Art grants going to videogames has not served to better the medium, but instead served as a hipster welfare program for untalented hacks to shit out propaganda.
>But if Videogames aren't art how do you justify preservation?
They are history. History is entitled to preservation.
>But everything is art
If everything is art, nothing is art.
>but videogames cause human emotions
So does working as a customer care rep and being frustrated with an assembly instruction manual. Doesn't make it art.
>Are you saying the art in games isn't art?
Games contain art, just like a deck of cards has art. However just cause it has art does not make it art.
>I don't care what you say they are art
Cool, you disagree, doesn't make it art
>They're art but you shouldn't treat them as art cause it makes them worse overall
You and I disagree just slightly and I can respect your different opinion because we still reach the same conclusion.

Carmack is vindicated. Fuck storylines. Gameplay is the only thing that matters.

@grok can you summarize Anon's argument against his strawman?

Thank you.

>>714492746 (OP)
nortubel is art

>>714492879
A game with no story can be an incredible timeless game.
A game with the greatest story ever written cannot survive having no gameplay.

>>714492746 (OP)
I like Yahtzee like 80% of the time, but then he spergs out with some shitty hipster/snobby opinion that I am physically repulsed by.

>>714493541
I haven't cared about him since 2013 when he stopped being funny.
Then see him on sidescrollers shilling second wind, cause why just start a patreon and only take responsibility for yourself and validate any criticism you don't work a real job and are not a critic that should be taken seriously when you can larp as a business owner for validation!
Then I saw him make mistake after mistake running his own "game journalism" website, and in reality he is letting his retard friends to be his mods to keep him in a hugbox, I lost all respect for him.
Then look at his history of failed projects with Zero Punctuation being his beginners luck hit out of the park he's milked long past it's due date, his pride in being British while being desperate to live anywhere else even a country he openly despises, and yeah dude is a lolcow

>>714493039
Two things
>Who the fuck pays for AI or uses Elon Musks attempt to create a social credit system
>How would it invalidate the counter argument even if it were true, which it's not.

This is just an argument to end art grants. If it doesn't go to dustborn it goes to some shitty independent movie or some expo where women queef to the tune of ave maria.

>>714492746 (OP)
>Make up quote
>Retards seethe
He didnt even review the fucking game.

>>714492746 (OP)
he aged out. his takes are all bitchmade complaints begging for more journo modes and accessibility. he should give it a rest and go raise his kid.

>>714492746 (OP)
who cares

>>714492746 (OP)
Videogames are art. Only braindead modernitards who think art has to be hung in a museum seem to have trouble with this.

I miss let's drown out bros...
I still rewatch them occasionally

>>714492746 (OP)
how did you get out of the psych ward again?

>>714492746 (OP)
The only reason video games are not considered art is so they can be censored
You can draw all the tits you want, you can build a statue with great big titties, you can make a movie that prominently features boobies bouncing on the screen the entire time, you can write a book that's entirely focused on mammaries. All of these mediums being considered art gives you artistic freedom to create as you please.
But god forbid you feature so much as a brief flash of sideboob in your video game, and suddenly you are a horrible monster objectifying women in your sick perverted fantasies because it is not art, it is a video game.

>>714492746 (OP)
no, there can be "artistic" games, and there can be fun video games. Generally the fun video games are fun, and the artistic ones fucking suck dick.

As a bluesky user I see games are art fags everywhere.
They are completely divorced from the idea that games are products people need to actually want to buy and play. They see the mere creation games in itself as a goal and call anyone who creates games a valuable artist or creator even if nobody plays anything they create. Studios who have never made a good game closing are treated as tragedies, yes they actually use words like tragedies, and are considered losses for us all because creators are harmed and out of work. Creators of what you ask? That doesn't matter.

I actually agree with you OP that these people see games as a big project where we subsidize a bunch of artists for arting for the sake of arting because it's the right thing to do, and it's a giant waste of money propping up people who make shit nobody cares about most of which is indie slop.

