-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
In the present time, only independent developers seem to consider games as an art form
- Thread starter OrdinaryUsername
- Start date
I agree OP. People seems to mix nice visuals or cinematic experience with art. I tend to disagree. Interactivity is the core of the videogame experience and where its art should stand.
That being said, I think Death Stranding or Journey are games that could be considered art. Also Mario Galaxy or Portal.
That being said, I think Death Stranding or Journey are games that could be considered art. Also Mario Galaxy or Portal.
not art. Art is something deeper. Something that touches your soul.
Oh...you think indie devs don't like money? And that's the only way for anything to even be considered art?
games of a certain budget should appeal to the average consumer to minimize the risk of unrentability. therefore, it has ideally to be streamlined, bite-sized and market-research-supported. in the best case, it's a sequel. if the majority is happy to spend their budget on these entertainment entities, that's a win for everyone and the wonderful circle can start again through the miracle of re-investment.
and that's art.
and that's art.
Video games are applied arts like architecture, fashion, ceramic, jewellery. The balance between playability and aesthetic is specific to each games and dependent of the scale of the project - not reducible to one domain. I have played indie games hiding their mechanical misery behind hand-drawn illustrations, naive poetry or unimaginative stories in a symmetric way that AAA does it with mo'cap' and orchestral music. And this year we've had Control and Death Stranding, a lot of talented artists worked on both for two radical proposals.
I'm pretty sure that most people who make something and charge money for it sees it as a commercial product first and foremost, my dude. I'm not sure what your point is.
The "game as art" discussion is almost never more than hobbyists' self-validation of the medium. Simply stop this...
It would be more meaningful to treat gaming as a cultural and POLITICAL phenomenon/platform first that can actually set a path for games to be relevant to the real art scene.
Also, stop calling AAA games soulless. you don't have to like certain games but please be respectful at least.
It would be more meaningful to treat gaming as a cultural and POLITICAL phenomenon/platform first that can actually set a path for games to be relevant to the real art scene.
Also, stop calling AAA games soulless. you don't have to like certain games but please be respectful at least.
Almost all entertainment is some form of self-expression. Sometimes this self-expression is managed by corporates but allowing such a thing is itself a part of the creator's self-expression. How is that not art?
OP
OP
Cash-ins and less good games are of all times, that will never change. There are games that have also been monotonous and non-innovative in the past, but now the same is also the case.
I just see more and more noteworthy games that take over successful elements such as RPG-like upgrade systems. I also find pixel style more authentic, more personal than the photorealistic games that probably use stock textures. These are some of the reasons why I find a large part of the current assortment homogeneous.
Last edited:
I agree mostly with OP, but I don't completely disagree with you.
HOWEVER, Assassin's Creed Odyssey is about as cynical creation as one could have. It makes pop art & advertising look enlightening and insightful.
The Assassin's Creed series is about as artful as a Trump tweet.
I think a major problem with the video game industry is that amusement is often seen as the only valid emotional response a game can elicit. Criticism is hampered by the question "but was it fun?" Room is allowed for games which tell a somewhat sad story but only if their underlying mechanics are "fun".
The critical response to something like Pathologic 2 shows that the game industry just hasn't developed enough to accept games that don't fit certain models. Rather than considering that a lot of that game's design choices are intentionally there to elicit a particular response, they're written off for being "unfun". It's a problem other mediums have generally overcome—books like Ulysses or Gravity's Rainbow are designed to be difficult but have largely come to be accepted. In film, Lynch found traction in the late 80s and 90s before struggling to find funding after Inland Empire...but then the culture came around in such a way that he was given free reign over an 18 hour tv "movie".
It's the one thing stumping games—even indie games—for developing as an art form. Hopefully as the medium matures it becomes more accepting of alternatives to the mould.
