Print

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

[justinlee999]

Anyway, artistic games for me are games that don't have much "game" to them.

Not all artistic games are good or bad, it just doesn't have much of a "game" (not necessarily a bad thing).

Non-artistic games can be great too, because they can be fun (Fun).

Bottom line is: Interesting or fun makes a good game, not whether because it's art or not

[Dakk]

Hey, guys!

All contemporary [insert OP qualifier here] video games are shit. Fuck me. Stop playing [insert OP qualifier here] video games! They're shitty, and OP demands that you justify their existence!

OP's opening our eyes, as we were once blind, but now bask into the true glory of unrivaled cynicism.

Man, OP, you were right, [insert OP qualifier here] video games are shit. Dont you remember [nostalgic blindness] were great? Boy do I!

/Thread.

If only original concepts could be considered art, then I guess we haven't had a work of art in a few ages. Everything is based on something, and most games are far more elaborate then some pieces of scrap paper that people exhibit on museums these days.

Please don't confuse pretentiousness with art, something a lot of silly developers and gamers (as we can see from this thread) believe. This is something that affects indie devs mostly these days. Moody =/= art.

But really, why people even argue about this (probably because companies these days seem to be focusing too much on the visual aspect of things rather then the gameplay, pherhaps)? Games are supposed to be fun, I don't care if its art or not, as long it entertains me I could care less.

On a more specific note: Dark Souls isn't a sequel really, dark souls is what demon souls was supposed to be like. Demon Souls was a test game made with a rather low budget to see if people would enjoy the concept. Due to the massive success they basicaly remade it using ideas they couldn't use before.

[Fniff]

Well let's see, Fallout, it's not exactly like Wasteland or the games that came before it.

Fallout: New Vegas is a pretty damn good game, in my opinion.

I didn't exactly like Fallout 3. It had a dull storyline, no truly interesting characters (apart from Liam Neeson, but everyone remembers Liam Neeson), boring landscape (Whooo rubble, Whooo metros, Whooo green desert) and didn't have the same spark as two or one did. Now, New Vegas was excellent. Political intrigue, post-nuclear Vegas, catchy rat pack songs, wild west in places, earlier Fallout references, memorable characters! One of the things that I enjoyed was that you could find out more about your companions with their own quests. I thought that was a neato touch, lending color to your companions and making them seem like actual people.

The only way that games can lose their spark is if they stop making games like this occasionally. Just a few hours ago I was playing Mario on my DS. I could have stopped playing it and went "Nintendo has bee recycling this since 64, why do I bother?" but, you know what? I was loving it. New Vegas and Mario are quite different games, but they prove one thing: there is still hope for video games. When they stop making fun games, they stop making arty games. Because art is about invoking mood. And fun is a mood, right?

Now, you may have been talking about Fallout 3, but that's a simple risk. Good day!

[dogstile]

I wouldn't say fun is a mood exactly, its more of an emotion acquainted with being in a happy mood. But not a mood in itself. Maybe i'm just being silly, who knows

[justinlee999]

Because art is about invoking mood. And fun is a mood, right?

Do you count frustration as one? I'm sure Big Rigs will invoke plenty of 'mood'

[Frumple]

Man, only thing I have to throw out is someone put Glory of Heracles up as a new IP in 2010. Citing the DS game, I guess. Just wanted to fix that. That series has been around since the bloody NES. One of the better Dragon Quest clones.
 
Other folks caught most of the stuff I noticed (Tactics Ogre, new? Seriously...) E: I don't think anyone caught Cathrine, either. That's a persona (/Shin Megami Tensei) game. Another one leading back to the SNES. Also, Elven Legacy. I don't remember if that's the sequel of the two games released related to that, but the game itself is almost completely derivative of Fantasy General. Pheonix Wright was first released in '05

Rest of argument stuff we heard million million time. Somewhat boring

[Iituem]

I'd like to throw something into this from the perspective of someone who can reasonably call themselves an 'artist' without being too pretentious about it (i.e. I work in theatre, I write and I do amateur game design).

Art is life, but heightened.  The aim of art is not to simply mimic life, not to merely show us the fantastic or the ordinary, but to heighten life; to show us the extraordinary within the ordinary, the common ground within the fantastic.  One does not go to a theatre, does not read a book or play a game to find out how people eat, how they sleep and what suits they wear.*  One approaches art not merely to be entertained (though this can be its purpose) but to be enlightened.

