To my knowledge, no one in or out of the field has ever been able to cite a game worthy of comparison with the great dramatists, poets, filmmakers, novelists and composers. That a game can aspire to artistic importance as a visual experience, I accept. But for most gamers, video games represent a loss of those precious hours we have available to make ourselves more cultured, civilized and empathetic.
—Roger Ebert
Bioshock infinite
If Ebert had such great taste, why did he lose his mouth? Checkmate you fat dead faggot!
Just like all the real art with any worth, good games are not made by self-entitled artists but by artisans.
Pretty much 100% true.
Spend 1000s hours playing RPGs learning nothing of value, develop no new skills. It also didn't improve my quality of life in anyway like even pointless exercising does.
It would be interesting to see if anyone had ideas whether this is a permanent problem or if vidya could ever be more than the equivalent of watching shit TV.
CliffyB, pls
Who the fuck cares about this dead prick?.
video games is a form of entertainment
...
I still don't understand why people put so much weight on Eberts opinions of video games AS A FILM CRITIC. I respect the fact he was familiar enough with the media to understand its importance from a visual standpoint. But the art in video games comes from the gameplay, mechanics, and level design. These aspects predates video games in the form of game theory. Video games from a gameplay standpoint has helped advanced not only the fields of AI and logic, but have been the driving force of computation advancement since the 1980s when the Commodore 64 was marketed to gamers. People don't realize the significance of games driving hardware sales, thus boosting R&D budget for hardware makers. Games are big business in these respects
What's more is he later retracted that statement saying he really couldn't say since he wasn't familiar enough with games.
What if Ebert was just doing the professional equivalent of "Recommend me some video games All games are shit, and you can't prove me wrong." style of shitposting?
I don't know why people are annoyed with this guy.
The only people who want videogames to be identified as art are faggots who have this need to be more than manchildren and want their hobby to be justified than merely playing with toys.
It's clear by now that Holla Forums is more interested in listening to cunts that disrespect video games than the games themselves.
Poets and Novelists, to a degree, I agree with. A lot of people read shitty poetry and dime-store novels, though. One of the great values in literature is that it's more-or-less timeless. This person who has been dead for centuries, maybe millenia, are speaking directly to you through the page - telling you a story, or describing some bit of history. But they are still bound to their time, and to understand their words, sometimes it's necessary to educate yourself on their culture, the history and politics of the nations they lived in, and learn about the people they're referencing. Video games, being so young, largely can't compete with the sheer histrocity that comes with literature.
Cinema… it's largely shit created to give idiots a spectacle to gawk at, or give pretentious shitheads some deepity in moving picture form to mistake for being some profound insight into the human condition. In this regard, games are already the equals to cinema.
Composition and music, while I don't see how it can make you more "civilized and empathetic" has already largely been folded into video games rather nicely. Though it does beg the question of, aside from pacing issues, why aren't there more video game musicals?
...
Things like toilets, canvases with vomit on them and jars of piss are art, not videogames.
He ignores the fact that most books,films, etc are wastes of time as well and that video games are a very young medium. Not to mention that comparing video games to film and literature is always a mistake when the quality of games always comes from its design and mechanics. They should be art in the same vein as things like architecture or woodworking is and I have no problem with that. Better than a bunch of pretentious hipsters and film school dropouts making 30 minute walking simulators or 10 hour b movies.
Well, I know of at least one video game musical that is based on Phoenix Wright which is fairly decent. It's done by a group called Takarazuka Revue, which is an all female musical theater troupe. It's so silly and goddamn ridiculous but they gave it a good go and made it work. Here's a video of it if you've got 2 hours to spare.
The whole idea of video games being art has been done to death tbh. People who claim that it isn't are usually people who are out of touch with the proles but I respect Ebert's opinion on video games because he does touch upon the fact that we may have become less cultured, empathetic etc but that seems to be more of a societal phenomenon rather than something that can be purely squared on video games.
We see it on how distant we've become to the truths of the world and that prevalent white guilt that manifested itself in ugly ways by people with a high degree of self-loathing but with no meaningful outlet. We see various types of media that is so banal and pointless; yet people religiously follow these celebrities like the Kardashians, Selena Gomez, Kanye West because mainstream culture is so utterly vacuous and empty that society in general doesn't care about the things that matter. There aren't many great rock bands because everyone is focused on image rather than musical content, which is why most pop stars sound so fucking awful but somehow have their own set of fans. Rap music has went the same way with all of it's stupidity and shallow flows with a few exceptions like Chance the Rapper or Childish Gambino but rap music has deteriorated into irredeemable shit.
