Daily reminder that games by definition are not art

Daily reminder that games by definition are not art.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_theory
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Oh hmm okay so? Nobody gives a shit.

Posting in a lame thread

Daily reminder that "art" is not art.

The definition of art is the floatiest thing in the history of human thought.

Games are a medium that is made up of art such as music and visuals.
Its purpose is to deliver that art to others.

good
wouldn't want my hobby to be shared by fart sniffing pretentious retards
now if only gaym theory faggots could fuck off too

(((art)))

You're preaching to the choir op

Games are also made of mechanics that are not art, but raw data. Games can contain art, but they're not "art" in and of themselves, much like how a car can have a nice enough artistic paint job, but the car itself isn't "art".
No, games are meant to be played with, not pushing "art" to people.

Go play your walking sims if you want to see what happens when games want to shove art up your asshole.

Game theories are the reason I play retro games, nothing else would push me to play them.

Daily reminder that art is a money laundering scheme, for extremely rich or drug dealers.

It became that way thanks to (((subversive elements))) trying to destroy the language and culture by either constantly changing the definition of words or by deeming certain words as inappropriate, thus using new euphemism that barely anybody understand. In the case of art, the definition has changed so much that in post-modernism if some cunt with money is willing to pay a lot of shekels for puke on a canvas, it will be declared art.

Art means capturing beauty.

(((art))) means shitting on beauty. Sometimes, literally.

Arabs would pay a lot to defecate on beautiful white girls, thus scat porn must be art in some kike's mind.

You are indeed correct OP. Nice dubs thread by the way.

Impressive

In the first place games are entertainment.

Games are Art

Games are Not Art

I really don't have the time to explain how to use their own game against them, but if you guys can't figure it out then, yeah we deserve all the bullshit that's happened to gaming.

Leave please >>>/reddit/

(checked)

While this true, bear in mind that the leftist has the power to hold two contradictory statements in their minds, and accept them both. They will call games art, and in the same breath say they must be censored, and regulated.

Damn son, those are some nice numbers.

(checked)
Jesus fuck

That's where you're wrong, OP

Art is short for artificial.
Therefore anything man-made is automatically art.

isn't that just hetero?

But that's wrong, you fucking retard. The origin of the word stems from Old French, and before that from Latin. You can't just randomly assign some bullshit origin to words because you only speak English, faggot.

Prove me wrong?

Of course it isn't art. It simply uses various forms of art for visuals and immersion. Nothing less, nothing more.

Art is pic related.
Modern art is nothing but Marxist subhuman degeneracy

The games are art meme comes from Marxists and retards and is supported by other insecure Marxists and retards who think they need to legitimize their hobby with some larger source of approval. The phrase 'relax, it's just a game' comes to mind now more than ever.

Let me guess, it's da joos behind it all, right?

All art is subjective, and to say one form of art is superior to another is fundamentally retarded.
Claiming art you don't like is a Jewish-controlled subversion plot makes you a special kind of stupid.

Games are art the same way that movies are. Which is to say, it's an artistic medium but individual pieces do not necessarily need to do anything more than entertain.

There's that word again. I swear, fucking Holla Forums is just too autistic to keep to their own fucking board, they have to convert everyone.

There are however objective qualities of art that can be used to determine quality. I hope you don't mean to imply that modern masterpiece like "guy jacking off into his face" or are anything close to good art.

>>>Holla Forums

Well Marxism was invented and executed by a certain Semitic tribe if that's what you're asking. Also, all forms of relativism (cultural, moral, etc.) are Hebrew subversions of societal norms. I'm not sure why you're getting angry at the mention of Marxists, though. Would you rather we just come right out and say Jewish? Are similar terms like globalist or usurer equally triggering for you?

Who are you to decide it isn't as good as the Mona Lisa or Beethoven?
You literally have no authority because it's fucking subjective. I understand internet autists can't really grasp the abstract concept of subjectivity because everything has to be fucking quantifiable or else muh brain hurts, but come the fuck on.

Are you actually defending a blank canvas and a string, and claiming they are as good as the mona lisa? This is either bait of genuine retardation. I hope for your sake the former.

I wonder who's behind that post

"art"

9/11 was an inside job, the holocaust is a lie, the earth is flat, Jews control the media, etc.
Spare me your Holla Forumscuck conspiritard bullshit and just cut straight to the chase… You're schizophrenic.
For fuck's sake, if you're so paranoid and bigoted towards Jews, why do you go to a Jewish owned site (Formerly Brennan [Jewish], now Jim [also Jewish])and to a Jewish owned board on that site (Mark)?
Maybe the Jews are out to take over chan sites too? Fucking hell man, there's no place to escape the Jewish cabal!