>>714494051
>Then see him on sidescrollers shilling second wind

Wait why was yahtzee promoting the channel on a blatant right-wing grifting channel?
Yahtzee was always a guy keeping it to himself, so him going to sidescrollers is a big surprise to me (if true)

>>714497410
truth

>>714492746 (OP)
Apologize

>>714492746 (OP)
>Art grants going to videogames has not served to better the medium, but instead served as a hipster welfare program for untalented hacks to shit out propaganda.
True, but this also applies to all other art mediums.

Didn't read, literally everything designed, created or performed is art. Anybody arguing otherwise is a babybrained faggot and has wasted his life

>>714492746 (OP)
>if everything is art, nothing is art.

What decides this? Art is human creativity which shows itself in everything.

Blah blah blah Pathologic makes these art arguments a retarded waste of time.

>>714499263
Man I miss the days when IPL games were a fairly regular subject of discussion here.

It's kinda horrifying to watch how... far we have gotten from that now.

>>714492746 (OP)
reactionary
you fucking suck and your opinions are shit

>>714492746 (OP)
People conflate "art" and "high art". Video games are art, sure, but what isn't. They're definitely not high art though, nothing has been for a very long time.

>>714492746 (OP)
Yahtzee is the only critic I trust, I’ve followed him for longer than you idiot nazi shits have been cognizant, please fuck off

>>714497410
>They are completely divorced from the idea that games are products people need to actually want to buy
you are vile

>>714492746 (OP)
Oh boy, this thread again? Please use your template maker to make one where yahtzee call OP a tranny plz and thank you

>>714499804
>People conflate "art" and "high art".
No, no they don't. The word "art" today means exactly what the word "high art" meant 150 years ago. Back when the word "art" was actually synonymous with the word "craft", refering to any form of skilled creative labor or it's produce.

Since the meaning of craft and art have been thoroughly disconnected in the last two centuries, we don't need the term "high art" anymore, and it has lost any actual meaning.

Also, even by that outdated and unused distinction, games can be high art, there is nothing preventing them from that, it's just that very few even attempt that, and fever yet succeed.
Which by modern terminology, means that games can be art, but most of them aren't.

>>714493540
They should say those who can't do teach and those who can't teach become video game critics

>>714492746 (OP)
I still like Yahtzee. He's been at it for 18 years now with reviews, but back when he debuted (before he got hired onto The Escapist) in 2007, his cynicism was a massive breath of fresh air in an era when Youtube was still in its infancy and the review base was dominated by bootlicker sites like IGN/Gamespot and webcomics.
Granted, I never cared for specific opinions, especially his political ones, but I'm not autistic enough to dismiss a person for that alone when I agree in other areas. Now games being art? I disagreed on that. I think he has also come to that conclusion that that mindset has led to more garbage over time.

>>714492746 (OP)
>games are art if socialism

>>714500274
Ok, semantics. Point is pretty much nothing is (high) art nowadays, everything is too commercialised. It's weird to focus on video games when movies and books haven't been art for ages either.

>>714500652
>I think he has also come to that conclusion that that mindset has led to more garbage over time.
I literally cannot even begin comprehending this claim. Especially from someone who claims to have watched the medium go through 20 years of development.

You think the claim that games can be art is harmful? You seriously think that is the problem of the industry. The sentiment that brought us shit like Psychonauts, The Longest Journey, Outer Wilds, Pathologic and The Void.

And not, you know: the brown and bloom craze, the moba craze, the MMO plague, the open world crafting plague, the ubisoft open world formula... those are all fine, but the suggestion that games can produce more niche focused and memorable experience has caused harm, unlike literally every major trend that LITERALLY DEFINED THE INDUSTRY - AS IN DIRECTLY HIGHJACKING 90% OF ALL PRODUCTS, that was always a result of desperate desire to appeal to the widest and lowest common denominators?