The critical response to something like Pathologic 2 shows that the game industry just hasn't developed enough to accept games that don't fit certain models. Rather than considering that a lot of that game's design choices are intentionally there to elicit a particular response, they're written off for being "unfun". It's a problem other mediums have generally overcome—books like Ulysses or Gravity's Rainbow are designed to be difficult but have largely come to be accepted. In film, Lynch found traction in the late 80s and 90s before struggling to find funding after Inland Empire...but then the culture came around in such a way that he was given free reign over an 18 hour tv "movie".
It's the one thing stumping games—even indie games—for developing as an art form. Hopefully as the medium matures it becomes more accepting of alternatives to the mould.
You know NyaNeko I have been meaning to make a thread like this.
AAA games, especially in console space, barring a few exceptions and a couple of genres has pretty much stagnated as to what we do in games. They are not art because they seldom discuss the poignant aspects of life because if they do, it might hurt their bottom line in certain markets.
Let me put it in points (for AAA industry):
1. By virtue of genre, WRPG, some horror, simulation and racing are the ones where the main means of interaction with the world transcends lethal violence. Sans exceptions, killing is the primary way to solve conflict. Playing Jedi Fallen Order, it incensed me how most of the things in the world just want to kill Cal. So much potential simply wasted away.
2. AAA games' creator seldom talk about politics of their world, in fact, at times they pre-emptively and openly lie about their creations having deeply political messaging- be it diagetic or non-diagetic (like Activision, Obsidian, Ubisoft) so as to not to offend the GG cunts. By doing so, their publishers invite these scum fucking degenerates to represent the gaming culture by virtue of being the loudest voices.
3. Where are the games that tell us stories of the struggles of the current age like climate change, racism, bigotry, war survival without wrapping them in layers of fiction to the point where they seem like any other fantasy/sci-fi derivative nonsense where, again, the player will most likely interact with the world by killing. After all, thinking of Cyberpunk, this image comes to mind:
AA games like Hellblade Senua's Sacrifice and Plague Tale Innocence cut through a lot of bullshit to tell stories about mental illness contextualized within a world bereft of medical care of the present and a survivor's tale.
In console space, Playstation has been home to a few AAA titles that speak to the struggles of our times like sexual and gender minority representation and endorsement, toxic masculinity, AI warfare and greed and the role of a man. Sometimes, the attempt is hamfisted but I am glad they exist.
I think R* deserves credit for developing games that, while not being WRPGs, give players multiple ways to engage with the world, including non-lethal ones and provides notable metacommentary.
For me, art is not about the visual style or flair of a game but rather what it has to say, through whom or who they say it, how relevant or banal it is and how the game conveys its messaging. It is why games like Planescape Torment have endured.
AAA games, especially in console space, barring a few exceptions and a couple of genres has pretty much stagnated as to what we do in games. They are not art because they seldom discuss the poignant aspects of life because if they do, it might hurt their bottom line in certain markets.
Let me put it in points (for AAA industry):
1. By virtue of genre, WRPG, some horror, simulation and racing are the ones where the main means of interaction with the world transcends lethal violence. Sans exceptions, killing is the primary way to solve conflict. Playing Jedi Fallen Order, it incensed me how most of the things in the world just want to kill Cal. So much potential simply wasted away.
2. AAA games' creator seldom talk about politics of their world, in fact, at times they pre-emptively and openly lie about their creations having deeply political messaging- be it diagetic or non-diagetic (like Activision, Obsidian, Ubisoft) so as to not to offend the GG cunts. By doing so, their publishers invite these scum fucking degenerates to represent the gaming culture by virtue of being the loudest voices.
3. Where are the games that tell us stories of the struggles of the current age like climate change, racism, bigotry, war survival without wrapping them in layers of fiction to the point where they seem like any other fantasy/sci-fi derivative nonsense where, again, the player will most likely interact with the world by killing. After all, thinking of Cyberpunk, this image comes to mind:
AA games like Hellblade Senua's Sacrifice and Plague Tale Innocence cut through a lot of bullshit to tell stories about mental illness contextualized within a world bereft of medical care of the present and a survivor's tale.