Games are an easy target because it's a young medium. We've just got to make sure that we don't buy into the whole "games is art xD" bullshit; so we don't get more "games" like Gone Home or any of those really awful walking simulators like Firewatch.
Just as it is for "most" bookers, moviers, musicers, poetriers, hobbiers, etc, I'm certain.
I used to enjoy reading his reviews in the newspaper as a child, but once I grew a critical bone and compared the reviews to the subjects, I realized that's all they were: fun to read, but with little value as reviews.
Why did you delete your post? Coward
He is right. This thread is full of sperges who do not want to face the fact that they've been wasting way too much time playing video games rather than doing something productive and something that actually improves your quality of life in some way.
Video games are a past time, but if you are really lucky, you'll become one of those "e-sport" or streamer types and make money.
Typo.
And no one needs to. Video games are purely entertainment and I don't give a fuck what pretentious faggots think of them.
Explain, because the average person reading a book is always reading genre fiction which is no better than the average video game.
or it's because I like my life and playing video games makes them better. If you're reading or watching fiction you're no better than the average kid in a cod match.
Reading a book requires you to use your imagination way more than comics or vidyas
Fiction is the only worthwhile aspect of reading books anyway. Nonfiction is boring normalfag real life shit.
And imagination is a useful thing because?
The same can be said about most forms of entertainment. It's up to the particular individual what he intends to do in his leisure time. There is no imperative to better oneself in every waking moment, except possibly a moral one. Why won't he pick on any other hobby like collecting stamps or travelling the world?
Good goy
XD
Fuck that shit. The God of War games would have changed his mind.
No, son. You're way off.
And he is right. Video games are just a past time with cheesy and infantile weeb shit or dark and edgy tryhard shit. We play for fun, not some grand experience that moves us.
You read nonfiction when you need it (usually to learn something useful), not because you want it.
Of course we play for fun. There's no other purpose to something that is purely entertainment.
And you're wrong on the reading. Nonfiction is nearly exclusively realm of the normalfags. That shit is in education.
That makes sense.
What are you, twelve?
I liked your shitpost so I responded in kind.
Movies, novels, music, and games are all just something to take your mind off the drudgery that is life.
This is why we need ART GAMES, user.
That is NOT the image I selected but I guess it still fits..
We need another war.
We just need video games to be mocked and seen as for losers again. I miss being unironically called a nerd in school for genuinely liking video games. Now those same faggots probably are the target demographic for shitty games overrunning vidya.
M8…
Normalfags don't read. If they do, its very basic stuff they feel they have to because of social norms.
Nah
Normalfags are the ones reading the boring nonfiction because they think it makes them more cultured or smarter.
Discworld is what's really for patricians.
...
It wouldn't be senseless if it was waged against the Jew
Why don't we just skip the war and get the part where gas them all?
just because you don;t understand it doesnt mean there's not a reason
Maybe that's because a shitload of dramatists, poets, filmmakers, novelists, and composers are overrated hacks that get a pass because "muh classics!", while games don't. Also, all the modern "masterpieces" I've seen and read are dogshit that pushes an agenda and thus gets its dick sucked by sycophants. For example, Avatar.
You mean against Freemasonry.
Shitty fantasy written for kids is normalfag territory. Like Harry Potter, Twilight etc.
Profit at our expense. It's all politics and money. It's senseless.
Shitty books in general, yes. Nonfiction is especially appealing to normalfags though because it's real life and things that don't bring them out of their mundane comfort zone and can connect to.
Someone post the Cliffy tweet.
I don't have that but I have this.
LE SHITIZEN KAYNE OF GAYMING
Video game doesn't make men receptive to good.
There is no meta-language in gameplay. Everything is very mechanic to the core, it is meant to to be understood practically and give your brain jolts of excitement rather than spiritual experience.
There is no logic of poetry in gameplay. Again, they're all very straightforward, mechanic, and symbolic. From level design, enemy placement, character behaviors that affect the gameplay, they're all engineered that way to be logically coherent to be understood (not in an emotional way) by the player rather than poetic. Otherwise it won't be a good game.