Good art makes us do more than think (though it does make us think) - it makes us feel.  It makes us connect with the grand story of humanity, with the commonality that exists between the farmer, the soldier, the computer programmer.  There are books which doubtless seem to involve people just eating and sleeping, and mostly talking, but the best of these make us laugh and cry and truly feel for the characters within.  Chekov, Ibsen, Pinter (all playwrights) are infamous for writing plays in which people eat and sleep and wear suits, full of conversation and pauses and plays in which nothing seems to happen - but bring us to tears with the stories they tell.

What is the Sims, but people eating and drinking and sleeping?  Yet within these mundane activities we are entranced, watching these simulated figures come to life - and we see the truth of our own lives within them, our hopes and dreams, our follies and successes.

A game does not have to be a new IP to be art.  For art to be art it just has to be true, and accessible.  Many games fall short of this mark (as do many books, plays and movies) - but those that meet it are a beauty to behold.

Art is life.  Heightened.


*One for the Chekov fans out there. ;p

[Orangebottle]

trololololol

TROLL!

Lovely. And on christmas, too.
Go away. We don't want your kind here, troll.

[chaoticag]

Spoiler: art (click to show/hide)

I'd like to point out that the guy that made this ended up depressed and comitted suicide pennyless. I might be wrong on this, but it's not exactly a viable business model to do stuff like this.

In the end though, as much as I do like paintings and art, art is not inherintly fun, art is not something you spend hours on enjoying yourself.

This topic is more about originality than art, and that's when you run into problems, especially when discussing mechanics. Mechanics isn't about being original, all mechanics are derived from somewhere nowadays with very little room for innovation, so bashing mechanics is like bashing Van Gogh for using a brush. I suppose you can make an argument for paiting with your face being original, but that's more a gimic than anything, and doesn't acheive the same amount of control a brush does.

So, okay, art is not original, so what's art? You can say that a game like Shadow of the Colossus is art, and that's typically the most quoted game for being artistic. The game was pretty much a puzzle boss boss rush without the rush part. That's not original, nor does it sound exciting. You pretty much climbed something, and stabbed it, ran back, ran to the next boss, climbed that, and stabbed that too. Innovative gameplay at it's finest. But it left an impression on gamers, and that's what makes it art. If you go wow, then it's art. If your heart skips a beat, that's art, and that's what Shadow of the Colossus is.

I think the problem, is that you have the unrealistic expectation that every game ought to perform that way, or it ought to have completely new mechanics, or something. I'm not very clear on what it is that you'd like a game to do, actually.

We can complain about comercial games being commercialised I suppose, but that just seems silly. Most games are lucky if they break even, and a bad sale can kill a studio, hell, a good sale can kill a studio, look at 3D realms. They tried to make Duke Nukem Forever the Van Gogh of video gaming, and they went poof, just like Van Gogh. (Then the game that was picked up and released turned out to be mediocre).

[Itnetlolor]

I think this trope is relevant: Doing it for the Art

I remember Yoshi's Island and Chrono Trigger being rather artistic games for their licenses, and I was also surprised to see that FFXII was among the list as well; but when you consider what has been mention that explains why (Final Fantasy Encyclopedia unlocked throughout gameplay), the background, the detail put into it graphically, storyline, and history of Ivalice for their last game on the PS2. That game is indeed a work of art as their final piece for it; although FFX was also pretty decent (good start for a different approach to their game franchise, although X-2 didn't do as well.).

Another artistic game would also have to be anything made by Team Ico and the Panzer Dragoon series. Those games are beautiful, downright awesome looking, immersive, and the music is made of refined awesome. Good immersion, story background, and impact to make you care for not only the main characters, but even the NPCs is what really makes a game really artistic when done right. Even in Panzer Dragoon Orta, there's a side-quest that you get to play as one of the people in the military you regularly gun down with the dragon; turns out a great majority of their forces are children raised by the military, many of those giant beasts you fight are ancient weapons, some of them remodeled/tamed by the Empires to be weapons of fear and domination and etc., and there's so much more to be learned throughout all the episodes too.

