Are there any videogames which you would consider being "high art"?

Are there any videogames which you would consider being "high art"?

Other urls found in this thread:


I wouldn't consider most art as high art tbh

i hope nobody takes this seriously


I am seriously sick of the faggots that proclaim video games are art.

for anyone that wants to make their own
Vidya and Videogame are not one better than the other, just a reminder

gone home


Things like level design and composition can be considered art principles, which vidya has.
But vidya isn't meant to be seen as art, the focus has to be on the gameplay. Otherwise it can't be a game anymore.

They are though. I don't understand why people get triggered by calling it art.

I don't understand why you'd want to apply a meaningless label to video games
"art" is the most vague, useless term ever conceived

>but yeah, totally art guys, swear on me mum gender non-specific authority figure

The hypocrisy and mental gymnastics those numales pull off never cease to amaze me.

Yeah it's a vague label. That's why I don't understand why people get so mad about it. We use vague labels all the time when talking about games.

Yes. The

Vidya should be art in Germany though since I think there's a loophole for swastikas if it's in art. So if vidya is art WWII games can have the proper flags instead of the bullshit where showing a man taking a bullet to the face is alright but a fucking flag is a criminal offence.

If it's a meaningless label, why do you care so much?

I'd consider all videogames art, just mostly shit art. I don't make a distinction between "high art" and other art

Anyone who uses the term "high art" is a pretentious hipster faggot. Art is defined by it's lack of practical use. Just think of a painting that is considered both art and useful, or a movie, or a song.

videogames as art is a cancerous meme that needs to die.

Well, more acutely, the entire art scene in general is fucking cancer and needs to die.

Like: what have these fucks produced since like world war fucking 2 that is of any interest to people outside their pretentious little circle? Dali is pretty much the last proper painter most people can name, aside from novelty acts like Pollock or Warhol. And Bob Ross, 'cause he had a TV show and a bitchin' fro.

If you want videogames to be any good, keep them as far away from artists as you fucking can.

Here is art, you tasteless nu-males

They are even without all the fags that make the pretentious bullshit.

Seems like your anger is fueled by a very dim perception of art

Fallout 4 and the remastered version of Skyrim.

Get fucked

I'm not saying that there are no more good, perhaps even great painters out there. But realistic painting is hardly relevant to "art" world these days. For example, the artist you posted is hardly famous. Dude doesn't even have so much as an English language wiki page. Being really good at painting is no longer something that will make you culturally relevant. That sort of accessible shit is shoved off to the sidelines, for the plebs to enjoy.

The kind of person who does art like Mikel Olazabal is much more like the sort of people who make videogames for the sake of making good videogames, than the sort of people who make mainline contemporary art, to whom the message is more important than the execution.

Many are. I'd say Katamari Damacy, some FFs, Xenogears, Killer 7 and many other as art.

High art is a fag meme.

Games as art = games need to be less videogame, more "experience" is equally faggy, casual and more than anything, just a subservice ploy to push some form propaganda of propaganda into unwilling devs (the few still out there)

But many, if not most, games are art in the most abstract sense.

This might seem like a strange choice, but if I had to pick one, it would probably be Psychonauts. Leaving gameplay aside, it has interesting characters and a unique storytelling style married almost seamlessly with its engaging level design and art style. Playing Psychonauts feels like you're controlling the inside of someone's mind. It's an interesting concept to explore, so yeah I would say it's probably worthy of credit for artistic merit even if you don't consider it "art."

Kill yourself. Game as art implies that it's a masterpiece in how it plays, not how it looks. You don't go to a concert so you can look at fancy dresses, you go for music.

Video games van never be art. The textures, music, and other things could be considered art. What makes a video game is it's coding, and mechanics. They perform the same functions as toys by developing certain skills, and helping us deal with abstract concepts. They are for teaching not art.

What this guy said, kill yourself OP

Nah, they're to different.
There might be a shared artist mentality, sitting in one spot, going over and over something until its "perfect". But they just don't compare to each other.


I think people just have different opinions on what art actually is.

Most artists consider literally anything to be art. Cars, billboards, site designs, etc.
Most non artists don't consider anything outside of music/paintings/drawings to be art.

There is an "art" to making games, however. That much is undeniable based upon how many shit games exist.

The world you're looking for is technique

I believe any medium can have examples of "high art". Illustration, painting, music, theatrics, etc… So to put it simply:


I'm sick of seeing ugly pieces of shit publicly presented as art at local public institutions paid for with my fucking tax dollars, when I get to my 60's I'm going to go on a shitty statue sledgehamming spree. Everything looks like shit because no one cares about things looking nice, they just care about special snowflake expression
I need to take some pictures if I ever return since words can't properly convey how shitty it looks. It used to be so comfy, and seeing how they've butchered it into a shell of its former self makes me pissed off more than I've ever been in my life. I'll never be able to see it again like it was. That church was part of my town's culture, now it's been ruined by post-modernist neopop garbage architecture. Fuck whoever took over and transformed my church into a den of ass

High art is nothing but a new buzzword. It's leftists trying to alter definitions for their agendas. There is no "High Art" only art. Saying otherwise would be to imply some art has greater importance than others that is not based on merit. And video games are certainly not art

If I remember correctly, Hideo Kojima once said that a video game is an interactive art gallery rather than an art piece itself. And I think he's quite right.

High art just means art of the highest quality, the best in it's field

Art is art, if you were just discussing quality you would use terms like "bad art" or "good art" there is no high art. Sage because shitty thread

Anyone who uses this phrase with anything other than derision is a cocksucking pretentious retard. There are two kinds of art, objectively good art- which is skilfully rendered, paying attention to proportions, colour, and design, and then there is dogshit, which does not.