I'm the same guy who can tell whether or not soup tastes good even though I've had zero formal culinary training. Imagine if you applied that same mental framework to anything else. Is a building just as good as any other even though it collapses? What makes a good structure is subjective, right? If everything is relative, then we're both right because right and wrong don't exist anymore in a world where nothing is absolute :^) Also get back in the fucking vola, Algae, and upload some titties you fucking race traitor faggot

Do you even understand what the literal definition of subjective is? I hope you're just pretending not to know to get my goat because otherwise you're especially retarded and autistic.

Baraka is my favorite movie.

That's called personal preference. Objective is whether or not the ice cream is good, not whether or not you like the flavor. Sort of like objective standards for art. Whether or not you like paintings of boats is subjective, but the artist's skill and quality of the work are objective.

I really wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt, that you weren't some Holla Forums retard, but you need to leave and take your retardation with you.

In your analogy, it would be that the art before you is an empty bowl, while the mona lisa is a scoop of icecream. You cannot tell me that the empty bowl has any flavor.

Only a leftypol subhuman would make such retarded posts. Sage and report.

>comparing the taste of soup (weird, you use a phrase that is used to describe subjectivity. funny eh?) to the act of making and preparing and look of the soup which would be the artistic part
You couldn't be more retarded if you tried.
That's like saying "this painting can't be art, it was painted on a poster-board instead of a canvas!".

KYS

Art isn't entirely subjective, dipshit
Craftsmanship and good technique can be taken account.

And there you've defeated yourself. Modern art has neither quality in its creation nor does it have aesthetic appeal. Also that's a really bad analogy. You're pretending that I said something like 'buildings are only buildings if they're made of stone, concrete doesn't count.' You're the prime example of how college doesn't actual make you smarter or foster critical thinking.

Just because it's subjective doesn't mean you aren't wrong.
Relativity was thought up by a kike and is at odds with the laws of nature.

No, that's retarded. Fucking idiot.
Objectivity are facts about something. Something objective about ice-cream would be
Kind of like the only objective things you can claim about art are whether or not the painter uses certain design techniques

When the fuck did this board get filled with 8th grade retarts?


Some people like empty bowls, some people like ice-cream. There is no objective basis to tell someone that a bowl is ice-cream is quantifiable "better" than an empty bowl. Only whether or not the person prefers one or the other.

Craftsmanship and technique are not the art itself, simply the tools used to make it. Funny how I don't even have to work hard to dismantle your own argument.

...

That's literally what it means. Subjectively is by definition not a black or white concept. No right or wrong, simply preference.

AAAAAAAANNDD……. filtered. Have a nice one, hun ;P

Why don't you try arguing against what I first posted You are only "winning" because you are removing all logic and reason from a discussion that hinges on it. Subjective is the "everything proof shield" of criticism.

Don't fucking cuck out. At least own up to the label.

You sure trolled this thread, my man. Truly epic, for the win even.

Just because you think 1 + 1 = 3 doesn't mean it's true you cocksucker.

Yup, and you can objectively determine whether or not those things are good, ie. good use of color vs bad use of color., good use of anatomy vs bad use of anatomy. Really, the only thing that's subjective is whether or not you like the actual picture. Therefore it stands to reason that everything about the painting is able to be analyzed objectively. The only subjective part goes on in the person.

Good to know that Holla Forums is just as antagonistic to /liberty/ and neutrals as Holla Forums.

Maybe because you're not dismantling it at all. You're farting and pretending that your fart took down a building.

I'll be more clear. "Better" and "worse" can't be used to compare art. If that was your sentiment, you're right about that. But you can compare the quality of art by looking at the talent and technique that it took to make.
Modern art has no craftsmanship or skill involved to make. When you leave those out, all you have left is the "message" or something. Whether or not that's good is up to you but doesn't take away from the fact that there's nothing appreciable to it other than what you take from the minimal effort put into it, whereas classically made pieces of art can be appreciated by the effort put into making them, even if the end result isn't aesthetically pleasing to you.

Maths are just an abstract concept thought up by a Greek faggot.
There is no objective truth to maths itself.
I could say zimbledeebop + dogonorg = flimfloom and it would be just as "true" as 1+1=2.