Yeah, games having artistic ambition is really the problem. Because Dustborn got like 50k dollars from Norvegian insanely rich goverment, then proceeded to bomb and become the laughing stock of the industry... that is the real harmful thing we should worry about.

Seriously, I don't get what the fuck is happening in your head. This industry is entirely choked by the most braindead, unabitious, cynical slop imaginable, and you whine about the less than 1% that isn't like that? Why?

You've already tried this thread in the past, you unbearable retard. It was gay then and it still is now

>>714501187
>art is when socialism

>>714501187
They migrated over to videogames because of the known fact that the game industry has the highest amount of revenue thus believe they can get their "message" across by making some type of indie slop.

>>714501270
>those are all fine,
Never once said that. But keep on going on a schizophrenic rant.

>>714501187
>Ok, semantics.
No.
Semiotics.
A very different discipline. And your point is moot. Just becomes something isn't mainstream does not mean it does not exist. By the way, the whole fucking point of distinguishing between art and high art was exactly to solve the same issue you are complaining about today.

High art needed to be separated from just art because in the early modern era, art (meaning craft) became drastically more accessible and the entire cultural scene became flooded with items that were products of solid mechanical craft, but lacked any further ambitions, literally being just purely commercial items. This was facilitated by development of manufacturies and later industrial plants, as well as general massive rise of middle class across western worlds.

Meaning the "problem" you are describing is at least 500 years old issue. Nothing has actually changed at all. This is how things always were, as far as we are concerned.

>>714501572
So your opinion is "EVERYTHING IS JUST SHIT JUST ACCEPT HOW ADULT AND MATURE I AM BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS SHIT!" then?

Based and correct

>>714492746 (OP)
>Art grants going to videogames has not served to better the medium, but instead served as a hipster welfare program for untalented hacks to shit out propaganda.
This alone does not make them not art. I have a feeling this entire argument and sentiment is based on your negative feelings towards the current AAA Western environment and how games are changing and regarding censorship.
>>But if Videogames aren't art how do you justify preservation?
>They are history. History is entitled to preservation.
Didn't really have anything to say at this point then I realized I've never heard anyone say the former line before. Who are you quoting?
>>But everything is art
>If everything is art, nothing is art.
Never heard anyone say this before either.
>>but videogames cause human emotions
>So does working as a customer care rep and being frustrated with an assembly instruction manual. Doesn't make it art.
Or this.
>>Are you saying the art in games isn't art?
>Games contain art, just like a deck of cards has art. However just cause it has art does not make it art.
So is a movie not actually art but just contains 300000000 pictures of art played 24 times every second in order? This is how ridiculous this all sounds.
>>I don't care what you say they are art
>Cool, you disagree, doesn't make it art
Creating more false statements as rhetoric for your argument in order to try to paint the people you disagree with as "bad guys" instead of actually offering a nuanced take like I'm about to. Awesome.

There's two ways to go about this. If you follow the literal definition of Art video games are 100% art. They are created from creative and imaginative people collectively and marveled for their beauty and enjoyed worldwide. Video games are and can be enjoyed by literally everyone alive much like movies.

The other is me attacking why I feel you and others say this like you did except I'm not inventing imaginative statements to make someone look bad. (Cont.)

>>714501781

>>714501270
>the MMO plague
MMO's were based until they started to emulate WoW's formula down to a T.

>>714501626
Ok, which piece of media from the past 30 years would you personally consider art? Not trying to start shit, genuinely curious.

>>714497410
>As a blue sky user
Thank god I kept reading cause I almost disregarded this amazing take entirely.

