoretically get to that point. Playing any game where you design things can be considered art. Any other game cannot, in my opinion.

~CGameProgrammer( );

the simple fact that movies are considered an art will
force me to say that games are a form of art...
they express a creative design put forth by multiple entities...
much like most movies we see. not all movies are good, not all
games are good.. likewise, some movies are made strictly for
profit (ie: STAR WARS), while others attempt to project an
emotion or underlying message (ala american beauty).
playing a video game isnt art, just as watching a movie isnt..

my formula is this:
art = creativity + message/emotion

that''s my take on it anyway.. i''ve always considered myself
an artist, i draw/paint, write music, and code.. game programming
is the single medium i can express myself using all of these
methods.

-eldee
;another space monkey;
[ Forced Evolution Studios ]

I dunno, some paintings (considered modern art) are just a mess of color spots on a fabric... are those paintings more artistic than a single frame of Monkey Island III ?