Are videogame movies proof videogames can never ever be art?

The player is just going through the limited scripted events and actions.
Yes a player can decide to just drop down a pitfall or not go through the same motions as another player but the actions they can take are all programmed and nothing can done outside of the confines of that programming.

The element of control is still present, though.
Rather than be relegated to the position of passive observer, the player is given power to direct the sequence of events. Even if it is a pre-determined path, the player can exert influence on the smaller things of the path.

It's already dead m8.

this

So we can all agree Ebert was a retarded faggot?

w

e weeee

oned

Video Games are a craft. Not a art.

...

So every video game since 2008

I think the issue is that they're picking the wrong games and just like most execs are making unnecessary changes. See: The new Death Note series.

Just take the cutscenes, fill in the blanks, put on screen. Everyone happy but nope.

"Can we make Daxter Black?"
"Hmmm Nico is baltic? How about he's a gay nigger?"
"This Cloud Strife guy…blonde, blue eyed? How about we cast Adrian Brody."

DB Evolution is a prime example, they know what people want to see so they grab the license but don't know WHY they want to see it.

Good video game movies that come to mind:

–

It's also directors. Give the Mission Impossible guy Splinter Cell's license and you'll make money but don't give it to Jew Jew Abrams.

Give Diablo Cody the license to Mother, LISA or Undertale and it's perfect.

It was a movie length commercial for SMB3.

Yeah that's why it's good, It's TWITCH the movie think about it:

Sorry but it's kino

No, because they're movies and not video games. They're shitty because they're effortless cash-ins. Video games can be made to be art, they just usually aren't because it takes a lot of dedication to make one yourself and big studios are only in it for the money. You can use video games to tell a story and incorperate other art forms like background music, but what video games are really good at is creating a world to explore. With books and movies you can only show or describe the world but with video games you can make a simulation of it, using NPC's for worldbuilding and making events that only happen if you cause them to. You can also use levels and music to create muh atmosphere which you only fully experience if you're really "there." That's why Star Wars and Star Trek are so big, other people can expand on the fictional universe with their own stories. It's about the world and not just the shitty soap opera plots that take place in them.

>Spy Kids 3D
No.

...

I don't want video games to be considered art.
Do you know what kind of people do? The kind of people who play Gone Home and think it's a masterpiece. Pic related is a real-time playthrough of Gone Home.
I just want video games to be fun, fuck art.

Good point.

Isn't LISA about a drunk child molester?

Daily reminder polygon gave this a 10/10.

They're also the kind of people who think Andy Warhol was one of the true great artists in the world, they think people like him deserve a pedestal next to Michelangelo.
They think that someone covering a 400-pound woman in honey is high art. They think that a bunch of people running in a circle holding each others' asses is deep and meaningful.
Post-modernism ruined everything.

The moment anything is considered art it goes to shit, I mean look at movies

You forgot to mention these,

So it's Lena Dunham: The Video Game?

The audacity of this faggot. Warhol was extremely influential and important to modern art, he created several of the most valuable paintings ever made. Just because you dislike his art doesn't mean he was a bad artist.

And Warhol had a deep appreciation of classical art. He was known to collect a lot of it.

ANDY WARHOL WAS A FUCKING HACK.
HE WAS A FRAUD.
HE WASN'T PARTICULARLY TALENTED AS A PAINTER AND MOST OF HIS ACTUAL WORKS COULD BE DONE IN LESS 30 SECONDS WITH PHOTOSHOP IN THE MODERN WORLD.

A lot of his work was done by just editing photos, something that wasn't new in the 60's and wasn't hard to do, it was just expensive to get the equipment to do it. He didn't edit them is special ways, either, he always simply altered the colours.
If this shit is considered art, then art is fucking meaningless.

Are you implying that's a good thing? Modern art is cancer, it opened up the door for any hipster with access to daddy's money to be paraded around and treated like a genius.
By that logic Michael Bay and J.J. Abrams are absolute masterminds.

Bwwwwwaaaaaa, faggots.