In console space, Playstation has been home to a few AAA titles that speak to the struggles of our times like sexual and gender minority representation and endorsement, toxic masculinity, AI warfare and greed and the role of a man. Sometimes, the attempt is hamfisted but I am glad they exist.
I think R* deserves credit for developing games that, while not being WRPGs, give players multiple ways to engage with the world, including non-lethal ones and provides notable metacommentary.
For me, art is not about the visual style or flair of a game but rather what it has to say, through whom or who they say it, how relevant or banal it is and how the game conveys its messaging. It is why games like Planescape Torment have endured.
Hard disagree. There are absolutely people that create art for art's sake first an foremost (even if they desire to be financially supported by their work). Think about the difference between an experimental film with no traditional narrative structure (maybe a David Lynch or Terrance Malick film) and a Marvel Cinematic Universe movie. One is made to make as much money and to play to the widest audience possible and the other isn't. Every artist wants an audience for their work, but money absolutely isn't the primary driver for everyone.
Imagine if a director pitched the equivalent of a Terrance Malick film in terms of aesthetic/theme/structure to Marvel Studios because they thought it would have a significant impact as a work of art. There's just no way in hell that movie would get made. It's way too weird and risky, and would inevitably piss off a certain percentage of viewers no matter what. Making games/films/whatever that focus on commercial viability inherently constrains the creators to safe creative decisions that will appeal to the widest possible audience. If making something with artistic merit is your main goal you're likely to end up with a different experience than if commercial viability is your main goal.
Sorry, I should not have quoted Undertale since I have not actually played it. My bad.
I think the same thing applies for Inside. It's an average puzzle platformer that's elevated to greatness thanks to it's art direction, sound etc.
As for journey. It's a really basic game that comes to life thanks to it's fantastic presentation.
I think it's good these kind of games exist. They are entertaining games and in my opinion well worth experiencing. But they excel in the things I find the least interesting in games.
I consider art a very few little things. Not all movies are art, not all music. I know it maybe wrong by definition but it's the way I feel it.
There is also the problem where many don't think a game that was fun can be good if it dares to be too obvious with its messaging, which seems to vary greatly as many manage to somehow miss the messaging in Kojima games constantly, because "its just a game" so obviously shouldn't try to have a meaningful message.
OP
OP
I've played several Assassin's Creed games, but never for long because I got tired of too much content. Argument your opinion, demonstrate it and then maybe you can change my opinion. I'm really looking forward to it.
I love history and I think it's great that the series does a lot with it, but I've never really thought very deeply about these games.
Wow as somebody very close to some of the artists working on this game I hope none of them are reading this thread. Have you seen some concept arts of this game? The artblasts on artstation? How is that not "art" ??
Indie games definitely get overrated from time to time but so do games from the big publishers. I think that indie games can help fuel the creative juices of the larger publishers. A lot of AAA games do seem similar to one another but that is actually a good thing because it means that we have reached a point where a lot of games have very broad appeal which means everyone is happy. I used to hate the photo realistic graphics of AAA games, considering them to be "too serious in a medium that is supposed to be here for escapism" It is actually a reason I sold my previous PS4. That was a few years ago, but after playing nothing but indie games on iOS and Switch in those two years I began to miss the quality of the AAA games released on console and PC. You can't say that a game like Horizon Zero Dawn isn't a work of art. Maybe you can, but you would face some push back. In the end, I think that gaming is at a point where we are going to start seeing the influence of indie games bleed into AAA game development and a few years from now this sentiment will be mostly dead among gamers.
Easy there, Ebert. There are many expressions of creativity in a video game and to claim it isn't art? Art does not need a deeper meaning and can definitely be crafted by a corporate entity.
Even the lack of creativity is an artistic expression.
Even the lack of creativity is an artistic expression.
Last edited:
I like how the OP mentions Journey when that was originally published by Sony, a major publisher.