I completely agree.
>Videogames are art and I am an artist!
>My game fully funded by grants is about how I'm gay and no one TRULY gets me. It's told through shitty hints left throughout the environment of purchased reskinned assets.
>Gameplay? That is such an outdated concept. You occasionally have to walk and press the interact button to read a description.
>did you not like it or get it? You are just too dumb to understand how the letter you find next to the anal lube saying "YES TYRONE! GIVE ME YOUR BBC! WRECK MY COLON SO HARD IT DROPS MY CREDIT SCORE AND DESTROYS MY LOWER INTESTINES" was really a commentary about the main characters unwillingness to accept that they are in an interracial relationship, and how the main character does anything to keep their love interested to overlook the bigotry and racism they face.

Call Videogames art, you get give license to the game makers to blame the audience for being shit and get rid of the need for the customer to be satisfied at all because they can just get money from the government.
You give publishers to write off shit games as tax deductible art projects.
You create a business model to where making a good game that sells is less preferable to getting grant money and tax write offs for pretentious slop.

>>714502327
It's a simple question child. Why don't you answer it?

>>714502161
>Video Games aren't art because they are for the gameplay not how I perceive what the surface level of art "is" (how it is presented in media, tortured genius, rich people, staring at ink, offering deep insight)
>Video Games aren't art because if they were art that would mean that critics have a deeper understanding of video games than I do and video games are my entire identity because I feel like I have failed at life.
(this one is just conjecture on my part, nothing more need be said)
>Video Games aren't art because they are funded by giant corporations and exist to make a profit.
This is all modern art.
>Video Games aren't art because giant teams work on them.
This is every big movie ever.
>Video Games aren't art because the words "play" and "beat" are so heavily associated in my head with them (thus , "Game") and Games can't be art.
Art is interactive all the time, Google interactive art displays. Are those not art?
>Video Games aren't art because I just heckin love the gameplay and I hate tranny walking simulators and they are ruining my games.
Has nothing to do with something being something or not being something. That's completely separate and even if it was relevant it isn't the root of the western video game crisis.
>Video Games aren't art because they are largely made with technology and are just programs.
So basically movies too?

Listen just because you don't want something to be something doesn't mean it's not. Video Games are the most important artform to ever exist. Honestly we should just start calling them interactive media. I don't care to say any more because it's probably a waste of time anyway.

>>714502620
Because you're too unhinged based on your random capslocking and are making ridiculous assertions. Same way I don't need to answer a question from a lunatic off the turnpike ranting in the air.

>>714502465
>MMO's were based until they started to emulate WoW's formula down to a T.
Yeah, that is pretty much exactly what we call the "MMO Plague". It was the time where everyone was absolutely desperate to be the next WoW for like five years.

>>714502590
>Ok, which piece of media from the past 30 years would you personally consider art?
You want to narrow that question down a little? There has been a LOT of actually amazing works of art across books, movies, theatre etc... across the last 30 years. Even a handful of games.

If we want to stick to the subject this board is supposed to be about: Pathologic 1/2, The Void, Outer Wilds are the titles that tend to most immediately pop into my mind. Though I could make a solid argument for some more widely recognized games. Like the original Homeworld, for an instance.

Do you want me to list some books, movies or theatrical plays as well?

>>714492746 (OP)
If video games are not art, it isn't unjust to censor and otherwise molest them. If they are not art, they can be forcibly turned into leftist propaganda.
The people who claim that games are not art are making that claim on the basis that they are not already leftist propaganda. They equivocate on the definition of art to trick you into denying your legal protections.

I feel like one of the motivating factors for tech's shift to the right is the left's unhinged reaction to many of their domain's professions (art, management, lawyerism) being exposed as parasitic and ultimately a drain on society.

>>714502781
>Because you're too unhinged based on your random capslocking and are making ridiculous assertions.
No, it's actually because you are a vapid, brain-dead cunt already pissing his pants and running away from a confrontation.

My assumptions are absolutely not baseless. It's entirely based on what you said. I even explained the problem to you.
But let me sum it up again one more time.

You are looking at an industry whose by far biggest problem has been, through out all of it's history, it's obsession with conformity and desperation to appeal to lowest common denominators. These are things that have been most actively harming the whole ecosystem.

