Is it true?

is it true?

Other urls found in this thread:

moma.org/explore/inside_out/2012/11/29/video-games-14-in-the-collection-for-starters/
moma.org/explore/inside_out/2013/06/28/video-games-seven-more-building-blocks-in-momas-collection/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Needs more reeeeeeeeing about consoles and frame rate

Not really. There's a strong anti-art strain on Sup Forums because it's always fucking cancer when invoked for video games. Indie hipster shit, walking simulators, please donate to my patreon, etc.

Eh. I suppose I see what you're trying to imply, but it just doesn't stick.
Sup Forums is made up of a large variety of people who all have varying opinions. Not all of them enter a thread, thus views are skewed. And also, I know a bunch of people like TLG. I never paid attention to the Order 1886 tho.

That's also more of a roundabout logic problem, not a complex pertaining specifically to Sup Forums.

Games can be art if they were created with a true love and passion for games. Games cannot be art if they were created to be art.

Truth to be told, many Sup Forumsirgins abide by OP's pic and it's why this is a shitty place to discuss video games.

More like the exact opposite

Roger Ebert's opinion on vidya was made a long time ago, when they were still pretty shit. He had changed his mind later on.

>this shit again
Games are an art. They are usually a combination of visual and audible entertainment from creative minds. What isn't art is gameplay.
Example: An enemy in RE4 is art (Textures, 3d model, animations, voicework and sound effects). Virtually blowing that enemies head off with a shotgun is not art.

But video games have gotten worse over time user.

kys

The term 'art' has become a pleonasm ever since the definition was stretched to include 'all forms of human expression,' like a toilet or a set of random Pollock paint splatters.

It's an extraneous and useless term. If anything can be art, nothing is. Therefore the real question is: who cares?

The people who do are virtue signallers who want status from some abstract label. Those people are poseur fucktards.

Is mcdonalds packaging art?.

moma.org/explore/inside_out/2012/11/29/video-games-14-in-the-collection-for-starters/
moma.org/explore/inside_out/2013/06/28/video-games-seven-more-building-blocks-in-momas-collection/

>Pac-Man (1980)
>Tetris (1984)
>Another World (1991)
>Myst (1993)
>SimCity 2000 (1994)
>vib-ribbon (1999)
>The Sims (2000)
>Katamari Damacy (2004)
>EVE Online (2003)
>Dwarf Fortress (2006)
>Portal (2007)
>flOw (2006)
>Passage (2008)
>Canabalt (2009)
>Magnavox Odyssey (1972)
>Pong (1972)
>Space Invaders (1978)
>Asteroids (1979)
>Tempest (1981)
>Yar’s Revenge (1982)
>Minecraft (2011)

Here's an actual list of games one art museum had accepted into their collection. Notice how none of them exclusively focus their efforts on the story?

yes

Games are art=/=all art is good

Was it art?

A glorified escort quest?

Wow this is an awesome movi-,
Oh its Japanese game, nvm

Yes

Art is a descriptive term, not a term of praise

B-B-BUT MUH NAZI IDEALS!
DEGUNERATZE!

First:
>TLG
>Order 1886
>""""""""""story""""""""""

Second - trying to make an art piece out of a game via "cinematic storytelling" and the like is similar to writing a good book by filling it with stunning visuals. It works against the nature of the medium. A masterpiece vidya is the one that works as a whole while fully exploiting the interactivity of all of it's elements, from gameplay to characters to story.

This

Really changes my nature

No.

>"Example: The stage decorations are art. Actors jumping around the stage and quoting Shakespeare is not art"

what exactly are you describing

The flaw is that you believe you need to experience video games the same as other art forms.

Objectively, they haven't.

Games are art if the gameplay immerses the player into the story and the story actually reflects that, unless it is a game focused purely on the gameplay.

MGS 2 was art because the story worked as an explanation of player actions but also as a meta narrative.

I'll laugh if he ever responds

if this game came out today Sup Forums would hate it for being hallway simulator cinematic experience.

I fucking hate you guys.

Quality of work aside, Kojima and Ueda are the only two people (at least that I can think of) with the freedom and creative vision to make their works something that would fall under "art". Most other games are so company controlled that they are purely products. That's fine though, a game doesn't have to be art to be fun.

>Notice how none of them exclusively focus their efforts on the story?

of course not, it's a collection of building block games

Portal?

>Sup Forums is 1 person

I agree entirely.

I also want to point out that while being an art piece, MGS 2 was a really shit art piece.

>the only two people
Negro...

art1
ärt/
noun
noun: art; plural noun: arts; plural noun: the arts

1.
the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
"the art of the Renaissance"
synonyms: fine art, artwork
"he studied art"

Games, like music, theatre, paintings, and film, capture and relate experiences. Games are, by definition, an art form. The connotations you autists pull out of your ass every time you see a word is more cringeworthy than any tryhard 'art' game.

This.

Sup Forums would label it SJW propaganda for featuring a brown boy and a pale girl and nit pick little things in 3-4 webms and yell "movie game movie game" over and over until threads 404.

People who use "art" as a label for "classy, high intellect" bullshit are pretentious faggots who huff their own farts
Art is what you make of it

>producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power

99.9% of games are primarily made for profit and only profit though. Same as most romantic comedies and pop music are products for a certain demographic that studios can pump out because they know that demographic will buy it.

No, the argument is that games are art, similar to that esports are sports, trying to prove that by making games that aren't games is a completely worthless endeavor.

Is this supposed to be coherent sentence in English?

This

Only problem with that is that if I paid someone to draw a picture and micromanaged it to my exact details it would still be art. If I made a program that randomly made lines and it created the mona lisa then it would still be art. Photorealistic paintings are art even if they had no input to the subject.

>Games cannot be art if they were created to be art.
I don't understand what you mean by this could you elaborate?

Nah, it's more just about general contrarianism.

Please don't compare the last guardian to the order 1886

fpbp. fourth post best post.

Who's that possum getting fr*cked by?

/thread

Your first example is the same as mine, and I would agree. The other two really depend on intention.

DADA af senpai

>fr*cked
Language!

This

Spot on