Video games aren't art

do people really do that?

>defining art
Waist of time. You can’t do it. The only way a game could be art is if it was universally fun to play. THEN you could put whatever bullshit you deem as “art” in the story/visuals

Dude. Art.

Attached: 6345.jpg (840x840, 176.74K)

The picture in that OP is quintessentially "CONSOOOMER" grade A retardation.

God fucking forbid someone would start creating something instead of consuming what someone else created. That never happens.

Attached: 1573921405033 (1).png (720x720, 1.3M)

>Video games consist of graphics (art), sounds (art), music (art), writing (art) and sometimes "simulated" acting (art)
>But they can't be art

Attached: 1557201190809.png (300x297, 7.43K)

Well, Art is all about re-affirming yourself.

Literally Art

Attached: sh2.jpg (706x1000, 112.57K)

Don't bother arguing with these retards. You can't fix stupid.

Games are a form of entertainment, Art is a form of entertainment. Videogames are able to incorporate both, thus they partly possess an association to both.

Sandbox and linear games are full of stories that have already been scripted for you. Even unscripted events are scripted.

Don't compare games to art just because games have textures and sound...

video games are entertainment, unlike movies, books, music, etc

>the post that killed "vidya isn't art" threads

>Sandbox and linear games are full of stories that have already been scripted for you. Even unscripted events are scripted.
And this makes them not art, somehow? They're still art.

>If you think artists are useless
Literally who even said this? Why is this person spending their quarantine attacking strawmen?

Every story written by a writer is 'scripted'.
Every music created by a composer is 'scripted'
Every picture painted by an artist is 'scripted'

You are wrong, books are entertainment, music is entertainment, movies are entertainment and games are also entertainment. They all revolve around creating stimuli.
You are simply confusing 'interactive' entertainment, with 'passive' entertainment.

Literally everything man-made is art, prove me wrong.

Attached: 1429753690637.gif (514x510, 93.74K)

Me.

A proper video game cannot be art. Why? Because if it's an actual game, then it's just a means for the player to create art. Counter Strike? It's up to the player to make something out of the tools he has. Rocket League? It's up to the player what type of plays he will make with his car. Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2? It's up to the player how he chains combos together and creates a masterpiece of a run.
If people talk about a game because of muh story, it's not a proper game. It's an interactive movie.

Attached: nnv2s496erw31.jpg (4160x3120, 915.01K)

And very few of those things are good art these days. The vast majority of movies aren’t fine art, the vast majority of music isn’t fine art, etc. They exist mostly for entertainment because this is a shitty consumerist society and actual artistic sensibilities such as in the past are extinct

I mean, to me at least, gameplay itself is artful. Tons of designing and thinking goes into the exact gameplay you get. For a 3rd person action game, from the speed of the character, to his moves, his height and overall design, the animations, the environment design, the enemy design, etc. And all of it comes together for the unique way of controlling the game. I guess it isn't art, but it is artful.

Game Design is an art unto itself because the job of a game designer is to help the players experience specific emotions.

Of course he mentions some walking simulator. Even crash bandicoot 1 is more of a art piece than stanley.

>someone drew the design on a soccer players Jersey
>OMG SOCCER IS ART NOW GUIZ!!!!!
retards

It doesn't have to be good to be art. Besides, good is subjective.

>the slippery slope that killed millions of brain cells

Games are not art. Games, however, can contain art.

Is the Mona Lisa unscripted?

Attached: Yes.jpg (201x201, 4.66K)

see

>the reductionist brainlets have arrived

Videogames are a mixture of art and games.

I mean, /tg/ combines 2/5 of that plus sculpture sometimes, and yet no one calls it art

>sports aren't an artform

TV, books and video games aren’t art

None, I only watch state and national virus daily updates. Best tv out there. Boomer governors trying to figure out computers on live tv. Trump saying goofy shit. International health organizations not being able to keep a consistent story on if masks are real or if countries exist. Way better than any gay ass book.

But it is.

Confusing "video games" with "gameplay" won't do you any favors in this discussion.

Durr sports are art cause people experience specific emotions

Not an argument

Why is every fucking retard implying that you need an art degree in order to write a book, make music, write a poem or to paint?

why would he name The Stanley Parable of all things?
it's a very good interactive lecture on game design, but the art assets are pretty shit

>LEL EVERYTHING IS ART GUIZ

Attached: 1585088141226.png (600x800, 50.3K)

to validate their poor choice in degrees

Videogames are absolutely art, but videogames are not art because other art is incorporated within it. If that was all there was then videogames really wouldn't be art, only the art pieces within it. Which is not the same thing as videogames itself being art.

What sets videogames apart from all those other mediums you mentioned, is its interactivity. That is to say the gameplay, its mechanics, and its design. That's where the art of videogames lies.

Art is human expression

movies are scripted you tard

What would you call art if not something created to elicit emotion in the viewer/reader/listener? Game design is precisely that.

if anything can be art than nothing is art
meaning art is meaningless

gatekeeping is what make something special

A chess board and chess pieces are products of woodwork and can be art.

The game of chess itself is not.

Much like sport venues are of architecture, the designs and themes of music are art, yet the game of sport itself is not.

>murder someones parents to elicit sadness in their children
>murder is now art
Retard

I would argue that it also requires artistic intent. If you make a cup for a sake of making something to drink out of, you've created a tool, not a piece of art. If you make a cup for the sake of making a piece of art that happens to serve a secondary purpose, then you've created art.

>Read about a story of a child getting his parents murdered
>Book is art
>murder is now art
Fucking brainlet I swear to god

you're stretching the meaning of "art". If a game is designed well, it's definitely an achievement. But not art. Same reason why you don't call a well-engineered sewer system art (not a good analogy, but you get the point)

What I meant to say is that, if the game provides with the necessary tools to create art, it's a good game (but not art). If a game holds your hand and 99% of the playerbase can have the same experience (i'm talking about the sony movie games primarily) then I don't consider it to be a proper game. That's an actual interactive movie.

I'm well aware that I will get shit for this, but I cannot - in good conscience - claim that rocket league (i'm hooked on RL rn) is as much of a video game as tlou or uncharted or even half life alyx. You need to put hundreds of hours into Rocket League to be able to pull off the satisfying plays one yearns for. While a game like the last of us can be completed by anyone with a functioning brain.

That's why I said, that one game puts the tools in your hands and lets you create """art""", while the other is basically an interactive movie, and wouldn't lose much of its merits if it was an actual movie.

youtube.com/watch?v=OIR_pQnKqho

A tool is a piece of art. Tool-crafting is an art-form.

Pathologic 2 is literally art.

Attached: 1567955088320.jpg (1920x1080, 181.55K)