Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Grakelin]

Art is about feeling, so I don't understand why you think video games are 'more' than art because they're an experience. You experience all art. If you didn't it would have failed.

[Footkerchief]

He's just giving up. His series of screenshots from random first person shooters (which, at a glance, look like the VG industry's answer to exploitation horror films) indicates his viewpoint hasn't shifted at all.

It was all from Jericho, and he had a video from Jericho and one from Undying at the bottom of the page.  And while I wouldn't go as far as exploitation horror films, Jericho's environments did look like, to paraphrase Yahtzee, the contents of an abattoir slop-bucket.

I think the point of the Jericho screenshots was to mock Clive Barker's statements about games being art.  Clive Barker was the producer (or writer, or something) for Jericho, which is decidedly NOT art.

[Sensei]

He ought to play a Team Ico game, really.

You can bet he's never heard of them, and has ignored any attempts to inform him of such.

I'm pretty sure Mr. Roger Ebert has a very poor idea, born primarily from FOX News, of what games are aside from art.

And I'd like to add a stance I don't think I've seen yet- you'll note that video games CONTAIN things which would definitely be called art- soundtracks, imagery designed to be visually appealing of all sorts, and stories (the fact that most of them are terrible excuse plots is irrelevant and has exceptions). So, is an art gallery are in itself? Not unlike a game it requires the work of artists and technicians alike. Perhaps a game cannot be said to be art as it does not exist purely to evoke emotion, but it definitely should not be eschewed as a place where art can be found.

[Kogan Loloklam]

Art is about feeling, so I don't understand why you think video games are 'more' than art because they're an experience. You experience all art. If you didn't it would have failed.

Because art stops at the initial experience, and generally doesn't change if you look again right away.

[Duke 2.0]

I'm pretty sure Mr. Roger Ebert has a very poor idea, born primarily from FOX News, of what games are aside from art.

While I agree about the statements made about the parties, I feel making the connection here is somewhat ironic considering the stupidity of the very thing being mocked. I think Roger Ebert just never got really into games, nothing I read reflected the opinion that violent games are the cause of all crime everywhere forever.

[Grakelin]

Art is about feeling, so I don't understand why you think video games are 'more' than art because they're an experience. You experience all art. If you didn't it would have failed.

Because art stops at the initial experience, and generally doesn't change if you look again right away.

...

You have no idea what you're talking about, and I won't even have this discussion with you.

[Kogan Loloklam]

Art is about feeling, so I don't understand why you think video games are 'more' than art because they're an experience. You experience all art. If you didn't it would have failed.

Because art stops at the initial experience, and generally doesn't change if you look again right away.

...

You have no idea what you're talking about, and I won't even have this discussion with you.

I know exactly what I am talking about, or I think I do. Maybe my reaction to "traditional art" is so abnormal that what I percieve really is different than what everyone else does. I doubt this though, since I don't see anyone going back to a museum every day to look at the same piece of art for more than a week just to try to get another "hit" of emotions.

But like I said, maybe I am just very odd.

[Grakelin]

Or maybe the reality isn't what you think it is, because people DO go back to museums again and again, and they watch the same films over and over again, and they listen to the same music over and over again.

[Kogan Loloklam]

Or maybe the reality isn't what you think it is, because people DO go back to museums again and again, and they watch the same films over and over again, and they listen to the same music over and over again.

Granted, they do. Still, it's a different experience for games when it's the same for other art in the short term (which is what I am trying to get at).

If you watch the same movie over and over again, you see the same movie. You may see things you missed the first time, but your reactions and interpretations will be mostly the same (room for change based on what you didn't see)
If you saw everything the first time, you'd probably react the same the second time you saw it, though likely less strongly
Contrast that to video games. Their very nature of being interactive means they are different every time you play. Even if you know everything there is to know about the video game, it will be a different experience each time you see it.

[nenjin]

The only thing that bums me about this whole thing is that people keep insisting SoC being art was a good excuse for it not being much of a game. *dons flame retardant suit*

I think the disconnect for Ebert is this; he doesn't find these things cool. He doesn't look at the main character and have a millisecond, unconscious reaction of "it would be cool to be that guy." The actual art design in video games means squat to him because he's not on the same wave length as even people his own age who have consistently consumed this stuff for decades now.

It's the same reason Conan is a cult-classic while not being considered 'art' in film circles. Or why many academy award winning movies are things I couldn't sit through. He has a totally different set of values that doesn't include things like: most badass ways to kill people and story lines that involve magic.

While not being the same as a new artistic movement trying to gain validity with the established forms...video games have some of the same issues. Namely, there is a huge disconnect between content and appreciation for people like Ebert.

[Leafsnail]

I've never really got the media's bashing of Grand Theft Auto.  GTA is basically a parody of gangster culture and the like, and a lot of it is pretty funny.

[Acanthus117]

I've never really got the media's bashing of Grand Theft Auto.  GTA is basically a parody of gangster culture and the like, and a lot of it is pretty funny.

and of course, it's a great time waster, blowing away crack dealers, whores, hobos, and other exaggerated stereotypes.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Of course, that sort of ended with GTA IV. The realization at the end that you've spent the entire game ruining Niko's last chance at a normal life is somewhat shocking. Granted, Niko really is a bad guy who deserves what happened to him, but he's still the player character, so the effect is undiluted.

[Leafsnail]

Fair enough, I've only played some of the older ones.

[Acanthus117]

All my experience with GTA IV has been the same with the older ones:

Cheating like a bastard and blowing shit up.

I guess I should actually play the story, then.