The whole 'art video games art' meme is just one giant farce perpetrated by the games industry (who want to fleece investors by telling them they're going to be the next hollywood and thus gain hollywood money and power) and propelled to theoretically impossible levels of retarded by the gamers themselves who, after literally spending decades of their lives on a hobby that has left them unfulfilled and with regret, are *desperate* to salvage meaning from it.

Better than 90% of video games are entertainment the way a trip down the carnival midway is "entertaining". Sure it's fun and thrilling, but also designed to rip you off and leave you empty (with maybe a valueless trinket if you're "good at it"). Is throwing a softball at a faggot in a dunking booth some kind of performance art, you morons? That's pretty much what Twitch.tv is. The phenomena of games streaming and face camming is the universe screaming "could i make it any clearer?!?"

Gamers are spending far too much time on a medium that, while not inherently evil, is "gamified" and thus designed to exploit your brain-dopamene primal reward system. Movies don't do that. Obviously there are exceptions like some obscure strategy games, simulations, some sports titles, and even some older RPGs that are decended from traditional board game, card games, pen and paper games, and real life sports.

Most games are vices, though. You fucks are basically debating "is poker night art?"

To what end? So I get to direct and edit the new Star Trek now. I'm gonna have Captain Shaniqua Jenkins walk in place into a bulkhead for 50 minutes while the camera spins around her head because "freedom".

Protip: player agency vs. authorial agency. dig it.

Perhaps some non-reward-exploiting video games are "art" the way architecture is art. Are buildings or bridges art? I guess, but mostly on account of secondary crafts like masonry, ironworking, and glasswork and even then not really… it's more like high-level craftsmanship and artisanry. Similarly, video games own their artistry mostly to "assets" (a telling label) that could just as easily exist outside of games.

tl;dr - some video games can be 'artsy', but not art, but it doesn't matter because almost all video games are vices that seek to exploit the user. This thread is irrelevant.

andy wahol was literally autistic and the only reason modern art and avant garde exist is to substantiate hipster elitism.

id say twitch is more comparable to a sports network. not in that videogames are a sport, but that its for people who arent good at it to live vicariously through others.

The only people who think of vidya as art are either hipsters or people who can't accept it's nothing more than a hobby.
I know plenty of people who have hobbies they enjoy very much, one guy I know collects coins and another builds figures of robots, none of them would consider their hobbies to be "art".
I wouldn't say that's true, hobbies are for fun, only absolute retards (as in people dumber than even the average normalfag) would have a hobby and wish to seek some kind of personal fulfillment. I'd say 73% of gamers are normalfags just looking for fun with GTA5 and Candy Crush, 20% are younger people who play CS:GO and DoTA, 6.5% are the hipster types who play walking simulators and 0.5% are Holla Forums-tier people who hate the other 99.5% and only play games the other 99.5% never heard of and/or never played.

Video games can't be "art" and neither can movies or books. I dislike that use of the word though, I only use "art" in the context of "the art of ____", not as a signifier of emphasis on aesthetics and non-ulitarianism or the expression of ideas.

Video games are an artform. They combine elements like programming, game design, storytelling, visual arts, architecture, cinematic techniques, music, sound and acting. There's no reason why they wouldn't be art.

Art as the faggots describe it is always just hobby tier. Writing fictional nonsense, painting, acting (which is just like kids playing pretend), playing music… it's all a bunch of unproductive and unfullfilling shit that's used for wasting time and recreation. I'm not defending video games mind you but "art" is just as dumb and isn't all that different from the others.

It doesn't fucking matter.
Does it being art or not really effect it in any meaningful way? It's not like a lable it changes anything about it.
What even is """art"""? From what I've seen it's a bunch of pretentious fucks dicking around jerking themselves off about how fucking clever they are.
Also >>>Holla Forums is a more fitting board for this, but I'm guessing they deleted your thread because it's been made 100 times before.

Isn't that what art truly is when you strip away all the gobbledygook surrounding the word?

bridges are useful therefore not art

"Art" has never been anything but pretentious assholes overrating one thing or another. Even the greats are pumped up far higher than necessary. So the guy could chisel a mean statue, how exactly is that of use? You appreciate it and derive your own self centered idea of meaning from looking at it? What a bunch of faggot nonsense.

Artists have always been those who couldn't produce anything useful. Style over substance. It's a shame some great builders and inventors are remembered for being "artists" when that was the least great thing about their work.