There is only a handful of trends that actually buck against this obessively safe, corporate, unambitious, derivative, low-denominator-focusing plague.
The most notable one of which is the notion of "artsy games". Games that explicitly define themselves against these major mainstream trends.

And you, very explicitly, state that these trends are HARMFUL.
Which means there are only TWO POSSIBLE CONCLUSIONS from what you said.

1) that you actually consider these destructive mainstream trends a GOOD THING (which you already denied)

2) you don't actually have any adult comprehension of the subject, and you just vapidly declare that everything is shit because you think it makes you sound cool and mature.
And since you explicitly denied option 1, it is option 2.

There are literally no other ways to interpret what you said. You are just too fucking stupid to even understand even your own words, which is an achievement.

we can treat some games art, how about that?

>>714492746 (OP)
Pretty simple..

Art = something created by 1 person. An expression.

Product = something xreated by many people. A result.

End of debate.

>>714503858
yeah only the games that you personally dislike (the rest will be destroyed and you cannot argue against this)

posted it again award

>>714504030
This post is art (mona lisa isn't)

>>714503097
>Do you want me to list some books, movies or theatrical plays as well?
If you want, I was asking for literally anything you can think of.
Haven't actually played any of the games you listed, so got nothing to say. Might give them a shot at some point and see for myself. Have a nice one.

>>714504030
>Movies aren't art

>>714492746 (OP)
You're a total retard.
Whether or not games are "art" is not the problem.
The problem is that gaming is big enough that it is attracting shitting people who have no interest in gaming itself and are only interested in using it to serve their own ends, and has been for several decades.
>So does working as a customer care rep and being frustrated with an assembly instruction manual.
Neither of these are designed by a human to evoke specific emotions. Games are. Shit argument, retard.

>>714501270
>Psychonauts
Overrated slop with bad game design
>The Longest Journey
Undeniablely dog shit with bad game design
>Outer wilds
Mid at best survival slop
>Pathologic
Edgy survival slop with bad game design
>The void
Edgy puzzle slop with bad game design

I see a trend here. With the exception of The outer wilds, every single one of these games leans on "art" being an excuse for poor game design choices.
>Muh industry shitting out too many clones is killing muh industry.
Yeah, trend chasing is cancer but the games are atleast clones of games with good gameplay and only lack a population player base.
Good? No, but they also don't excuse being shitty on "um ackshully its art", they fail and cost companies bigtime.

But some of those clones? They become whole massive franchises and genres. Doom clones became the FPS. GTA clones became sandbox/open world. The ones that do it right become successful.
>Industry is being choked to death by the most brain dead cynical slop and you whine about less than 1%
Ahhhh, you see this is where you fail to see the big picture.
>Game industry employees pre "games are art" faggotry
Yeah, I have a passion for making fun games and have spent my whole life learning coding. I want this game to be the best it possibly can be. We want the best tallent we can find no matter who it is and just want gamers to enjoy our games.
>Game industry employees post "games are art" faggotry
Yeah I'm a social media manager. I constantly find ways to sneak my political opinions in on our social media and ban people I don't like for minor infractions! Our dev team is made entirely of fresh grads who barely care or play games or understand the software they are using. Luckily my friend at a feminist consulting project got all those toxic idiots who think they are special cause they have "experience" from undermining my friends by getting them moved off the project!
Anyways the new CEO who totally supports this wants to integrate NFTs in the game!

just saying that a game doesn't need a deep narrative to be considered art. Mario 64 is just as much art as FFX

>>714504160
>If you want, I was asking for literally anything you can think of.
Well, when it comes to books, I actually tend to avoid reading stuff that is less than 30 years old for the most part (there is just too many books coming out, and it usually takes a few decades before things settle and shit that is considered "good" based on a trend separates from stuff that is genuinely great. Which is why I mostly only start looking through stuff that already withstood that test.
However, I would definitely point out something like Michal Ajvaz's work, his Golden Age (which came out in 2001) is absolutely a masterpiece.