I suppose I can also toss in Jet Set Radio Future as an artistic game as well. It also holds elements of unique gameplay, interesting backstory, nifty style (while cel-shading was still relatively a new style), and epic music that makes you feel like part of the crew. Starcon and Starcon II: The Ur-Quan Masters is also among what I would list as well. Despite the villain(s) of the story doing all sorts of bastardly things, you hate them; then after you learn enough about them and their motives, you then gotta feel a bit of pity for them, understand better, but for the good of the universe, you still have to defeat them so they don't destroy themselves in the process as well. All the races were unique, interesting, and funny, and really complex even; excellent graphics for the time, unique and sometimes dark sense of humor, and yet again, good music. This list can go on, but I hope these examples can provide some insight.

I think when a game maker wants to make a game, and not flourish their bank accounts, then they tend to lean on making works of art; most of the time, it just seems that they're just trying to keep their business running by repeating what works until it breaks, along with their funds.

EDIT:
I forgot to mention Steel Batallion. Holy crap, that game was not just a game, it was an all-out battlemech simulator which required a $200 controller to play it. I wish I owned that game, because holy crap, I wanted to seriously drive a mech (full console and everything like a simulator) since playing the Mechwarrior games. This game allowed that dream to come true. That is a work of art as well.

[Neonivek]

I'd like to point out that the guy that made this ended up depressed and comitted suicide pennyless. I might be wrong on this, but it's not exactly a viable business model to do stuff like this

Well this is because as people knew for a LONG time... Art is sort of... fake.

Or rather the idea of a painting having an actual inherant value based on its artistic endevours is deluted to the point of being an outright lie.

There are always two things you need to know about every painting. The Artist and the painting.

It almost makes Videogames a more pure artform then painting if you look at it in that way. At least when a game is considered good a lot of the time it is because it is good and not because the guy who made it locked himself in the bathroom for 30 days making him edgy enough for his paintings to be worth millions.

[Putnam]

Because art is about invoking mood. And fun is a mood, right?

Do you count frustration as one? I'm sure Big Rigs will invoke plenty of 'mood'

Are you denying that Big Rigs is art?

The way it manages to use 100% of a quad-core CPU despite being made in 2003 and not designed for multicore is amazing.

The way the install menu uses the recycle bin sound effect defies words.

It's fucking art.

[Korbac]

Guys, can we stop stamping on Dakorma's face?

Sure, we don't need to agree with him, and it looks like most of us don't. I don't. But do we need to insult him?

We might like the games, but it's not as if we made any of the things he listed - we probably shouldn't treat it as if he just personally attacked a relative of ours. 

[penguinofhonor]

Because art is about invoking mood. And fun is a mood, right?

Do you count frustration as one? I'm sure Big Rigs will invoke plenty of 'mood'

Are you denying that Big Rigs is art?

The way it manages to use 100% of a quad-core CPU despite being made in 2003 and not designed for multicore is amazing.

The way the install menu uses the recycle bin sound effect defies words.

It's fucking art.

It's dada.

[Enzo]

Lots of threads of discussion going on here. But I will focus on mine.

So just to be clear, your argument is that we shouldn't expect the best of an artform, when it's a struggle?

No, my point is just because media is business doesn't mean it can't be art.

Tell that to pretty much any artistic revolution. Tell that to the early proponents of film as art.

I will tell them, and they will nod, and point at the numerous contemporaries of theirs who pumped out drivel. And they will tell me that it didn't stop them from making art.

You are saying that we should just let our expectations SLIDE away, simply because, HURR DURR, publishers are publishers. MOREOVER that we shouldn't complain about the standard quality of games dipping.

I'm going to be an asshole here and say, fuck that. Why the hell should I lower my standards because of the state of the industry?

Again, you are confusing art and business. It is not a publishers job to create art, it is to move units. That's not lowering your standards, just applying them correctly. It is also why that I would argue that self published games have a higher turnout of artistic integrity, because they don't need a publisher to green-light a title and shell out capital to get it made. Big budget titles, because of what they are, are determined by the will of the publishers, and their prerogative is making money.

EA etc. are making a killing. You know why? Because they're pumping out safe releases: Madden 20XX and Call of Duty Revenge of the Modern Nazi Terrorists 7. I don't like their games, but I respect that they're managing their business well. They wouldn't be raking it in like they are if they were releasing experimental avant-guarde titles.

So again, it's just like other media. A bazillion people going to see Transformers 3 does not mean that movies can't be art. It just means that most of the time they're business as usual.