"High art" is a term invented for faggots, by faggots, to describe specific pieces of typically mediocre art that they subjectively assign ludicrous value to.

Well, certainly sometimes. But there is another group that would more accurately describe the people you're referring to.

Dubs tell the truth

Haven't seen it. Haven't cared to.
Absolute dogshit.
It's a clever way to continue the Rocky series and I would want to see a sequel.

Only a Sith thinks in absolutes.

That sentence itself is an absolute so you must be a Sith

I want a vidya gaem that looks like that, where I can explore everything. And fight sickass monsters and shit.

Not with that jpg artifacting, it ain't. Try again.


Video games are never art. They're simply an experience and a toy that you can spend time with for more than 5 minutes.
They're supposed to be fun, engaging, and puzzling and nothing more.

that's such a fagatronic turn of phrase. what do you call "high art". i would say some games are perfection in action and are "artistry", but art? no

Video games can be art. Stop being hyper sensitive faggots reacting to the negative sides of "art" or to those trying to pretend there are things unacceptable for videogames because they are "art".

Most games are not art, but some of them can be. Being interactive or with fun as the main element doesn't stop it from being art.

Post a game that is art worthy that doesn't rely on story as a main focus.

Fuck off, it's this attitude that let liberal faggots latch onto video games in the first place.

Stop bumping this shitty thread

The fact that some worthless pieces of shit have dragged something valuable through the mud doesn't invalidate the thing itself. I don't understand why some people are happy to let liberals perpetuate the idea that art is dead.

pics related

Most games that rely on 'story' as a main focus are shitty art, for the same reason that a movie that was 50% scrolling text would be shitty art, even if that scrolling text was fucking Shakespeare. Deus Ex being the most notable exception.


How are these games "art"?
If you think good game design is art, that's not correct. It's just good game design.
And I know you can say
But games aren't "art" art.
You play, think, achieve, and eventually, win (if the game on hand has an ending).
They don't convey any emotion other than

taste meets saturation, ideals meets nihilism, civility meets hedonism, facts meet fiction, tool meets toy, technological boon meets simulatory bane,

reference points meets deviation, eternal truths meets arbitrary whim, appreciation meets trivialization, worship meets desecration,
creation meets destruction,
life meets death.



This guy is right. Not every song or novel is a fucking timeless masterpiece. Some of them are mindless bubblegum pop or trashy self-insert fanfiction. They serve their own purposes. Only a select few games are able to elevate the medium. Also, VSav and Metal Slug? Fuck yeah, mah nigga. I'd also add LittleBigPlanet, and Skullgirls.


Get the fuck out of here with that mindless drivel.

Viewtiful Joe and Rayman

Again, why do you consider these games to be art?

He doesn't, this is a shitty attempt at trying to influence opinion on Holla Forums. Liberals always try to change the definition of terms to suit their agendas. Hence the term "High Art."

It's hard to put into so few words, really. But have you played Rayman? The game is a paragon of the platformer genre. Everything is beautiful and the gameplay is is challenging, yet ever more rewarding. Everything is truly perfect in Rayman.

Similarly in Viewtiful Joe, the game has an artstyle that permeates the entire game and cooperates with it's mechanics to provide a verisimilitude to the world of Movieland.

Videogames are not art, they are a product that contain the work of artists (visual, music)

Are you literally retarded? What fucking emotion is "explore thing" supposed to be?

I didn't realize liberal brainwashing had this strong a hold on you. I'm sorry for trying to get through to you.

There's no fucking art/non-art division you fucking tool, that's a liberal invention to bolster their dumbfuck egos and allow things to be placed in galleries based on whim rather than quality. All games are art, all movies are art, all paintings are art, all music is art. Some of them (like 99.9%) are just really fucking shitty.

as for artstyle, see>>10583286
as for gameplay see>>10583102
Just because rayman is a good platformer doesn't mean it's art.


shit taste, honestly

It seems the one Liberal brainwashing has a hold on is you.

Videogames are more of a toy. It's value is determined by how much fun you have with it. The videogame can contain art, but the videogame itself isn't art

Kill yourself.

The Mona Lisa is a toy by any sane definition of toy, you fucking idiot.

should be vidcon/vidya/video game/experience

Who'd have known that a talented shitposter such as yourself could get this many repeating digits

I'm not even the same guy but


You are a sad little man, , you're a moron

Nice quads and bait.

Well look at that, I think kek is fucking with us

Doesn't mean it isn't, either. The fact that it's an amazing platformer, however…

Holy shit that policewoman sculpture is fucking hot. /k/ porn when?

High art in competition with other mediums of art? I'm sure one exists, but I'd be hard pressed to think of one. Probably some CRPG from the 90s like Planescape Torment or Baldur's Gate, Then again I'm a pleb and will probably never play them. But high art in the realm of video games? Easy contenders from what I've played are Deus Ex, Metal Gear Solid 3, Doom from a pure mechanical and gameplay perspective, Souls games, DaS in particular.

Being under the effect of cultural hegemony ahhh
i remember being like that

>You've been brainwashed by liberals!

Like, yeah, that was the colloquial in merica like ten years ago, but these days not even they call themselves that.

Not that classic liberalism doesn't have it's own glaring issues, but they don't really have anything to do with this awful hippy bullshit.

I've yet to see an answer that isn't debatable/baiting.
How are games art?

Video games are not art. Video games are toys, my first post explains it here, , and stop changing you ID faggot it's not fooling anybody

And this is why liberals will never be successful at any movement. They are not willing to question their ideology even a little bit

at the risk of sounding like a faggot i think it comes down to personal definition. i really like well-engineered machines, for example - fine swiss watches with tiny mechanical cogs, interesting weaponry (most of Germany's WW2 arsenal is basically magic), that sort of shit. i call that a hobby or an interest. i have a friend who is into literally all the same shit as I am and he calls that fine watch or incredible airplane design "art", and i mean you can't really say he's necessarily wrong - they're mastery in physical form

How does it feel to be the cancer killing video games?