People need calmness in order to turn on the frontal lobe part of their brains and appreciate the spiritual experience of art. Video games are way too fast paced and autistic to be enjoyed spiritually.
Video game is closer to science than art, because intuition only comes after you win a move set by the computer.
Empiricism plays a very large part in the enjoyment of video games. "You have to git gud", some Holla Forumsirgin said. There is no dynamic of revelation, there is no infinite metaphor to be found in gameplay.
Therefore, it can be concluded that video game is a much worse form of art than motion picture. There is little to no art in it's practice, it doesn't make you question the meaning of your finite life and the existence of the infinite. It does your soul NO good. Video game is kitsch entertainment, not true art.
Look, bottomline is, you play video games because you aren't good enough for any other form of media.
This is why /mu/ laughs at you when you present the 2-3 shitty albums that your underdeveloped ear managed to understand.
This is why /lit/ laughs at you when you present the 2-3 shitty entry level books, mostly recommended by you by Holla Forums as the usual propaganda that your underdeveloped brain managed to read even tho there weren't any pretty pictures.
This is why in real life you've always been laughed out of the room or considered a gigantic fedora manchild when you presented your opinion on pretty much anything.
This is why even in Holla Forums people laugh at your taste in games, clearly presenting the same 2-3 games that the hivemind accepted and that you haven't played yourself, trying to fit in to the place but you clearly were neve good enough even for this stupid ass "hobby".
This is why even Holla Forums laughs at you, as you repeat all the stupid shit they brainwashed into your brain just to watch you sing and dance like an uninformed, clueless puppet trolled into oblivion for their amusement, because you were never good enough to actually have serious political discussion, as you're nothing but a child.
The truth is, if you're in Holla Forums you're basically not good enough for anything, you fail at every form of medium you try to approach, you're shit at everything, including games.
Video games are the "hobby" of the mentally underdeveloped manchildren, the rejects that don't fit anywhere else.
I really wish I could slap people who think themselves too cool to have fun. you know the same people who go UH ACTION MOVIES ARE BENEATH ME M-M-M-MUH VIOLENCE IS TOO UNCOOL FOR ME WATCH BOYHOOD
Quentin?
t. guy who literally watched shitty movies he didn't like for a living
Books will always be superior to games in storytelling.
Books will always be surperior to movies to storytelling also, as with the medium some information will be lost.
Very true, which is why game makers need to stop trying to make games about story and focus on GAMEPLAY and mechanics again.
Games will always be superior to books or movies in gameplay.
b-b-but Boyhood took 12 years to make!
Yet normalfags love their capeshit, Game of Thrones, Walking Dead and more. user, stop trying to justify your pleb level and accept you're just like them.
WEW LAD
It's always to the benefit of the bankers.
Here.
That's actually an NSA employee. You could get blackvanned and replaced with an AI by one of the beautiful ones from Calhoun's Utopia - what a world we live in.
Investment of resource on something doesn't make that subject a form of art. The background might be an art, but you need a better argument in proving your point. An art must involve the artist's emotional capacity and longing for spiritual harmony, not only mere creativity.
It is a combination of creativity and technical knowledge utilized in order to achieve a form of twitch based enjoyment from the player.
See above. Next you will say that hockey rules and chess are a form of art too.
Yes.
Films are the ultimate medium for art. No other form of art can derive an audiovisual experience in logic of a poetry. Films that aren't cinema and kino are not art, yes, but that doesn't mean that films are less of an art form than video games. Video game is the worst medium for art.
Storytelling in books usually involve rigidly logical development of the plot, which arbitrarily forcing pieces of the story into sequence in obedience to some abstract notion of order. The complexity of storytelling in books makes it an inferior medium for art to cinema.
>Cliff "Overwatch is catered more to an anime fandom, Law Breakers is more mature" Blezinski, hack of the century and the guy who hasn't made a good game in at least 10 years besides fat princess because that is true ART
How do you compare hide&seek to hamlet? How do you compare monopoly to moonlight sonata? How do you compare tetris to the old man and the sea? The only way to make a game comparable in this way would be to turn it into a non-game. Into an "experience". Fuck that.