...

At least philosophers did something useful in some way, even if they sometimes get millions killed due to their ideas Karl Marx
Hard science reigns supreme over all the plebeian nonsense

Said the person who watches television and movies and shitposts on Holla Forums about them.

art has become just a way for people to vomit out thier inner conflicts. if you relate to it.. you call ir art if not its called garbage. thats how i see it

notice i say has become. i think in the past it actually took talent. i still dont really value it. as iam nihilist

Nearly anything can be art.
Good art on the other hand…

is this art?

A lot of people practice a lot of fulfilling hobbies irl, user, and they end up rewarded and with something to show for it typically, not least of which being a generally more interesting person. Thats probably not why most people find hobbies, but it's a beneficial side-effect.

The normalfags are irrelevant because they aren't the ones obsessed with "art" and "muh cinematic storytelling". They're wasting their time playing games too, for the most part, but they'll waste less of it in the end. It's the degenerates who have spawned this "art" and "storytelling" cancer…. either because they're fiends trying to get a novelty fix or they have some other agenda. They're the problem.

If there are people who are really interested in moving beyond 'gaming' and finding meaning in interactive, 3D digital words, they can start by rejecting gamification and the tropes associated with vidya and instead turn their focus toward education or utility. The beauty and transcendent meaning or whatever can follow that. Trying to manifest those things from rotten carnival midway diversions is foolish as fuck, tbh

I don't call what I do art, or expect others to, or call watching tv/movies or shitposting about them art.

You say sculptors are useless shits wasting time as if you were being productive by watching Game of Thrones and posting bane memes.

Ayy I made that image
What, a collection of useless trinkets and items? What's the difference between that and collecting video games?

Basically everything you do that isn't self-improvement or work towards bettering society can technically be classed as "wasting time"
Listening to music, watching movies, playing vidya, painting, sculpting, using the internet, etc.

just fuck me up fam

These video game movies were pretty good.

MDE NEVER DIES

Watching MDE is never wasting time

...

dunno what you mean by useless trinkets and items, but nice OC.

cardio exercise can be a hobby, if approached from a certain point of view and if it gets you out of the house and interacting with people, it can make you a more interesting, competent person and get you laid. Cooking can be a hobby. So can working on cars and ballroom dancing. Hobbies dont have to be solitary, pointless, and consumerist like collecting "stuff".

I swear internet "geek" culture is more of a cancer each passing year. Part digital crack den, part nostalgia cult and increasingly enriched with social justice politics since the virtue signalers found out that pressing buttons inside virtual skinner boxes fits nicely with their lifestyle. The next great video game crash couldnt come soon enough. Let's hope its permanent.

bruh you wasted way too much time on this

Video games can't be art due to the lack of the emphasis on aesthetics. The emphasis of a video game is always the mechanics, it's a competition oriented entertainment media. It is the game part of a video game that hinders it from being an art form. Entertainment can't be art as well. The main and the sole purpose of art is to deliver an emotional catharsis through aesthetics, this is tantamount to faith in religion, personal revelation for both the artist and the audience. Without this artistic intention, a media form can't be art.

But due to technological advancement, some video game developers, one of them is on pic related, have been pushing the boundaries of the artistic value of a video game. Still though, the line that separates video game and other entertainment media from art is still definite.

Fantastic bait

Video games emphasize aesthetics a lot. Do you even know anything about them aside from Pong?

Skyrim confirmed kino.

To emphasize, you need to make it the whole point. The only aspect lit by the spotlight. Video game is incapable of doing this whatsoever.

Literally kino. I mean, look at that editing and imagery. Pure audio visual poetry.

I've said it before, video games serve a different purpose than books or film. Books and film are a story telling medium, video games are a medium for game mechanics. You wouldn't call a game of monopoly or scrabble art. You wouldn't call a game of chess or DnD art. It's why all of these hipster games trying to be art and tell stories are fucking boring and no one talks about them after 5 years. Video games are not art, and art is not subjective. A picture of your piss stained toilet is not art, you faggot kikes.