A scultpure is just a rock.

A toy can simultaneously be art while still being a toy. They aren't mutually exclusive chief. I won't disagree that games are toys, but they can be art at the same time.

I never said that. I said it serves the same function as toys, and toys regardless of how fun they might be are still perform the function of developing a child's mind and body. In the case of vidya not really that much on the body though

a toy is just plastic.

Liberals are the "dude weed lmao" part of the leftist coalition, as well as some of the (more) retarded parts of the libertarian coalition.

How loose does the definition of art have to be for games to be art, and how strict for them not to qualify? If it's too loose a definition you could start calling plenty of things art that fail the test of common sense.
this thread is the same every time

Yes, what's your point?

Because mine was that you can make something sound so simple like that but it doesn't mean that it can't simultaneously be art

I disagree. I think of art as the product of a skill; a physical representation of ability. It's captivating and makes man think about how incredible his species is to have produced something so stunning. To me, it's not a question whether video games can qualify as art, but I don't know if there has been anything that has ever reached that level of quality.

Ok. I agree, if I get what your saying. Which I think I do.

I've come to the conclusion that games can be art in the world of games, which is perfection in mechanics. But they can't be art in the general sense like movies, music paintings, etc.

Art is the combination of medium and ideas .
vidya is a medium and ideas are everywhere inside that vidya

Yes, that's absolutely

I don't

I think art

and video games are just code.

ur mum xD

So would you compare a video game to a museum of sorts?

Don't let fags shitting up the medium keep you from thinking it isn't. It is art, but what normalfags call "art" in gaming is garbage and pointless since Doom is much better and is just as art as that shit.


What makes something art in the general sense then?
Just being art in a medium that isn't video games?

The lack of

To add on.

Conveying a strong emotion within your psyche. ei: sadness, anger, joy.

So something like the intensity of the final round in fightan or FPS?
Or the Tzeentchian "just as planned" in strategy games?
The art house needs cleaning badly, no doubt about that, but it's because vidya is part of it more than anything else as far as I'm concerned.

Bring back craftsmanship.

Adding to my post , some examples would be something graphically impressive or well-programmed. Even though there it's not video games, demoscene stuff always impressed me by showing the maximum capacity of the hardware.

I consider Super Mario Galaxy "High art"

You know why?
1.) Unique and experimental level design and level mechanics

2.) pleasing aesthetic without being too over-the-top cartoon-y or photo-realistic

3.) A fantastic score/soundtrack performed by the Mario Galaxy Orchestra that follows Koji Kondos theory of game music (the music exists to illustrate and help augment the feeling and tone of the level)

The western game industry is run almost entirely by Hollywood special-effects people. They do NOT know what true art in video gaming is, to the average western game developer the following is considered "High Art"

1.) Easy controls and mechanics as to not distract from the narrative you are trying to present and to not offend new players

2.) Game graphics have to either be hyper photorealistic OR overly aesthetic

3.) Music must always sound like a big Hollywood epic with generic scores by Hans Zimmar knockoffs

That is the big difference here. Games are art, but it feels like only the Japanese game industry knows why

The defining feature of video games is gameplay, it is what sets it apart from other artforms. If we are to be purists about it, the only way to really evaluate a video game as art is on the merits of its gameplay depth and the agency afforded the player. As things stand though video games also frequently incorporate other art forms in their composition so to really give a game a comprehensive appraisal means also — at the very least — evaluating aesthetic cohesion.

Personally I would consider games such as Mirror's Edge, the Half Life games, Neverhood and dorf fort to qualify as high art.

Also, to comment on the spergs saying games aren't art;
-If computer modelling, music, and the schools of game theory (level and mechanics design) are each individually considered art, how come they are suddenly not considered art when compiled as a video game?

I have yet to see retards answer this one
Yes they are you stupid spergs. The only dubious factor is wither or not they are considered good art. Liberal bullshit teaches us art simply cannot be judged thanks to cultural relativism. You completely misinterpreted the "Why is modern art so bad?" video people keep referencing

Anyone know the source of that webm?

Yet there are absolutes in this world. Gravity is an absolute, and so is death.

Is it so hard to understand that parasites attach unearned meaning to their pieces, say to other parasites that "they just don't get it" to threaten their credibility, which causes them to praise their horridly below average work, creating a cycle of fear and exploitation?

This is what my pretentious ass calls be ready for the useful but cringy as fuck term
Gameplay essentialism
and it is nice to someone else hold the same believe

I mean look at ICO and Shadow of the colossus from deep but small and limited mechanics they made a god tier vidya tbh

Stoped reading there. I actually wanted to accept your opinion but that's awful. If you need to go to school for game design, you shouldn't be involved with the industry.

Its an expression, sperg

Games are for fun and nothing more or less.
Everyone's wrong.

Having fun still expresses joy, which is an expression of emotion

It sounds to me like you need more mental gymnastics to say games aren't art

Art is for faggots

Holla Forums pls go

Is there a reason you're defending games as art?
Art in what sense? Art is so abstract and vague that this whole thread is meaningless come to think about it.


Because I believe they can be art and I want games to be evaluated as such

Retards hate calling video games art because they feel like it'll lead to games being interactive movies.

But that is just one school of game design, or the western school. The Japanese school of game design tells us the art in vidya comes from gameplay and gameplay only, and in the end, that is the only school of game design people should be taking seriously.