When it comes to cinema, I'm partial to animation, so I absolutely and immediately think of stuff like The Secret of Kells and Song of the Sea, The Incredible Mister Fox or Kuki.

Then there is the whole library of Martin McDonagh, both in cinema and in theatres. The Pillowman being probably one of the best pieces of fiction I've seen in my life, and I consume a lot of fiction, it's kinda part of my job.

There is a lot of good stuff going on, even today. Across all media. You just need to invest some time looking for it.

>>714504642
You haven't played a single one of the games listed. In fact you quite literally don't even know what genres they are, you haven't even googled them.

If you aren't lying about having interest in making games, trying to create something from a place of mind-shattering insecurity and blind hate towards anything that even remotely sounds uncomfortable to you is not a good place to start, child, and probably explains why you are here, and not, you know, somewhere you could matter.

>environment artists
>texture artists
>3d artists
block your path

>>714504956
>Secret of Kells and Song of the Sea
Shit, I forgot about those. You got me there, that animation was pretty spectacular.

>>714504030
Mostly correct. Collaborative art CAN exist but the key here is art is the vision of the artist(s)

Videogames are a product
The customers enjoyment with gameplay is priority number 1
And often times a corporation just tells people with skills to use those skills to make what market research says will sell well, then will tell them to change it a million times to hit research sale goals.
>>714504219
What makes movies an exception is a director has total control of the vision and can legally fight against changes from the studio.
So it is still the vision of a person seeking to make expression. This isn't including all the movie making rules like an actor not being forced to act how they are told, only given instructions.

>>714504642
>Outer wilds
>survival slop
You have no fucking clue what a survival game is. Kill yourself.

>>714505331
The point is always the same: are video games just containers for other arts, or are they an art form in their own right, like cinema?

>>714505331
The word "art" in all of those particular terms actually means something very different from how we use independently.
The title "art" or "artists" is a simple anachronism from back when the words "art" and "craft" were still synonymous.
It's much like in the title "The Art of War". The "art" in "art" of war does not refer to the notion exceptional value (as it does in the context of say, "an art gallery"), it simply means "craft" or "technical expertise", which is what the word "art" used to mean generally a good while ago.

Language can be confusing, I guess.

>>714504030
>>714505474
So much art throughout history was collaborative. Even the most famous stuff was often guided by patrons rather than the sole vision of an artist.

>>714492746 (OP)
Expedition 33 felt like art to me instead of just a product of capitalism like most games, and it was beautiful. So I will disagree, the best games are the ones who treat it as art, while the terrible soulless slop doesn't.

>>714505685
Why don't people call them texture and environment craftists then?

>>714505461
>You got me there, that animation was pretty spectacular.
And it's not just the animation, there is a lot to the storytelling. Secret of Kells probably moreso than Song of the Sea, which stumbles on a few occassions, but still, these stories are told by someone who actually has something to tell. If... you don't mind the religious undertones of course, but I find them to be very tasteful.

What is fucking depressing is the fact that they were both commercial failures. Wolfwalkers did sligtly better, and I suspect it may be because of the female protagonists, but I also don't think they are quite as good.

Anyway, yeah. There is a lot of beautiful stuff being made today. We might objectively living through an active competency crisis across most media, but really, that is "only" a big production problem, and not something that can entirely stop genuinely talented people from making beautiful things.

>>714505921
>Why don't people call them texture and environment craftists then?
The word "craft" has generally lost weight and value in the early 20th century. To a point where it became almost tainted.
Also, language has it's own odd quirks, oddities, customs and forces, and sometimes creates odd cases like this one. It may have not even been about the general antipathy towards the word "craft" and just was an essentially random custom that happened to establish itself because... natural language just works that way.

