Somewere out there anyone who played the wind waker are sheding a tear.
Title: RE: games aren't art
Post by: Bill Aurion on January 28, 2006, 02:12:15 PM
Well his games aren't art, that's for sure...
Title: RE:games aren't art
Post by: S-U-P-E-R on January 28, 2006, 02:20:04 PM
ice burn
Actually, didn't he say that in the big Game-Informer article? I think he goes on to say that some games can be art or something terribly abstract, and this quote seems kinda selective to me.
Title: RE: games aren't art
Post by: ThePerm on January 28, 2006, 02:25:17 PM
the word art means anything created by a human...therefore its art.
not this lame artistic definition of art
Title: RE:games aren't art
Post by: mantidor on January 28, 2006, 03:49:30 PM
Art has a very loose and subjective definition, but Kojima's definition excludes even things like non-independant movies, dancing or architecture.
Title: RE: games aren't art
Post by: KDR_11k on January 29, 2006, 05:37:36 AM
Photos aren't art!
Title: RE: games aren't art
Post by: wandering on January 29, 2006, 09:10:09 PM
Delicious cakes aren't art!
...Oh, wait, actually, cakes really aren't art. Forget I said anything.
Title: RE: games aren't art
Post by: Ian Sane on January 30, 2006, 06:52:14 AM
I would consider anything art if the creator himself considers it such.
Title: RE: games aren't art
Post by: Pryopizm on January 30, 2006, 07:03:03 AM
If an idiot pooped on a plate and told me it was art, I'd punch his throat.
Title: RE: games aren't art
Post by: Ian Sane on January 30, 2006, 07:10:25 AM
"If an idiot pooped on a plate and told me it was art, I'd punch his throat."
Worse stuff has popped up in museums. Hell "artists" these days are more likely to make junk like that then a painting that people actually, you know, like looking at.
Title: RE: games aren't art
Post by: UncleBob on January 30, 2006, 07:11:29 AM
What if I pooped on a plate and called it "Delicious Poop Cake on a Plate on Honey Sauce"?
...err... nevermind.
Title: RE: games aren't art
Post by: KDR_11k on January 30, 2006, 07:22:39 AM
Art is the ability to convince a fool with too much money to give you a good chunck thereof in exchange for something you slapped together in five minutes.
Title: RE:games aren't art
Post by: JonLeung on January 30, 2006, 08:06:34 AM
I thought this was about Roger Ebert saying they weren't art because they are too interactive, that the artist's perception of the world isn't there.
I think there are still limits in the game worlds created by the gamemaker, so if a forced perspective is required for art, there still is that in games. And someone experiencing the "art" in a game can do different things, much like how someone can look at an abstract painting or sculpture and interpret something different from it.
I didn't read the article, but what does Hideo Kojima know? I'm not all anti-MGS but there were several points in MGS2:Substance where I felt like I was just watching a movie. I'd walk down the hall, and, oh! Another 15-minute cutscene. I'm not exagerrating much at all.
If movies are art, then MGS is art.
Title: RE: games aren't art
Post by: stevey on January 30, 2006, 12:19:23 PM
"If an idiot pooped on a plate and told me it was art, I'd punch his throat."
If you pooped on a plate and painted it and put up on your wall then it's art. They did it with a can of soup you know.
Title: RE: games aren't art
Post by: KnowsNothing on January 30, 2006, 12:23:45 PM
ahahah I can be Andy Warhol too, just wait a minute while I open up photoshop
Title: RE: games aren't art
Post by: Hostile Creation on January 30, 2006, 02:31:26 PM
I could go on and on about games being art.
But if I do, it'll be later.
Title: RE:games aren't art
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on January 30, 2006, 03:11:32 PM
Title: RE: games aren't art
Post by: ib2kool4u912 on January 30, 2006, 06:00:56 PM
I really liked the Penny-Arcade comments from when Roger Ebert said video games weren't art. They were something to the effect of: Music is undeniably art, graphics are art, yet somehow when they are combined, it ceases being art?