Its like saying all paintings aren't art because of the relativist movements

The thing being

Are you still going? Video games can never be art, they are for fun that's it. And that's ok

I just think you're wrong. But please tell me to keep going, Mr. (15)

Video games were better off being in a niche and ignored, where they grew on their own, now everyone wants in on it and nearly everything is shit.

Being evaluated as art only means you attract parasites from the art "industry" the same bullshit that brings us this

Ok. So the most important thing is the gameplay, which sounds about right.
But what would I get from the gameplay that VIDEOGAMES should be considered an artform?
All I get is a quick,
That's not art.

That happened with every medium though. Its not exclusive to video games, its just a matter of waiting it out for the western game industry to grow up and realize games don't have to be interactive movies.

level design and mechanics design aren't exact sciences m8

Still doesn't answer my question. What do I get from gameplay that would lead me to believe games are art?

A challenge, an experience, something to engage your mind. Sometimes that's really all Gameplay has to achieve, if its something that brings you back to playing it. Its good, and I think it can be considered an art

reminder that this is the Holla Forums equivalent to bringing up someone's username or post history

Thanks for giving me an actual answer.
Your first sentence is actually what I consider "fun".
If you consider that "art", I guess that's fine. As long as we like it for the same reasons.

No. Video games can never be art.

it's not going to "grow up" because the art world is in a state of stagnation and stasis. What I showed you is the norm among "art" these days. The whole "industry" is dominated by these types. If you want games to be considered an artform, you have entirely the wrong idea.

Games are games, nothing more, nothing less. Art is fucking stupid and it's a breeding ground for parasites because of the whole interpretation wiggle room it gives them, it's the fucking norm in my classes when interpreting a work to cast off the "artist's" intent and to shove in your own.

I literally have had literary and art teachers (both required for my degree in my fucking technology major for some fucking reason) who have literally said that the artist's interpretation does not necessarily matter in the first fucking class with them.
You do not understand the hell that is the "art" world at this moment.

You have no idea what you're stepping into. The point of art, in truth, is not to force others to consider it art. The point is to make it and that's it.

The only thing that matters is if people enjoy it. If it's just another fucking piece pushed by a half rate fuck who pushes his bullshit with blackmail and social coercion, it's not worth even being near games.
Games are not art because it takes ACTUAL EFFORT TO MAKE THEM.


No, it's equivalent to quoting a bunch of posts and calling samefag; with IDs, we can identify samefags much more easily.

t. (1)

Regular poorly written post or Ol' Kojima pulling a Todd to shill some jeu à clef ARG about an artist displaced from his medium by even more pretentious faggots?

Gotta love postmodernism

Violated Heroine

Braid was a worthwhile puzzle/platformer, at the very least.

Labels sure are important for certain kind of autists, arent they?

Games are games, they can contain art in them, and you could say doing the music, drawing, and hell even programming to be artforms in their own right, but the final product is, and should always be, a game

Just like a painting should always be a painting, like pussy blood thrown at a canvas. and music should always be music, not nigger mumbling


Part of conveying a message well is in the execution. I don't understand how they don't get that. They're essentially like 5 year olds who make some crappy drawing where you can't tell what it is, and they say "it's a dog, see?"

Oedipus Rex (1957)

I want to eat that berry

It's not THE BEST GAME EVER 11/10 but it's definitely not shit. The story isn't 2deep4u but it's entertaining in a 90s anime sort of way.

no, because the moment a developer tries to make their game into an art, its a lost cause and an inevitable piece of shit

games aren't an art, they're a craft like building a house, for the best results you have to follow rules to make it stand on its own before you experiment with other aspects of it

i love all forms of arts, but artists are fucking faggots.

I was about to make that exact remark.


Nothing comes to mind, there's no reason to believe that vidya is or can be high art. Unless you consider modern (or art movements from the late 1800s on) the height on human expression. Here is an example of deep uplifting art, really makes you think, huh?
Man I wish vidya could be like this, that way the medium will grow up I want to avoid shitting this place up with Holla Forums talk but it's a lamentable fact that right wingers are not generally artistically minded, otherwise we may be able to push back in a significant capacity against post modern tripe permeating the art world.

Yeah, modern arts seem to be a social signaling contest + daddy's money time sink.

I wish Jackson Pollock stuff was just a brief fad that went away.
I can tolerate seeing it once every several months at the most.

To say games aren't art begs the question of why they aren't art, and what art is.
The answer I often get is that "entertainment" is different from "art".
Yet isn't art just a piece of craft designed to elicit a feeling? Be it adoration, fear, sorrow, futility, etc?
I see no reason why entertainment should be excluded from that list.
The other reason I often hear is that it's because they're commercialized. But lets be honest: people have always made profit off of painting, literature, music… This doesn't make these mediums "not art", so why should that apply to newer mediums?

Or is it just that? That they're too new?

please, watch your tongue around the nice paintings

When the fuck has a liberal said something that amounts to that. Fucking when.

The lefty lie about art that needs to die is that art is, (assuming it has a 'correct' message), inherently deserving of some level respect. Because that's fucking wrong. Art deserves no more respect than literally any other use of human capital. If your fucking janitor does a really good job some day at cleaning the floor, that deserves more respect than a shitty work of art that displaces very little care or artifice. Art doesn't need to be realistic painting or drawing, or sculpture, but to be worthy of respect, it needs to display skill and effort.

It doesn't mean a damn thing whether video games are art. A good mindless shooter is still far more respectable and indeed more fucking valuable to society than some walking simulator.

Imagine having his most famous piece take up an entire wall at your local gallery. There are other good pieces around it too. Including this one, which can only be appreciated in person. As a result I can't just ignore the Pollock.