Communist faggots being Communist faggots is why we have abstract art today?

Tell me, how do yo objectively measure this?
Who decides what is "good use" vs. "bad use"?
How do you objectively decide which colors are "good together" or not?

Yes, actually. The destruction of societal norms and standards is at the core of Communist thought. As long as you have rules that let you evaluate things like good and bad or right and wrong, you can't have the kind of equality that Communism forces on the population at gunpoint. That's why Communism will always fail. Equality simply doesn't exist in the natural world and you can only resist the natural order of things for so long. There are no higher laws than nature.

If you create the rule "zimbledeebop + dogonorg = flimfloom" and "dogonorg" isn't the equivalent to zero in this "+" operation you're creating, you're already creating a set of rules (axioms) that can be used to derive consequent rules like "zimbledeebop =/= flimfloom".

Math is the study that applies logic to abstract concepts that can be used in real life if applied correctly. Doesn't matter if they're numbers of retard words you made up.

Once again…
Making the art =/= art.
Whether or not a piece took a lot of effort and "talent" to make is entirely irrelevant to the subjective nature of art itself. You're using a shitty framework and are fundamentally misunderstanding the issue here.

So instead of complaining, is anyone going to offer a concrete definition of art beyond "this makes my feels hurt/gud"?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_theory

Holla Forums/ - philosophy and arts.


But user, I'm actually not a Holla Forumsack. I'm a /liberty/fag who occasionally posts on /polk/. I won't get angry if you call a nazi, just annoyed that you didn't use lolberg. And you still didn't refute my point that not all leftists like marxists

EZPZ, If I want to discredit it as art, I can. You can't say art is universal, because different groups of people will disagree no matter what.

I agree. Anyone who does is probably a talentless hack who can't do shit.
What do you consider art, user?

...

Thinking a color doesn't take a lot of effort and there's no craftsmanship to show about it.

I'm agreeing with that you autistic fuck.
I'm saying good, classically made pieces of art can be appreciated by their craftsmanship even if they're not aesthetically pleasing to you and they don't "say anything" to you.
Liking art is subjective.
What defines "well made" art isn't.

I did and it took no effort.
That's how bad your argument was.

...

And just like most anti-intellectuals, you don't know what a theory actually is.

Okay you got me, now I'm off the hook and out of this thread, I hope the attention you're getting fills the hole in your fat little heart.

Missed opportunity, fam.

Stay and challenge his bait.
Good baiters can get around arguments when they're cornered

...

Thanks for the laughs today my man. I was feeling a little down, but you really cheered me right up.


Thanks again for proving just how retarded you people really are.
Gravity is not a theory. How gravity works is a theory.
Gravity has quantifiable, observable and reliably repeatable results.

Unlike art, which is why I'm completely demolishing you all with zero effort.

Give me a fucking break.

That's just your subjective opinion :^)

VS you're right because you said so?

The mark of the defeated.

No, because I'm using facts instead of feels.
>b-but muh art has to be objective, it just has to!

Actually, in more rigorous fields of study, using the right words to convey concepts is very important. Not so much in whatever gender studies/sociology degree you have.

Did you read the image? Rockefeller commissioned some Commie to make him a mural, but as he was a Commie he just had to insert some bullshit about Lenin, so Rockefeller had it torn down and promoted abstract art as an apolitical artistic movement. Abstract art being just colours, shapes and lines.

...

Coding can be seen as an art form, gameplay as well. You need skill and knowledge to make good gameplay and can, by its own merits cause emotions in you. Or are you telling me that Holla Forums sees a game as only the surface fluff? I would be like watching a movie and only judging it by the music and the quality of the effects instead of the cinematography.
Yes, games are art, but not for the reasons used to push shitty cinematic games. In fact, making it more like a movie directly takes away from what makes games art.

You haven't stated a single fact regarding color theory other than not knowing about it

The image doesn't matter, modern art is entirely a Judeo-Communist invention.

Firstly, no where here have I implied or stated that art is objective.
In fact, I asked anons for a concrete definition of art which I've yet to really receive.
Secondly, color theory is the artistic equivalent to gravitational theory.
Both gravity and color are observable phenomena that can consistently be tested (whether by making dyes, observing falling objects, etc.) with consistent results.
The theory behind each is where the thinking comes in. How does gravity work? Which colors go with which?
Thus, we get the theory of gravity, and the theory of color, both of which are grounded in those observable phenomena.