...

jesus, I can smell that guy through the screen

No, it's a medium for visual poetry. It's not necessarily bound by the logic of traditional theatrical plot and narrative, at it's highest potential it's closer to a poem. It relies on the individual experience of the audience rather than rigidly linked plot, we non-procedurally generate the truth of our own story from watching films.

Not denying your argument about video games, just film.

Todd howard makes art?

Ebert was right. Get fucked Holla Forums

Conning people can be art, after all.

The only kino vidya is GTAIV and Max Payne 3. Everything else is trying too hard or not even trying.

Their last attemp at keeping the industry alive is this stupid VR shit. It will fail, and the gaming industry will have to move on to mobile. It's simply not profitable to keep making big games and consoles when you can make more money selling crap on mobile.

Yes

ISHYGYDGGY familam, you are asking the wrong questions, what if reality was art, what if art was reality, get out of here s

Sounds fucking gay

Games are maybe in the equivalent of the early silent era of film if you're being very generous, no point judging yet, they're still a novelty.
Criticism will never be art though.

Now that I think about it the only things "art forms" have in common are taking easily obtainable materials and selling them for far more than any reasonable man would ever sell them for.
Conning is the only art.

t. cudchewing burgernigger

tbh fam videogames aren't and will never be art, and VR is gonna get bought out by Disney and Universal, forever bound as a gimmick for shitty amusement parks.

I've become a stereotype

Mortal kombat is a good movie. It was even praised by sesker and roger

Some of the best video games have zero fucking story. Some are so bad that you're not even the main character.

MH4U

Video games are not art but good video games are a work of art.

An arbitrary and senseless definition of art that is entirely in the service of those who currently and traditionally have ruled the art trade. I see no reason why anyone should have to abide by such a definition. Art can be entertaining and interactivity or competition do not disqualify a thing from being art.

more like a work of FAGS lmao

parts of videogames can have aesthetic, artisic merit, such as the music or the grrfx, but the sum of the parts isnt necessarily artistic due to its interactive nature.

Story is always boring, in vidya and movies.

Way to protect that talentless art industry monopoly there, Chaim. Wouldn't want to include any actual skill or intelligence in art now would we. Art is supposed to be appreciated differently by the one appreciating it, but interacting with it somehow magically disqualifies it from being art.

Pic related is art, but exquisitely beautiful games aren't. Pic related is art, but moving video game stories are not. Pic related is art, but emotion stirring video game music is not.

so… im all for supporting dubs of truth. I want to believe, i really do… but… just help me out here… are you saying we shouldn't allow destructive forces to "monopolize" modern art and instead we should allow the degeneracy and "freedom" of modernist or post-post-meta-modernism or whatever to gain a foothold in video games and open source software and heavy metal and Scandinavian snowplow operation and whatever else the Consensus-Shapers decide is progressive because….. we don't want them to have a "monopoly" within the realms they've already thoroughly judaized and pozzed?

I get that all those things you mentioned are beautiful.. I think the problem most anons have is the question of why I should have to press a bunch of buttons on a toy controller to increase my score that I have a triple modifier on after spending shekles on the latest Booster Pack DLC in order to experience those beautiful things?

Are you seriously suggesting you don't feel like a rube on a carnival midway? One that has merely reconfigured itself and is adapting to 20, 30, 40+ year olds who would otherwise reject the skinner box and grow the fuck up but are being seduced by "muh interactive art" in order to better rationalize their vice?

Video game "stories" are fucking retarded, user. It's embarrassing. You're watching cartoons for 30 year olds that have walking simulations, quick-time events, and duck hunt-tier "shooting" scenarios instead of commercial breaks.

Video game writers are just retarded and don't realize you can't make video games like movies

That's why you get a bunch of shitty cutscenes or a plot that's just retarded in the context of what you do in the game.

The only games that do understand it are the Half-Life, Portal, Left 4 Dead and Mother series

They realize that sometimes what the player does in game is silly, so they created a world, narrative and characters that suit that silliness.

Some video games are already art, like Shadow of the Colossus. There's not many games that give you a feeling of existential loneliness in moments after picking up a controller. But at it's core it's still a good video game.
Also remember that originally the desire for them to be considered art was for the Supreme Court to call them art, giving video games the full protection under the first amendment

just fuck my shit up fam

Video games already are art. It's these shitty movies that disgrace them.