Exactly.
What the fuck does that even mean?
You play shitty Holla Forums approved games you don't actually like to make yourself look cool,
for free.
See? You're such a pleb you can't even understand that basic facet of art
To my knowledge, no filmmaker has ever been able to properly convey the experience of a video game on the silver screen. Hollywood will never be able to make anything as engaging as Nintendo can.
It's time to accept that Art will never be video games.
Interactive media have far better range than the rest in every respect. The only problem is that the game industry seldom lives up to its potential because it's so whored out.
Thanks, that's some funny shit.
2deep4me
no seriously what the fuck does longing for spiritual harmony mean and how exactly are you going to put that in a video game
The longing of harmony is the reason why humans try to find the reason and meaning for their existence, why humans question what consequences their actions will create in the long run, what will happen after a few decades of their life runs out. It is the reason behind all reasons, seeking of food for the soul. Harmony is achieved when humans have no fear and worry of the future.
don't take it too seriously. this is the designated shitting thread
It's almost like video games and literature are not the same thing and have different goals.
CHECKMATE
Forgot embed FUCK
You can't, that's the point.
Video game is entertainment. Art is not made for the purpose of entertaining the audience.
"I only enjoy mature hobbies for mature people such as myself"
—Roger Ebert
We already know the answer to all those questions.
Only fedoracucks deny it.
top kek
Nice one, you almost had me
Spotted the triggered atheist.
Are you being ironically retarded?
You're trying way to hard man
...
By your definition, not the clinical definition of art, nor most of the standards other people have for art. Which is fine, art is generally abstract to a point and by nature it's definition would be as well.
Here's your reply.
trying to make art of any game is ass sucking retarded, I mean no one is (seriously) considering football game to be art and art itself is just degenerated shit nowadays
rekt lol
...
Do you think if people were more literate in coding, they would see certain games as art?
The funny thing is, if people fully understood things like binary space partitioning, they would probably consider Doom as art before something like Life is Strange.
Shit you got me dawg!
I think you're misinterpreting him. I believe he means when there is no more reason to fear for these things, harmony can be achieved. Then again I could be misinterpreting him as well
Entertainment is only a fruit of art. An artist creates art because the world isn't perfect, because he had an intention to bring harmony into the world. An artist who creates art for the main purpose of enjoyment of the audience are porn artists.
There is no axiom for the definition of art, and society can't find the reason why a piece of painting is more "artistic" than a piece of machinery blueprint.
tl;dr
life is suffering, people without fear and worry are idle beautiful mice, dead and hollow inside, or just simply dead
im a dead old faggot
—Roger Ebert
t. gave Revenge of the Sith 3/4 stars
This explains itself, I don't have any problems with this.
This is horseshit. It can be A reason, but it is in no way THE reason. Struggle is integral to the universe, both living and not. Solipsistic "harmony" sounds like modernist wank to me.
Same as above.
I don't give these pseudo-intellectuals the benefit of the doubt - disregarding ideological purity is how you get subverted, and I'm not taking any more risks. If I see bullshit, I'm calling it out for others to see and assess for themselves.
Sage for OT
>As far as we know, Louis Bounoure never served as ["Director" nor was even] a member of the CNRS.
>Paul Lemoine was an atheist, and he was against the theory of evolution because he felt it was not a good explanation of the origin of living beings and by showing its limits risked to discredit materialism. Although this point was not very clear we believe that when he spoke of "the theory of evolution" he was actually addressing the explanation of specifically [how] evolution [occurred] and not the [more general idea] of evolution itself.
he has no fear and worry of the future, thus harmony
The Eternal Jew have no future and no place to go, they put their faith on the materialism or worldly desires. If you think these people can lead you into spiritual harmony, the woe is you.
I didn't say that harmony can be achieved in your lifetime. There is no harmony in this world. Maybe in the afterlife. Like what this user at
says.
That's the purpose of art. People try to create their own harmony, their own perfection. If the world was perfect, then art wouldn't exist.
why did i even bother replying to this bait
You're right, that is a lot of pseudo intellectual bullshit. I suppose I'm tired and need to go to bed. Though I have to say
Is some huge bullshit too
Fair enough man.
Who the fuck cares? If I've having fun I'm having fun.