Most German video games censor the Swastika.

That's what he's saying. In German law "art" is apparently exempt from the rules about banning swastikas, so vidya as a medium need to be recognized as art by the German government before kraut/v/ can have uncensored Wolfenstein.

"Art" is fucking GREAT, because you don't actually need to "define" what it is. If someone angrily asks you exactly what the fuck your pretentious cunt ass defines "art" as, you can just smugly whip your cock out and start jerking off on the spot, raising your eyebrows in absolute disbelief at the absolute pleb that stands before you.

"Art" is such a fucking empty word that means whatever the absolute fuck the person saying or hearing it wants it to mean. It's post-modernism at its most manipulative and disgusting.

The term "High Art" is fucking horseshit. Modern Art is also mostly garbage.
Do I think video games are art? Yes
Do I think most of them are good art? Fuck no.
Do I think all art should be respected? No, but I respect the rights of content creators even if I hate most of them and their work.

Painting is art.
Music is art.
Acting is art.
Animation is art.
Writing and novels are art.

A video game can be any combination of all of the above… and is not art. Somehow.

There was a time when Opera was considered the finest form of art made by men because it had writing, it had music and singing, it had narrative, it had crafted and painted setpieces. If that was anything to go by then for all intents and purposes video-games are more art than that painting of yours.

But then again Opera has all but disappeared, replaced by movies which are the lowest common denominator for audiences. The same way vidya has been catering more and more towards the lowest common denominator nowadays.

Scribbling a bunch of stupid shit on a blank canvas, rendering the same man-jawed dyke on a screen, or creating the bland and souless environment for the nth time is not art. For painting to be art it needs to be objectively good, captivating, intriguing, or any combination of the above. Zdzisław Beksiński makes art and the closest association would be Okami.

Banging your head against a drum isn't art and absolutely nothing in video game OST ever came close to art. Entertaining, fuck yes, Furi being a recent example, but it's nowhere near fucking art.

Don't fucking kid yourself, doing MoCap isn't even close to acting you dumb shit.

Said literally nobody ever as animation grows more and more choppy with each passing release.

If I stick my dick so far up your ass it doesn't have any room to push forward anymore doesn't mean you've now doubled the length of your dick you mongrel.

no, it wasn't.

all artists are gay tbh.

Not an argument.

You can always nitpick bad examples to "prove" your point. 2/10 made me reply.

Piss off Rolf, you're never going to make any money by shoving a spray can up your ass then spraying a canvas with the power of your ass-muscles you validation seeking hipster. The only way you're piece of shit is going to get exposed anywhere is after paying the gallery owner / mayor so much cash not even Da Vinci's works would be able to cover your loses.

Good job nigger, you post the most pathethic attempt of autism passing off as modern art with the soundtrack that could be inserted in any fantasy-esque game and would fit perfectly. And I'm not even ripping on EL, I fucking love that game, but get the stick out of your ass if you think it's anywhere close to fucking art. Ashley Barret is a more proper example if anything.

Why do people fucking care? Can't people understand that different works cover different subjects and have different goals? Why do people still think that good entertainment is in any way worse than good art. No one would be able to survive without any entertainment, unless he thinks of art as entertaining I do personally* and not just a way of developing on his own. Entertainment is just as necessary as art, but they are completely different things and cannot be compared to each other. But every now and then, some gigantic faggot would just come out saying that entertainment is worse, or a waste of time just because it doesn't help you to develop yourself. Well of course it fucking doesn't, because it's not the point. Find me one fucking human that could go through his/her life without being entertained once, you can't because humans like those don't fucking exist. I understand wanting to use as much of the time you have on developing yourself as a person, but I feel like all of those faggots who really care if something is art or not just completely forgot how to have fun** in their lives.

Not only that, but you will NEVER create art if you go into creating with the idea that you should create "art". You can only create art if you have a good idea, something to get across, a lot of knowledge and skill to portray your idea the best you can.



==FUCK== Here is the text without fucked up spoilers

Why do people fucking care? Can't people understand that different works cover different subjects and have different goals? Why do people still think that good entertainment is in any way worse than good art. No one would be able to survive without any entertainment, unless he thinks of art as entertaining I do personally and not just a way of developing on his own. Entertainment is just as necessary as art, but they are completely different things and cannot be compared to each other. But every now and then, some gigantic faggot would just come out saying that entertainment is worse, or a waste of time just because it doesn't help you to develop yourself. Well of course it fucking doesn't, because it's not the point. Find me one fucking human that could go through his/her life without being entertained once, you can't because humans like those don't fucking exist. I understand wanting to use as much of the time you have on developing yourself as a person, but I feel like all of those faggots who really care if something is art or not just completely forgot how to have fun in their lives.

Not only that, but you will NEVER create art if you go into creating with the idea that you should create "art". You can only create art if you have a good idea, something to get across, a lot of knowledge and skill to portray your idea the best you can.

Maybe I'll just go kill myself

Art isn't real.

Someone's so mad they don't realize (or would rather not acknowledge) I used their own argument against them.

Not that any of this matters to me; you can say whatever the hell you want. Many people would not call Duchamp's sculptures art, and many people said Picasso's paintings were not art when he first unveiled them either. Art is a reflection of our time, and there will always be naysayers.

3/10 made me type a longer reply. Have fun being a contrarian.

The problem is, when people declare video games as art, it's by what message is gives, not how it executes that message.
All true works of art display the craft, from Starry Night to Sassoferrato's Virgin Mary. Video games are made of code and no snooty art critic appreciates masterfully coded material. The only people who appreciate good coding are other people who code.

well they can't be considered games , that's for sure

Art is more than fads and perception, and the fads of the times can hold art back like with how modern art encourages laziness via postmodernism.