Interesting perspective.

He's just pissing me off though and I'm hungry.
If I wanted retarded opinions I'd go back to leddit :^)

And those are something that still takes skill and talent and time to produce, which sets them apart from what usually gets branded as modern art.

Okay, can you quit it now? I can take retardation regarding art just fine, but this whole da joos shit is really starting to piss me off. Just fuck off with it.

Implying you go there already?
Do us all a favor and go back anyway. And stay there.>>13024925

Dun goof'd, meant to quote

But Communists loved erecting dime-a-dozen Neo-Classical pieces across the world to celebrate their constant, unending butchery of innocent people. I'd much rather have pale yellow and blue squares than blood-tinged bronze statues celebrating the devourer of life.

Yes, Holla Forums - video games. Not Holla Forums - look at us, we're a bunch of schizo retards who think a small minority of a religious group are running the world and fucking my shit up fam.

Do you blame the Jews when it rains on your birthday?
Did they construct weather modifying machines just to make the goyim upset?

You'll have a hard time convincing me that you're not a poor lost soul from Holla Forums who wandered onto the wrong board. Would you hate me even more if you knew I was white?

No, I don't buy into the Vast Hebrew Conspiracy, I'm just politely reminding you that the long arm of Holla Forums reaches widely on here.
In fact, I'd wager that most posters here not including myself cross-pollinate both boards.

Don't get mad at each other just because a pussy ass baiter who didn't even stick around made you upset.

There's too much crap arround to quote and reply everything.

I just want to say that the guy here without taste can eat a dick as an art form if he compares shitting eggs to actual art.

What is truly "white" though? You don't seem to understand whiteness is just a retarded concept made up to make people with paler skin more "objectively" superior to those without.
Sorry, but I don't buy this whole "I'm being oppressed and hated because I'm white ;_;".
No, you're being oppressed and hated because you're a retard who thinks race is more than just a social abstract notion.

...

Mad? We're all mad here, user.

"White" is a nebulous term used by racialists that ostensibly amounts to nothing.
What they usually mean is Northern European, Germanic, or Nordic.
"Black" is an equally nebulous term. Frankly, I prefer to stick with more nuanced racial categories employed by anthropologists, like Negroid, Caucasoid, Mongoloid, etc.

OHHHH NOOO. Some guy thinks that music, gameplay and visuals combined, aren't an expression of human creativity and feelings. Those super smart movie critics say so too! Then it just must be true. I cannot be the single person to be right on this because they're a bigger group. My day is just ruined now. How can I even live my life knowing that some pretentious fags don't see the beauty and humanity in video games. Like, how?

I wish you never said that OP, QQ. I care SO much about what you or Roger Ebert think, so much! Well, if you say so, and you have a large amount of people who agree with you, it must be true then.

These threads are worse than console wars and West vs. Japan threads.

And you're a Communist.

Environments that promote free and open dialogue tend to be right wing or become right wing over time. It's no surprise that Holla Forums and Holla Forums get along, even though here we just use our unregulated posting to call every game shit. Only on boards where discussion is carefully monitored and controlled can you have any ongoing leftist activity. This is because collectivist thought requires consensus, and free speech is essentially the opposite of that. That's why leftist memes aren't funny. They tend to be slathered in words meant to tell you exactly how to feel and react about what you're seeing because everyone has to reach the exact same conclusion.


Actually society is a racial construct. Also there are some diseases that are only found in certain races such as Tay Sachs only infecting Jewish people. Explain that, merchant man :^)

White is a term to put every European in one category despite being the most divided continent. There are anglos, mediterraneans, slav but you can look even deeper, there are east, west and south slavs. The differences just keep stacking.

I don't think anyone here is saying that video games don't contain art (like music, character/environment design, etc), the question is whether a game itself is art.
If video games qualify as art, why not other games? If the elements that make up the video game are art, are the mechanics of the game art, too?
If so, does that mean games like chess, poker, backgammon, etc. are also art?

I certainly agree with that, leftist memes are atrocious.

Just saying getting mad over poor bait isn't commendable.


Is that the definition of art now?
I though art was supposed to be anything made with the intention to be appreciated for its beauty.
If expression and human creativity are art, then conversations can be art.

I don't think you understand my post, but then again, it's probably not your fault that modern college has made you this retarded. There is no question to be had here, you pretentious twat. I don't need you or anyone else having the authority to say what is art is and isn't for such obvious things. Video games are crafted by humans to express something, and they are also carefully visually crafted and have a soundtrack.