Or it could be a basic primal instinct to understand, in some small way, the world around us - because the better we can understand it, the better we can manipulate it, and the better we can manipulate it - the better we are at survival. This doesn't necessarily guarantee accuracy, mind you - there's no way for the brain to fact check your assumptions outside of your perception - so just finding an answer in itself can trigger the reward centers of your brain.
And we just so happen to have brains that are capable of abstract thought, and thus have applied this basic instinct and reward system to concepts like mortality and whatnot.
So, never. Because we will never know with 100% certainty what the future holds, and we will never be able to completely shake that primal fear of the unknown.
The purpose of art is not to replace struggle. Art is made as an embodiment of peacefulness in your mind, to make the human struggle more meaningful or find a meaning in suffering. We create our own harmony in art to make the human soul receptive to good…
Exactly. That's why video games will never be art
If that is the purpose of art, then art is the ultimate failure.
A single scientific discovery does that better than a hundred of artistic masterpieces. And that is because it can be objectively useful, unlike art, whose appreciation is nothing more than a mental wanking session.
My diarrhea against a canvas is art.
And how is your tl;dr related to the thread theme?
Are you familiar with Yuri Bezmenov per chance? I highly recommend you go over these two videos of his, and really reflect on them.
So long story short
Art: Being a pretentious fuck who does not want to bring joy to the world through entertainment and challenge
Video games: The exact opposite
I'll sick to video games
brütal, but accurate comment
Are you fucking retarded? How did you get the implication that I look up to the kikes from me mocking them and posting a merchant meme?
Yes, never. Only the christian concept of God knows harmony.
Tools can't remove ALL problems of now and the future. No, it has a different purpose than art.
Turns out, mental wanking is the main life support for humans. Every single one of our reasons stem from some sort of mental wanking. Humans will commit suicide when their mental wanking comes to a dead end. Mental wanking is what differs us from the beast. No, tools will never truly give you a reason to live.
Not you, but degenerates around you.
Are you serious?
I've seen them both. But disregarding ideological purity is how you get subverted sounds an awful lot like 'listen and believe' to me. I understand that its a sort of defense mechanism when you think there's a group out to brainwash you but at the same time it leads to an awful mentality where you follow blindly and 'listen and believe'
Try challenging your beliefs and looking for evidence for both sides of a topic and attempt to discern the truth yourself. Maybe you'll find your ideology is correct or maybe you'll find it has gaps in certain topics or issues. It's fine to disagree with some aspects. It doesn't mean your ideology is entirely wrong. But it does mean that it isn't infallible and questioning what you are told is a good idea
Replace "mental wanking" with "escapism" and we can agree.
Trying to make yourself work like a robot is the real escapism.
The future will be the judge.
If you're godless, there's nothing to be judged.
Harmony cannot be achieved by humans, because to create a world in which humans do not fear one another - you have to create a world in which humans cannot hurt or wish to hurt one another. Technical impossibilities aside, achieving such pretty much requires the extinguishing of free will - either through force, or subversion.
Think of it in terms of a celestial heaven. It's said to be a place of utmost harmony between souls, as they are all enraptured in the presence of god and are compelled to join the choirs of angels to sing his glories for eternity. In other words, the death of free will by subversion. A supercharged version of dosing everyone to the gills on opioids and other pacifying and mood altering drugs.
Or, by force - harmony is achieved by simply disallowing the potential for sin in heaven. Disallowing the potential for disobedience to the will of god - which is tantamount to a removal of free will.
And you must remove free will, or else you invite the potential for disobedience, and what becomes of heaven if souls are allowed to break that harmony? To disobey?
I suppose, you could also simply destroy their minds - returning souls to a state pre-fruit, where sin is non-applicable, because the reasoning mind capable of knowing good from evil is abolished. That does little to alleviate suffering, however. Animals suffer, and inflict suffering on each other. They commit egregious sins in their ignorance, and we (and presumably god) forgives them for being "dumb animals".
In any case, Harmony requires the abolishment of free will. If you want Harmony on Earth, then our best option is to invent and then join the Borg collective.
When I say 'disregarding ideological purity' I don't mean 'listening to what other people have to say', I mean letting insidiously subversive trollop like go unanswered, and slowly allowing your worldview, and that of those around you, be unconsciously changed without your or their reflection upon the matter.