Duschamps and Picasso were and still are pretty shit despite what your art history teacher tells you about them whilst sucking his own metaphorical dick (which he will probably make a poor illustration of later).

That's just some faggot that was too stupid to invent a camera. Sculpture is the real deal.

You can illustrate things that wouldn't otherwise exist. That's something you can't do with a camera. There's also a painterly feel to it.

Marcel Duchamp was art's first ironic shitposter tbh fam.

post gondola

That is exactly what it is. Art is art because people pay attention to it and acknowledge what they percieve.
Correct, much like how games nowadays have suffered from lazy devs and meddling publishers as player's perspective of games have shifted over the years. This is not exclusive to scultpures and paintings either; look at how music has changed since classical times.
Marcel Duchamp (spell the name right at least shithead) is one that I absolutely agree on you in that he is not very talented beyond knowing how to spark controversy. Picasso however was actually a great classical painter before he started to experiment in deviant forms of art. Whether cubism is better is subjective but he is far better than the likes of say Mondrian if you ask me.


A work of art is its own thing, not its consequence. People's reaction to the it is not art, unless it's performance art where the captive audience is a part of the work. While its true that art can be a reflection of the times and history can help us understand it but the work of art is still its own thing.
If we're going off of the fads and perception definition then he will be forever known for making symbolic illustration, the thing children start off doing, popular and I would say eventually it eventually metastasized into the cancer we have now. But that's art for ya, literally.

What is it about the sombreness of the gondola that drives me to feel this way

also what song is that?

Wrong, you stupid nigger; the consequence is the entire point of art. Art's goal is to evoke a feeling out observers ever since classical times. To feel calm and religious fervor out of a divine painting, or terrified and appalled out of an image of hell. There is no art without the observer, even if the observer is the artist himself. Try again, dumbass.

You're mixing up intent with consequence. Even then there's the execution, the work of art itself, to think of. I know I'm being pedantic it's better to be that than cancerous like the postmodernists.

That is a whole lot of words to say nothing. You said art is its own thing independent of what others see in it; so carving an incredible horse sculpture and burying it so nobody will ever see it and not telling anyone - is that art? Something that will never be seen nor heard of or registered about again?

I'm past caring anymore anyway. Nothing I say here will change the minds of people. Fuck postmodernism, fuck lazy artists, fuck everyone who contributed towards blaspheming the word "art" to the point where it has become a curse and something to be avoided rather than celebrated. I'm going to play some fucking vidya.

Consider this:

The most glorious painters, architects and sculptors of yesterday wouldn't be doing those things if they were born today.

art is about being good at your craft
drawings/paintings arent inherently art, they need to be well made to be art

Of course video games are art, but just because they are art it doesn't mean they are good art.

Is art. The rest of it is unrelated to the process of it becoming art.

I think these old great artists used to be rich anyway or had some sort of support which allowed them to spend their time doing what they loved.

if its not "god art" then its not art. art implies (or at least should) skill.

Reading the ignorant opinions on Holla Forums about the subject of art always disturbs me

Art is just art. It can be shit, it can be great. Something being art is not a badge of merit on its own, it still has to prove itself. Just like "badly sculpted dude sucking himself off" is art, but the that still doesn't change the fact that it looks like shit.

If it looks like shit it's shit, and if you have any ideas different than that you deserve to die by nigger mob

Because nobody around here has their head so far up their own ass to think of something meaningless and devoid of any actual value as worthwhile.
Art cannot send man to another planet. Art cannot cure somebody of illness. Art cannot provide basic things such as nourishment or shelter.
Artists are fucking worthless. A cook in a fast food joint contributes more to society than you.

Oh, and I forgot to add: a sharp rock on a stick has more objective value than a piece of art.
That is how absolutely meaningless art is.

seems correct

wrong faggot

good art can be sold for good money, so while it has no practical use, it still can be traded for something with real value, even furry drawings get sold for thousands.

also you are assuming artists create art to satisfy mundane needs, when in most cases artists that work on their own creations do so to please their own soul or to shoot for fame.

But he's talking about objective value.
What you're talking about is perceived value.

Yes it's a money laundering scheme to get money from the pretentious rich people, and governments. This is the way it's always been, , this opinion is a bit extreme but if we are looking at modern art he isn't wrong either. Modern artists have done irreparable damage to art as a whole, there is no fixing it at this point. Of course none of this changes the fact that video games are not art

Well let's

Maybe you should go back to tumblr then

mental gymnastics don't change the real world.

i mean i am sure that in the universe of objective value a hammer can be an incredible valuable item but in the real world things don't work like that

You clearly don't know what objective or perceived mean.

what is value theory my negro

None of those idiotic responses have made me any less disturbed.




Ironic that you're calling responses "idiotic" when you're the one resulting to the lowest form of retort known as "name-calling"
You're not actually debating anything, you're just asserting you're right and providing nothing else except a vale of self-superiority.

There's 2600 active users on here and only ~100 UIDs in the thread you whimpering monkey

Is this how you react to any form of differing opinion? You're not even responding to anything anybody's saying.

PS:T is fucking awful as a game, it's story is it's one saving grace. I cannot judge a game by story alone, it is not a novel.

Somebody get me a government grant, I need to bring my art to the masses.

No, they received favors or pardons, aka I'll give you money if you make something great so then I can slap my name on it and receive fame for it . My point was artists of those times used the best tools they had available at the time to create, or recreate, their perspective on reality. Which is why I find it hilarious when someone says video games aren't art when referring to paintings from people who wouldn't be painting if they were born today.

Speak English, faggot! bez żartów

I understand and it's fucking sickening; the state of art now is just a sign of how far we've fallen.
If we ever get rid of those parasites that fester in our society then we might have a chance to finally make art that means something.