>>714492746 (OP)
not with this attitude

>>714492746 (OP)
Shouldn't both you and the imaginary straw-men you're replying to, first establish a definition of what art fundamentally is before you even begin to engage in your fake imaginary discussion about the topic of art?
The fact you neglected to do so just makes you look like a rambling schizo trying to sell pencils out of a cup on a street corner.

>>714505474
>What makes movies an exception is a director has total control of the vision and can legally fight against changes from the studio
Ok so it's like videogames then

>>714494051
>I haven't cared about him since 2013

Everyone using shit games as an argument
Bad art exists
Art is when creativity and imagination form a tangible thing that causes the person interacting with it to feel complex emotions at its basic form
Creativity and imagination being the key here
So no that doesn't make anything anyone wants to do art
But another interpretation in the community I hear often (the art community) is that "anything is art if the person wants it to be" (which is a logical conclusion to make given if the first thing is true)
However I think it's the opposite if anything, because, and this isn't 1:1 relevant but I am a believer that objective beauty exists alongside the subjective. Subjectivity in art is just mostly the culmination of life experiences creating bias

I get annoyed with playing with words and definitions rather than getting to what matters. Should be asking questions like this:
>should games be a protected form of expression
Yes.
>can games tell good stories, make you feel and experience interesting things, and have a profound impact on people
Yes. Doesn't matter if you haven't felt anything from games personally, people have.
>did the creators intend to produce feelings like that on the people playing
Not always, but yeah a lot of the time.

In the end it doesn't matter much if people accept the word "art" for games or not. The effects are the same either way, so what difference does it make? Games get accepted into art galleries or not? As long as games are recognized as a protected form of expression and have the same protections against censorship as things like movies it won't affect me.

>>714503341
moron

>>714506360
So what, "artist" doesn't mean anything because language works in mysterious ways?
I can accept that "art" losing its synonym meaning with "craft" could've happened, but you're not simultaneously going to claim that "craft" also lost the exact same meaning. And in any case, the task of texture authoring is far too young to gain an archaic use of a word as its professional designation. "Artist" has to have had a contemporary meaning compatible with asset creation as recently as thirty years ago in order to give its name to the one who authors textures for computer graphics. There wasn't another word to use, and you're effectively claiming that it didn't have any contextually valid uses. Because...
>natural language just works that way

>>714492746 (OP)
>Video games are heckin art chud
>But also, i literally NEED this old game to be remaked/remasteted with realistic 4K graphics and improved controls and with all the heckin problematic things removed and censored, i don't wanna play any of that old shit.

>>714505181
>You didn't like them like I did? You must have never played them!
Lol. That's adorable.
Next you are gonna cry "OKAY, YOU DID PLAY THEM? WELL YOU JUST ARE TOO UNREFINED AND DUMB TO SEE IT IS ART!"
>Played Psychonauts cause everyone said it was this hilarious platformer and was only $2 used at Gamestop.
>wasn't funny
>too heavy handed with trauma metaphors
>Weird difficulty spike mid way it
Yeah, I get it... it just isn't art.
>Outer wilds
Own it cause free one day
I don't like survival games much and admitted this was the exception to bad gameplay leaning on being art as a crutch.
I'd call it a decent game for it's genre leaning heavily on story, not art.
>Longest Journey
Point and click adventure slop.
I own it cause it came in a bundle with Dreamfall and games I actually wanted. Tried it and even the fucking UI is a headache. But hey atleast I can enjoy the gameplay of rubbing random shit together to move forward in the story. No thanks.
>The Void
Own it cause horror bundle with games I wanted.
Its a puzzle game that is wonky and tedious. Oh wow the suffering is supposed to be part of the themes it explores.
Cool, doesn't make me have fun or want to keep playing.
>Pathologic
Own it cause horror bundle with games I wanted.
Survival slop saving a town from an outbreak. I don't like survival games with very few exceptions, this is not one of them. Horrid level design and janky mechanics that completely rely on but good characters and atmosphere to make you ignore it.