It's not art because I don't like the annual release cycle of course. /s
I remember reading a post a while ago from a dude who was going to bring a girl back to his flat and wanted to sit her down with Super Mario World and show her the evolution of games as an art form as a first date. Can't find it now, but I found it pretty funny.
...and other things 18 year olds say in their first political debate club.
Last edited:
What if I told you that the thing you call art and miss in those games you played is actually called nostalgia? There's more art in today's big games than there ever was 20y ago.
Prey 2017, Dishonored and Metro Exodus are work of art.
/Shrug.
Somewhere in alternate world, exist the exact same thread but with this write-up as OP, which (I imagine) lead to a much better discussion.
/Shrug.
You know NyaNeko I have been meaning to make a thread like this.
AAA games, especially in console space, barring a few exceptions and a couple of genres has pretty much stagnated as to what we do in games. They are not art because they seldom discuss the poignant aspects of life because if they do, it might hurt their bottom line in certain markets.
Let me put it in points (for AAA industry):
1. By virtue of genre, WRPG, some horror, simulation and racing are the ones where the main means of interaction with the world transcends lethal violence. Sans exceptions, killing is the primary way to solve conflict. Playing Jedi Fallen Order, it incensed me how most of the things in the world just want to kill Cal. So much potential simply wasted away.
2. AAA games' creator seldom talk about politics of their world, in fact, at times they pre-emptively and openly lie about their creations having deeply political messaging- be it diagetic or non-diagetic (like Activision, Obsidian, Ubisoft) so as to not to offend the GG cunts. By doing so, their publishers invite these scum fucking degenerates to represent the gaming culture by virtue of being the loudest voices.
3. Where are the games that tell us stories of the struggles of the current age like climate change, racism, bigotry, war survival without wrapping them in layers of fiction to the point where they seem like any other fantasy/sci-fi derivative nonsense where, again, the player will most likely interact with the world by killing. After all, thinking of Cyberpunk, this image comes to mind:
AA games like Hellblade Senua's Sacrifice and Plague Tale Innocence cut through a lot of bullshit to tell stories about mental illness contextualized within a world bereft of medical care of the present and a survivor's tale.
In console space, Playstation has been home to a few AAA titles that speak to the struggles of our times like sexual and gender minority representation and endorsement, toxic masculinity, AI warfare and greed and the role of a man. Sometimes, the attempt is hamfisted but I am glad they exist.
I think R* deserves credit for developing games that, while not being WRPGs, give players multiple ways to engage with the world, including non-lethal ones and provides notable metacommentary.
For me, art is not about the visual style or flair of a game but rather what it has to say, through whom or who they say it, how relevant or banal it is and how the game conveys its messaging. It is why games like Planescape Torment have endured.
Somewhere in alternate world, exist the exact same thread but with this write-up as OP, which (I imagine) lead to a much better discussion.
Last edited:
I suppose I can agree to the extent that indie developers generally have more freedom to experiment and "feel around" for new ways to do stuff in video games. But to say there isnt signficant, impactful art in stuff like the simulation aspects of RDR or the acting in TLOU or the narrative of MGS2 is not being holistic in their view of art. This is honed craft, from the best in the business (so to speak)
I can't get over that this was posted by someone named "NyaNeko" with a loli catgirl avatar. lol
Comparing developers, indie or not, to publishers is kind of silly. Of course developers care more about the game as art than the publishers. There are big name publishers involved artful games, whatever your definition is, and there are indie devs who are mindlessly throwing shit together without any real purpose or message. But indie games are in such massive abundance that I couldn't possibly quantify how many are art and how many aren't.
Comparing developers, indie or not, to publishers is kind of silly. Of course developers care more about the game as art than the publishers. There are big name publishers involved artful games, whatever your definition is, and there are indie devs who are mindlessly throwing shit together without any real purpose or message. But indie games are in such massive abundance that I couldn't possibly quantify how many are art and how many aren't.