Excuse me, but that sounds retarded.

Arbitrary and senseless? How come?

The reason is because of the main and inherent purpose of art. Art is a spiritual media that affirms man's longing for harmony in his life and the greater existence than all materials. An affirmation of the existence of man as a spiritual creature. Art is something that is made for the sole purpose of delivering a spontaneous intuition. Game and entertainment hinder this purpose.

Especially when something is built around the concept of entertainment and competition, we can't call such a thing art, it's simply not made to be one. Even though art might (incidentally) deliver entertainment, it is built around the concept of the artist's declaration of faith, love, harmony, catharsis, not the entertainment. Another reason why video games can't be art is due to the mechanics, it doesn't provide any room for spontaneous and personal intuition. Intuition in video game is like the "Eureka" of science, it's not an attribute.

Now if a video game has artistic cutscenes and aesthetics, can it be called art? No it can't, because the game itself isn't art. Only the video portion is an art. I don't deny that walking simulator with lots of interactivity can be art, but a video game definitely can't. Please note that I define walking simulator as something completely devoid of gameplay. No rules, no puzzles, no time limit, no competitive mechanics. I think digital interactivity has a great potential to be art, but not in form of video game.

It tried far too hard to be an art, but still not is. The director didn't understand what art really means. It's an unholy alliance of bland, pretentious walking simulator and bits of broken gameplay thrown in between.

You're kidding me. It's neither a good game or an art. It's a miserable piece of a crippled mongrel breed worthy of abortion.

Video game is not worthy of that.

autism tbh fam.

also the entire games are art meme was pushed by the same faggots who got the hot zoey quinn cunt, and was done only as an attempt to "legitimize" games, so as to get that sweet common core dosh.

That you even need to ask shows how retarded you are. How does interacting with something disqualify it as art? Because some faggots say so? No, fuck that, and fuck you. If that shit I posted passes as art, then the term is meaningless, and can be applied to anything because again, fuck you.

According to faggots.

Nothing about this disqualifies games. Don't agree with your projected purpose of art though.

Complete bullshit.

Yeah, naw.

Intelligent arguments tbqh.

It's hard to intelligently dispute arguments spewing from a retard's asshole

...

...

Doom wasnt too bad for what it was.

Has anyone mentioned Dead or Alive?

Doom is objectively better than Aliens.

The only intelligent argument for the whole issue is "who has the right to define what is art". If you want to believe that it has been rightly defined, without any bias, and without any advantage to a certain group, then that is your right. I on the other hand say naw, fuck that bullshit, you're a faggot.

Every dictionary defines art as a product of aesthetics and emotional investment. Now my argument is that an art has to be built for the sole purpose of delivering these two aspects. How is that any biased? My definition of art doesn't change the widely accepted definition in any way.

Doom is good because it has good level design and enemy compositions, two barely discovered and almost totally forgotten arts that are absolutely vital to high quality game design.

I'm reading through the posts and most of the arguments that are vehemently against videogames as art consists of "FUCK YOU!" and "SJWs". Meanwhile the ones arguing that videogames can be art and is different from films are able to back up their points.

Tbh the videogame can't be art crowd seem immature and quite shitposty in nature.

Neither movies or video games will ever be art.
Only things like paintings, sculptures and urinals can really be considered art.

WHAT'S WRONG WITH HIS FAAAAAACE.
seriously, that's spoiler worthy

He had bone cancer of the jaw you ableist scum

Who writes the dictionaries? Who got to choose what art qualified as art? The faggots I've been talking about. The dictionary is just doing its job, it isn't to blame for the proper definition put into it, but the people who decided "this is the definition" are to blame. It isn't an organic development of the word art that it can't be something you fucking interact with.

You came up with sole on your own. There is nothing restricting art to being something built solely for aesthetic or emotional investment. A piece of pottery can be art even if you drink water from it. Having a use doesn't disqualify something from being art.

Who got to define what art fucking means you retard. When did we vote on it? What dictator came up with the definition? What part of something being a beautiful and talented piece of work is nullified by it having a fucking use?

will this be kino?