I don't care if I'm doubleposting like a faggot at this point.

nice bait

Art and artists are fucking worthless because art is currently worthless. It's "practical purpose", if any purpose, is to grow and cultivate a healthy culture. Culture is what gives us new ideas and motivates us to go to new heights.

Art as it is now is worthless, because no one puts thought and effort into their work anymore. Why strive for technical excellence when you can shit on a few postcards, slap them in a photo frame, and sell it for a gorillian sheckles?

Liberals crushed the little value art had.


are you a gay cuckservative too?

this shit is so stupid
not everything prior to the 20th century was a masterpiece, what the mainstream focuses on is what is remembered through history
its like 12 year olds saying "music is dead" and "theres no good music anymore"
50 years from now some autistic kid will be saying the same shit, just a different focus on what they call art

video games qualify as art, they are an art form, and like most art, there's the ability to measure it's quality through objective and subjective standards
why dont people understand the ambiguity of what "art" can mean?

user please, we both know that comparisson is bullshit.

That isn't at all true. The problem is that "fine art" today is basically a big money laundry for jewish financial criminals, and they have no interest in letting actual art back in. That would be bad for business, plus beauty upsets jews.

I love DoW (DoW DC is one of my favourite games of all time), but it's fair to put it under mountain dew. That's not a bad thing. It's simple fun.

I should add, it's original equivalent from the Holla Forums template was popcorn. A blockbuster, an action film. That's not a bad thing. Most simple multiplayer games fall under that category, and they're awesome.

That explains why it doesn't work and seems off.

This one might be better, it adds an intermediate step after Game to reduce the negative connotation of mountian dew and clarify that Game is a good category.

No matter how you spin it, Mountain Dew is pretty negative. Maybe switching it out with a controller would be better.
What's an example of toy? Skylanders?

Not all video games are art, even though they may contain art, e.g. Wolf3d had beautiful glass paintings of Hitler. It really captured the whole Hitler as a messianic figure thing, and it was deep. And most importantly, it did not get in the way of gameplay.

Consider this: chess is a game, not art. If you were to make a video game adaptation of chess, does it magically become art only because it's now a video game?

The problem with fartsy videogames is that art/story/message/whatever is usually an excuse for the devs to not bother with actual gameplay, mechanics and gameplay mechanics. And then they call it video games "growing up", when in reality it's another round of emperor's new clothes.

Well, does it?
Chess has pretty good gameplay. If you consider good and engaging gameplay to be art than yes it does.

Minecraft. Or as an RTS example, Halo Wars.

What about nintendo games?

They're pretty good examples too tbh.

In the same way lego is a toy. Sure, its a toy, but you can make works of art with it.

kek. Aren't you forgetting someone?

Still pretty fun though. Better than games that try to be movies.

Well yes, that's why it's separate from the Experience category.

Dew would indicate a memegame for normalfags, DoW has a lot going for it to be in that tier.

Also, AoE2 is much more normalfag than DoW, unless you are in russia.

k here is better template

Nice. Another good question is what these categories are supposed to mean.
Also, because there are worth while games in the toy section (i.e nintendo games), that would leave some to believe there are some in the experience section as well.

Now that I'm looking at it, it's not that good of a template. Games can't be categorized the same way movies can.

Vidya = high quality game, a classic. May be emotionally moving, will definitely be memorable and age well even if it is outdated. These are genuine games as art. Examples: Thief 1 & 2. Half-Life 2. Homeworld. Metro 2033. EYE. Morrowind. This category is somewhat subjective and personal.

Video Game = hardcore. Complex, lots of depth, have to use your brain. High learning curve. Examples: Dwarf Fortress. EVE Online. Guild Wars PvP. TA/SupCom. Victoria 2. Aurora.

Game = fun. Not necessarily deep but may still be challenging. Probably not all that memorable and may not age so well, but good when it comes out. Examples: Dawn of War. Tribes Ascend. Severance/DSouls/Bloodborne. Metro 2034. Oblivion.

Toy = simple kiddie stuff, and unfinished or "test" games. Not necessarily bad but are often the result of a once good series getting dumbed down. Call of Duty. Minecraft. Destiny. Most Nintendo games. Reciever. Portal 2. Skyrim.

Experience = pretentious hipster crap that is only technically a game, and if it has gameplay it's little more than window dressing. Aka, walking simulators or "cinematic" games. Examples: Gone Home. Heavy Rain. Depression Quest. Amnesia. Soma. Bioshock Infinite. The Order 1886.

This is a contentious subject, of course.

not when they lock you in a room for 15 mins while they spout shitty dialogue. seriously, it takes like 30 ish mins to get to the crowbar in half life 1. and even longer in half life 2.

Shameful fucking display. SotC is one of the best games of all time. Excellent gameplay, excellent setting, excellent storyline, etc. Beautiful all around.

Vid related. He reaches the colossus at about 2:00.

Why is there so much unnecessary space in pic 3?

good job guys

Hardly, plenty of good posts have made the point that games can never be art. They simply are not the same. We hardly need to on what art is, and if you want an art definition just google it. Also not sageing? What are you some kinda faggot?

the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.

Oh wow, this could be literally anything, like I said. It's completely subjective whether something has beauty or emotional power. GJ, showed me.

And like a typical liberal you cut out the second definition because it suited your strawman.
"the various branches of creative activity, such as painting, music, literature, and dance".
GJ indeed, kill yourself.

"SUCH AS" literally doesn't do anything to discredit my point.

You can't even use the word literally right kid. Face it games will never be art, deal with it.