That is more art than some cheap crappy movies or some shit books will ever be. It does not matter if you can sell it or if you can enjoy it, because in the end, it's still an expression of feelings crafted by humans. Period. And chess is a good ruleset invented by people that can express war, so why would it not be more art than a canvas with some slapped ugly figure on it? Because you say so? As for chess, it's an important part of humanity now, this game ruleset that is chess will remain in human history for a long period of time as an expression of what humans entertain themselves with and simulating war. Either that or the individual pieces, if they're beautifully crafted. Art is a incredibly vague word, if you or anyone else wanted to exclude this, you should've modified all the definitions of art to say "Art only includes things that you can't interact with."


Yes. Look it up on multiple sources. Not pretentious enough for you?

By art's definition, yes, conversations can be art if they're had with the intention of expressing a feeling meant for someone else to judge and enjoy. As long as it expresses a human idea and you're expressing it because of your decision and not because you're forced to do it, it is art. I fucking hate all of you people trying to judge what's art and what's not when it's so simple, so damn pretentious. I should've wasted time even replying to both of you. But just remember that no one gives a shit about what you two consider art at the end of the day and that your degree is shit.

That's in line with what I said.
Not every conversation is art, just the ones with that intention.
Also I don't get what you're getting mad at me for.

Yes, like a play or demonstration, for example. Just like video games, if they are beautiful and people want to appreciate the craft put into them and enjoy their beauty, who are critics to say that it isn't art because it's purpose was to make money? That's complete bullshit. The original purpose does not matter if people give it a new one. It's like if you make a movie just for money and nothing else and after you watch it and consider art, you're told that it was made for money. Can you not appreciate the effort put into it and what is trying to express or just the beauty of the film? It is not crafted with utility purposes, so of course you can.

I'm just getting super tired of these types of conversations. I've seen the "games aren't art" thing since it was first said by Roger Ebert. And since then, people just don't wanna shut the fuck up about how movies and books are art and games are not because you can interact with games. And I'm more mad at the other fag, but I'll stop replying anyway. I don't like these types of conversations at all.

And by this I meant, you can only consume it to enjoy it, but it's not going to help you or anyone else in the physical world. You can't eat a game or movie, you can't build a house with them, you can't taste them. You can only see them, interact with them, and think about them.

Evidently you do, otherwise you wouldn't have unloaded your titanic, asshurt post onto the thread.
Sorry if I fanny flustered you, bud. Wasn't aware that you had such an emotional attachment to the discussion at hand.
Nor have I tried to offer a definition of art thus far, I've been asking other anons for their thoughts on what might qualify as art.
For the record, I do think video games are art. I just wanted to ask you questions so I could understand your position better. But I guess I didn't release that you're a walking, talking anal prolapse just waiting to unload their FEELS out on somebody.

No, the original purpose is what matters. If it was up to anyone to give it the meaning they wanted to, I could declare that the whole world is art and everything residing in it and entering it is art because I decide that everything has beauty. Then everything is art. Then the concept has no meaning and serves no purpose anymore.

Games are expression and art. Scalia used that defense to protect vidya. The problem is that the *wrong* people (postmodernists, ideologues and subversive progressives) seek to undermine vidya by the modern definition of art, ruining the hobby and turning everyone who plays vidya into mindless, retarded drones who will contribute to the downfall of society while also throwing their shekels away.

People really don't understand that getting mad and expressing the butthurt is precisely what fuels more bait.

Yeah, the conversation ends now, have your last words. I don't give a shit about what you fucks think it's art. I think video games are art, good for you if you think they're not. It doesn't matter. I'm just wasting my time with this. This thread is useless, like it always was.

Wew lad. Confirmed for being so blinded by autistic rage that you didn't read the specific part where I said that I THINK VIDEO GAMES ARE ART.
Look at this and learn, anons. This is unbridled rage and what it can do to a man.

It's an endless cycle, really. The fuel of the Chan.

I don't recall doing anything to make you upset, user. I'm not the one who made you tired by repeated the art argument ad nauseum, we were just having a conversation.

Anyway, by this definition, some games are art and some are not. Some games are definitely the product of pure corporate greed, but some are definitely the author intending to express something. I'd also say some movies are not art.


People on other less popular boards tend to have a thicker skin fortunately.

this is golden.

So THAT'S why so many communists starved to death