This isn't something unique to videogames. No one considers films as not art because of the way their corporate overlords meddle in their artistic vision
Technically, all games are art, whether or not they fit own personal definition.
Indie games have more freedom to be experimental and "arty" - which is what I think you're trying to say - but that doesn't mean that developers for big "AAA" projects are't also being artistic.
Making big budget games requires a well coordinated machine of people with various skills, but there are still creative people behind it all. Break down how some of your favourite music and films are made and you will also find "soullessness".
Indie games have more freedom to be experimental and "arty" - which is what I think you're trying to say - but that doesn't mean that developers for big "AAA" projects are't also being artistic.
Making big budget games requires a well coordinated machine of people with various skills, but there are still creative people behind it all. Break down how some of your favourite music and films are made and you will also find "soullessness".
Like, im not even defending the post you quoted (cinematic =/= art) but something created for it to be comercially viable or the artist did it to make money doesnt mean that thing isnt art.
Just look at how artists worked in the renaissance era.
Heck movies and literature are the most apt descriptions and equally right now to videogames.
If you strongly connect art with personal expression, then I can see where you're coming from.
A game created by just a few individuals usually feels a lot more personal and original than the super products made by a committee and 500 designers.
That's not the definition of art though.
A game created by just a few individuals usually feels a lot more personal and original than the super products made by a committee and 500 designers.
That's not the definition of art though.
There's no content to this line of argument beyond "things I don't like aren't art". All games, from the tiniest indie to the biggest AAA, are shaped by commercial considerations, practical constraints, personal whims, etc. Attempting to parse out the relative contributions of each from outside the development process is impossible and would be a waste of time even if it weren't.
If you want to argue that indie games are more interesting or more innovative than AAAs, then just argue that.
If you want to argue that indie games are more interesting or more innovative than AAAs, then just argue that.
Going through the games that I like the most this year. Disco Elysium, Outer Wilds, Untitled Goose Game.
I agree that a focused artistic vision is accomplished the most under a smaller studio, no doubt.
The bigger studios tend to committee and test group their ideas, because they can't stand to have a big studio title fail. I can see in that case where artistic vision can be thrown away in favor of greater appeal.
I agree that a focused artistic vision is accomplished the most under a smaller studio, no doubt.
The bigger studios tend to committee and test group their ideas, because they can't stand to have a big studio title fail. I can see in that case where artistic vision can be thrown away in favor of greater appeal.
I have a lot to say about this horrendous take, but for the sake of civility, I'll limit myself to saying I disagree strongly.
I'm not saying that either. I'm saying that commercialism constrains the creators' possibility space to one that is most likely to to make money (i.e. already understood to be appealing to audiences). Works that are non traditional or push boundaries are less likely to be created by entities that are primarily concerned with turning a profit because their performance is far less forecastable. These more commercial works can still have artistic merit though!
There's nothing more "authentic" or "personal" about either art style. You sound like a 16-year-old trying to be deep.
This. Resident Evil is art, just as Gris, only because RE is is a AAA blockbuster doesn't denigrate it from being an expression of human endeavor and creativity.
Art to me is Dante having 108 unique movesets that's you can potentially use on the fly, in real time, without pausing and going through menus.
You have to be absolutely crazy and ingenious to include that in your game when only 1% of the player base can appreciate it.
You have to be absolutely crazy and ingenious to include that in your game when only 1% of the player base can appreciate it.
Wow this is a really interesting post. All of those games I would consider to be not pushing games forwards as an art medium, except BotW.
It's not that I'm snobby about games as art or anything, I just find the artistry in games to be about mechanics and gameplay. Like if Parasite was a video game but barely interactive, I wouldn't consider a good example of games as art. Anything involving cinematography or direction feels like its more about film than unique to games as an artform.
I don't think taking a frame from a movie and hanging it in a museum could be called digital photographic art. So it feels weird to consider a game's artistry on qualities not unique to games.