That's not even an argument

Cropped the 3rd image.


user, Skyward Sword had gameplay mechanics that could be learned, adapted to and mastered, and it had a kick ass final boss duel. It was not
It was not
It was not

Everyone knows that SotC is the flagship art game. It's always cited as one of the first examples of artistic video games, so we're naturally avoiding it for that reason.

No user don't u c it's shit cuz it wuz popular so it's shit now nostalgia and also it's shit. man watru gonna say next, the sonic adventure games -aren't- the worst games ever? pfft get with te popular opinion fag.

Bandwagons are the worst.

You're confusing fucking cause and effect

Art is the effect, but culture is the cause, not the other way around, they don't "cultivate" shit, they DISPLAY it. Ignorant on all levels, you.

It serves no purpose, it is the RESULT of purpose. The culture of the French isn't the fucking Mona Lisa, retard, it's their way. It's something that can be recorded through art, but that's it.

Art cultivates nothing, it is a LUXURY, not a necessity. When it's present, society has reached a certain level, it's a marker, not one of importance, it's as useful as a recording, and only for a very small sect of past societies, as culture is diverse by nature from town to city to castle.

Art serves no purpose beyond recording

Tldr you're an uneducated faggot who inflates his own importance. With the way you talk, you produce nothing of value or anything entertaining. Fuck you and fuck off from society.

You missed out something in the money laundering part. The curator can get rid of art by taking it over to the bank and using it as collateral on a loan, never pay back the loan, and let them take the shit smeared canvas that cost them fucking nothing to make instead of the money.

It's an amazingly profitable venture to get the government to massively overpay you through subsidies to make art, be tax exempt while working on it, pocket the change, then get a loan on the garbage based on the value given to it by other money launderers and how much the government subsidized you to make it. So long as you know the right people to sell it to and are part of their circle (aka: having a name for yourself), you can milk it for millions.

Deus Ex is art. Do You Still Take Showers With Your Dad is modern art.


Art history has a lot of periods of artistic slump like modern times, so i don't think it's irreparable and won't be fixed. It's another slump period. There's been quite a number of these. It's like a rollercoaster. Technical art comes in vogue at times, and trash art comes in vogue right after and right before.

Keep your chin up user.

There is no agreed upon definition of what video game art even is. But the failed "artists" who can't get their foot in the door for either literature or film making try to bring their shit over to video games, and this is why we're seeing lots of "story based" """""games"""""

Personally speaking I don't see a reason for games to need to be defined as art, as it's a self made industry, it doesn't need the tag of art. However if you were to get an agreed upon definition of what video game art is you might be able to detach the label "game" from interactive stories masquerading as games.

I'd say Okami is one of the closest games in being visually art.

Mother 3 is one of the few games out there that has almost completely perfect writing.

Both of these games are accompanied by good gameplay and music. Something hipster, indie and AAA trash from these days can't seem to achieve. I think there's this dumb shift towards graphics rather than art style and even then, 4k textures don't make games look that good as seen in Fallout 4. And writing seems to become more and more shallow. Either being made for children to understand or straight out trying to be like Walking Dead which is just an American version of a soap opera. Devs can do better but they choose profit over quality.

pic related

While good visuals are preferred, writing doesn't need to be.
With, you know, video games.

I can't believe it didn't sell. Fucking plebs.


I hate art games but Journey was top

Why is subjectivity a thing in games? Aren't there objectively good and bad games? Even if you don't like racing or sports games, there are objectively great titles in both genres.

What's up with everyone having their own extremely vague definition of art and defending it like it's the absolute truth.
I think art is any form of self expression, and the important part is - just because it's art, doesn't mean it's good, I'd say most art is pretty garbage.
Can someone explain this one to me? Would comedy not be considered art? I'm confused about a lot of arguments in this thread but this one sounds the most retarded to me. That, and saying art is 100% objective/subjective.

Games are entertainment. Therefore, games can be a distraction or time waster, or if you prefer, fun.
I don't get why so many people want games to be art. I love games, but I'm not trying to make them anymore than games. I understand that coding and programming can be a tiresome task, but if that's art, I don't know what is.

Crash team racing is high art.

Why is entertainment not art? Can't a thing entertain and do bigger things at the same time? Again with my example with comedy.

I mean I don't really care much if people consider it art or not, I'll still work on video games out of passion. I wouldn't be anywhere near this anal about it if people weren't acting like experts on the subject when all their experience comes from reading Holla Forums and they never actually got into creating art of any sort. I don't claim to have the answers either, but at least I bothered to spend a few years on visual arts and a lot of those arguments seem like oversimplification of the issue at best, and intellectual dishonesty at worst.

No. Not a single one.

I agree with your points. It's just whenever I hear someone say games are art, it screams to me that this specific person can't have any fun with the medium. Which is what I think to be the most important aspect of liking games.
However, that doesn't mean I don't like quality, which is another important aspect.


Yeah, ironically, I think video games were much better at being good art before they became widely accepted as art, because then it was mostly people making games out of enjoyment, and not with the initial intent of being artsy.

Shakespeare may well be the single most overrated artist of all time, and that's not even a statement about whether or not his art was actually any good. The general consensus from plebs and patricians alike is that he holds considerable merit, even if he's not what others make him out to be.

What's the best Shakespeare work to start with, Holla Forums? Like everyone else in Clapistan, I was forced to read Shakespeare in high school English and hated it. Thirty borderline-illiterate retards taking turns reading prose aloud is not how you endear something to a young mind. I recently caught a small bit of a Shakespeare play done by the BBC with Patrick Stewart and it was really fucking good, so I'm interested again. I'm just hoping that it's Shakespeare that's good, and that it wasn't just mediocrity elevated by Patrick Stewart.

Sage for almost entirely off-topic.