That is where it boils down to the individual more than the whole - if you (not as in ''you' literally') don't have the mental capacity to critically analyse what's being presented to you and see how it fits with your beliefs and values, you probably shouldn't be engaged in this kind of thought to begin with. Obviously you've got bigger problems to deal with.
You say this as if you know my thought processes on the matter, or that my beliefs are laid out in plain through a few imageboard posts. I'm sure you mean well, but tone it down on the holier-than-thou if you don't want to be related to, well, pic related.
Not actually sure why you retards are allowed opinions.
Definitely troubling.
funny how he never mention painting or visual arts.
funny how he agrees games are a visual medium.
he's right.
ALL VIDEOGAMES EVER MADE have a garbage story compared to film or literature.
garbage, manchilds never read any book or good film.
He never played Ico or Shadow of the Colossus.
Opinion discarded
a fucking shampoo comercial has more artistic quality than 99.9% videogames.
I've always wanted to make games, so I engaged in learning about literature, film, sculpture (3D), animation, drawing, painting, music.
I can't provide my credentials, pls forgive me, nor I speak english as a first language.
Don't want to be seen as a huge asshole that knows everything, but I think I have a bigger understanding of art than 99.9% Holla Forums faggots.
Pls don't meme this post, and critique and weight my knowledge only on my answers.
So, if you have any questions towards art and the art world, feel free to ask anything.
If you wonder why shit on a canvas is art and why a game is not, ask.
why
do
you
type
like
you're
from
reddit?
You can be an artist by being a poet, a filmmaker, a sculptor, a painter, or a musician.
But as a video game developer, nah.
Some of your game's resources might be art if you put artistic merit into it.
but the game itself
is
not
art.
...
whitespace makes it's less crowded.
read on typography.
I don't even have an account of reddit.
there's not a single definition of art, that's why Holla Forums can't understand art.
but Holla Forums makes the mistake and most people make the mistake that games are like film or books, because action games, adventure games and rpgs use a linear structure.
Most game genres, pretty much all, except those three have no story or little story.
Games don't belong to the same cathegory as films and books, they're not fixed temporal objects.
Games are dynamic temporal objects, so they belong with street theather, interactive comedy, interactive performance art.
Even OP cites agree games are a visual medium, not a storytelling one.
Compare a game to a painting, not a film.
Hell, film isn't the appropiate medium.
Animation is a more appropiate medium to compare.
Most of the industry want to be like hollywood rather than disney.
Any game that has even a tiny edge in the amount of cultural value versus the massive downsides of gaming in itself would in all practicality have to minimise the amount of gaming in the game.
As such the less like a game your vidya is the more culturally worthwhile it becomes.
Basically walking sims, interactive novels and 6 hour long cinematics are the pinnacle of gaming achievement, which is paltry in relation to all other cultural works. And good gameplay games must have negative value, sinking to somewhere around drug use in terms of productive use of time.
read on narrative gameplay.
It's like saying transformers it's the pinnacle of film.
that retarded meme again
Video games are a game medium more than they are a visual medium. Graphics don't make a game automatically good, see? It's the game, like a virtual basketball or football.
Even if you compare video game to painting, vidya will fall apart. It is a game medium. Visuals in video games are used for getting your points across, not delivering aesthetic derived intuition.
99.9% of Holla Forums knowledge on art is retarded as fuck.
also pleb film, pleb books, pleb everything.
is called interactive mediums.
see: street storytellers, street comedy, street theather, interactive performance.
Hell, even tabletop gaming and D&D are better comparisons to games than film or books.
Can you recognize a figurative expression when you see one?
Interactive medium by it's definition can cover a lot of things. Walking simulators and computer UI can be considered an interactive medium. Game implies competition. Competitive interactive medium might be more fitting.
Too radical. I would settle for no longer having any sensible motivation for conflict. And those too dumb to recognize that having a disadvantage in a potential conflict.
if you take the literal or even a broad definition, internet explorer, chrome, microsoft word are interactive shit.
HEll, imageboards can be considered a text version of MMO.
A better comparison is stacking shelves or sweeping the floor. Games are not interactive like any kind of creative experience they are interactive in process alone.
...
But none of them is competitive. That's how you separate video games from other digital interactive mediums.
They are interactive like a monkey pressing buttons. Not like street theatre.
OP, you forgot the part that preceded that.
Roger Ebert wasn't challenging games to become art. He was subtly warning us. He was right, and in the attempt to prove him wrong, the industry has become a cesspool of wannabe auteurs shoveling out 90 minute experiences for 19.99.
Games aren't art, and trying to make them art has made them demonstrably worse as games.
It was a challenge but the industry and gamers are autistic manchildren that has never seen good art.
...
So you need some interaction with audience to call something interactive? And anything else, like for example in a multiplayer game, is not "true" interactivity? Pretty elitist, as expected from an art fan.
Games can be art. Like any medium. If Ebert knew anything about games he would have conceeded this point. But he's an old man with little knowledge on the subject.
When movies were invented people decried them as being unartfull mass media, suitible only for the filthy plebians.
And today we consider movies to be high art. But Michael Bay can still make movies. Him shoveling shit into cinemas doesn't mean film cannot be art. In the same was as a child drawing a stickman with a giant dick doesn't invalidate the sistine chapel. Some games being bad doesnt invalidate the entire medium from being art.
I'm not sure I understand what your trying to say, but I know it's bullshit. You can be creative inside the constraints of a game, does that not mean that it is interactive in a creative way? When someone spends hundreds of hours autisming up a perfect dwarf fortress is that not interacting in a creative way?
Again: The worst of a medium does not invalidate the best of a medium. The fact that something has the potential to be shit, dull, boring, etc. Doesn't mean everything made in that medium will be all those things. Any artistic expression has the capability to be mundane shit.
Because gamers are knee jerk reactionary children.
Apparently so are moviegoers, according to Sony and Paul Feig
And how would you know that? Nobody advertises here how much time he spends playing games as compared to shitposting.
At best, games have artistic moments.
kys storyfaggot.
Tip top kekkers.
Pls. Roger Ebert was a faggot.
At best, movies have artistic moments.
At least he was right about the Rob Roy thing.
Check em.
How many times do I have to post this shit before you (((film enthusiasts))) fuck off?
archive.is
I feel like this topic has been done to death. Video games can be art, but it really just depends on what you mean by art. If you consider a great combat system or a great user interface or a great level design to be art, then who is to say you are wrong? The whole crux of this conversation depends on defining art and then attributing that definition to the medium or elements of it. I don't know if anyone can do that. There are many different criteria for what constitutes art, and not everyone agrees on what art is.
People who don't want video games to be considered art are, reasonably so, worried about what the connotations of art bring along to the medium. "If walking-simulator-shit-for-brains-dialog-heavy-politically-charged-statement-making bullshit is what people consider art, then I don't want it!" I can sympathize with that sentiment, but you must keep in mind that this is merely one definition of art. Art can mean anything you want it to mean, really, unless there is a set and defined criteria that expresses what should and should not be considered art. Either you define it and then start developing a huge as fuck list of all the games that fit your criteria, or you shut the fuck up about it and move on.
Not everyone will think like you, so if you're even a tiny bit interested in determining how society views video games, then you have to be involved in the conversation and come up with counter examples and refutations to the bullshit that, say, feminists or other special interests will come up with when defining their terms and trying to push for this or that perception or change. If you don't then you're pretty much stepping aside and letting any fuck walk in and start making statements and demands in regards to their bullshit. This is why people like Anita can gain such a foothold despite being absolutely clueless on what constitutes a good game.
These threads were great the first few times, not so much now
Nice digits
this has been debated and it's a dead question.
It has been solved.
only faggots who lack any time reading about aesthetics still wonder what is art.
shit in a canvas is art, games are not.
there's good arguments for this.
only Holla Forums don't fucking open a book on art history or even a basic explanations of aesthetics.
it's only retards discussions over something that has already a definite answer they haven't googled.
Then we better stop calling them "martial arts" then.
because art has like a dozen meaning depending on context.
fucking retarded to argue about a word with hundreds of meaning without explaining what is your context.
are u talking about medieval art, tribal african art, renaissance, modern art, chinese and japanese art, martial arts, cooking, industrial shit, graphic design, experimental shit, contemporanean art, religious art, kinetic arts, sports, games?
which one?
fucking Holla Forums with their iliteracy.
BRING BACK DADAISM
I respect the guy, but how clever could he be if he died? Checkmate, Ebertists
I forgot to add.
many of the definitions of art contradict each other.
ask a conservative artist his opinion on modern shit vs a modern artist opinions on classical art.
It's like black and white.
so which is it? Is art something definite or something subjective?
Staring at paintings doesn't teach you how to paint .
Playing football doesn't teach you how to do other stuff than playing football but I guess there is a social component there so it's kinda better, but just as mindless
Video games are entertainment, and as such they are not aimed at teaching, they are aimed at you having fun.
They are quick disposable satisfaction for fags that can't do anything with their life, so they can feel accomplished when they deplete that boss HP bar.
read on art history.
each century and art movement has it's own definition of art.
sometimes those definitions contradict each other.
dadaism is the oposite of the french academicism.
take a course on art history pls.
so in other words, there is not a definite answer to "what is art?".
nah, i think i'll work on getting a real degree, thanks
Yah, you sound real informed. You can't even string a proper sentence together.
Sorry I have to be the one to call you out, but give me a break.
Remember when art was art?
2016
ART!
Post-modernity and moral relativism is cancer.
Fucking Hell Holla Forums, why? Have you ever read, watched, or looked at what these people consider art? It's shit! It's hamfisted metaphors that are only deep if you're a mouth breathing neandrathal. These people are the same fucks that scream about Dostevsky being read in school instead of some plural pronouned nigger. They disrespect art itself by pretending the presence of a metaphor is equivalent to perfection of form.
I don't even care if Ebert was at least a little saner than that, the sentiment is the same. He's claiming that art must be 'high minded' to be art at all and if it's made to be enjoyed it's somehow a lesser thing. Ignoring that Aeschylus or Shakespeare wanted asses in the seats more than their 'artistic statement' because an artistic conscience doesn't put food on the fucking plate.
Since I'm giving my unsolicited opinions anyway, I might as well say it. The highest art can be enjoyed by the cultured and the worker. The highest artform appeals to humanity not some asshole in Oxford.
Third pic is actually my desktop background, no joke. Never thought the day would come I'd end up seeing it on Holla Forums.
Did Ebert ever play Planescape Torment? I bet he didn't and I'd say not enough people in this thread have either.
I need to fart.
It always has been. You're just looking at it from the skewed perspective of the media, art galleries, and modern art museums.
...
Lamest fetish.
there are some text based games I hold in higher esteem then most books, some abstract games that compare with moving poetry, some AAA titles that play like movies :^), and some indieshit with soundtracks comparable in quality and fidelity to the orchestras of old.
you gain from videogames what you give and how much you invest yourself, not your time. unlike other mediums that are show and tell, videogames can and are feel and do, and this sort is a valuable thing that the lofty naturalists begged for, pleaded for, not but a hundred years ago
culture is a horde of moving parts and there is no better way to keep up than with the true modern art, vidya, a far cry from the absolute drivel that is 'performance art'
empathy can be garnered far easier from experiencing, fully engaged and more importantly being involved in, the horrors of the modern era through videogames, granted I find this area the least developed artistically because sad shit isn't fun but there's still a few vidya moments you can take things from and use to empathize
in summary, this thread is shit
pirate some dvd on art history.
or some book.
college is a fucking scam.
wow, haven't you realized english is not my native language yet?
ok retard.
full retard.
keep posting retarded shit.
sage, hide, report.
patrician critics can't stand that plebs like pleb art and have pleb opinions and tastes.
they can't understand some people want money and that art is now an industry that needs to make money.
they survive by profiting from rich assholes that want to be seen cultured by following their opinions and goverment grants made by some jew on the minister of culture.
English isn't my native language either but I start my sentences with upper case.
Everything is art. There's no question of what isn't, the question should be "Is it good art?"
my english isn't perfect, I know someone will always complain about it, so I stopped giving a fuck.
this is the only correct answer.
If everything it art, what's the point of having a word for it?
Not everything is art.
It has diferent meanings.
Art
That's true of most entertainment, though. Ebert somehow convinced himself there was some greater merit to watching movies, when there really wasn't. He just decided movies were in some ephemeral way superior to games because he preferred them.
The French Revolution was a mistake.
Piss off, you pretentious cunt. I'm glad you're fucking dead.