None of it is art.
Most of them lean on Art as an excuse for bad gameplay.
All of them I got for free or as part of some bundle.
Only one could be considered a good game (Outer wilds, not my taste but for what it is, it pleases its audience), maybe two (and I still say Psychonauts is overrated slop never meant to be "art" and always desperately trying to be a platformer franchise whose writer huffs his own farts)

Cope

>>714506920
This
You have cinepanettoni and FIFA games, just like you have The Shining and Final Fantasy VII

>>714506853
Lol, cry more still gonna make fun of your edaddy
>>714495821
Naw, Yahtzee 100% said everything in the images and the only way to make games art is to give him money

>>714507000
You should probably think of the term "art game" like "art film". Just because the term exists doesn't mean the rest of the medium doesn't deserve the protections we grant to artistic expression more broadly. Like some anon mentioned art nowadays seems to mean high art/concept specifically rather than just any artistic medium.

On Yahtzee himself though, I think over time he started overvaluing "art games" over others. Maybe it was just the insecurity of "we are a real artform" that reviewers often get because they feel the don't get the respect, maybe it's just a nature of running a weekly show where it's easier to make an episode on a shorter story based game over something more mechanically complex or higher skill floor, maybe because he makes games himself so he needs to hold up games in the same class as his garbo. Probably part of all it.
I stopped watching him a long time because I realised he's full of shit. Also he cucked out and went total leftie.

>>714507351
>So what, "artist" doesn't mean anything because language works in mysterious ways?
Yes, how did you not notice that?
I mean, even you realize that when you have the sentence:
"This environment was quickly thrown together by a single underpaid enviromental artist"
and
"We are pleased to announce our gallery will host Marina Abramovi, one of the most influential artists of the last century."

Obviously, one is a simple technical job description, other is a title of merit and achievement.

>but you're not simultaneously going to claim that "craft" also lost the exact same meaning.
Indeed I'm not. I'm not saying that the word "craft" lost it's meaning, I'm saying that it gained some additional connotations, because of the entire occupation gained a different social status.

Craft still means the same thing as it did 500 years ago, but people stopped valuing craftsmen in the last 150, to a point where in art academia, they became almost detested. There is a long and interesting history behind why that I can't really get into. But suffice to say, the last major creative movement that wasn't garbage, the Secession, was actively considered controversial, because one of its other names was literally "Arts and Crafts movement", named so in an attempt to defile the trend of devaluation of the "craft" notion.
And it was WIDELY criticized as "reactionary" for that name and philosophy.

>the task of texture authoring is far too young to gain an archaic use of a word as its professional designation
Not really, since this occupation and it's title were lifted from a much older medium. Even the word "texture" refers originally to the haptic properties of cloth. It all comes from stage design for theatre (and later, cinema).
Which by the way, are choke full of illogical occupation names. Like "principal photography" not having anything to do with, well, photography.

Again, language is weird, and it gets even weirder when you talk about cultural history.

>>714492746 (OP)
>Yahtzee
Been listening to this guy for over a decade. Usually his reviews work better as entertainment, but the games he praises I usually also find to be of high quality, so I trust his recommendations, even if our tastes don't align perfectly.

>>714508518
I define myself as correct, jump off a fucking bridge

>>714507586
>Lol. That's adorable.
No, it's just factual. Who exactly are you trying to convince here? Because it's not going to work on anyone who did play those games.

What is the point of this pathetic meltdown, child?

Trans thread

>>714506681
Director not only doesn't have control of the final product, they barely have say over the project being made.
They exist to streamline the gameplay and development process.
Removing them entirely changes nothing if the team knows how to combine everything.

And no, game directors have 0 recoarse over changes made to the game they worked on with the exception of if their work is stolen. In fact the only reason last of us 1 wasn't dog shit is because changes kept getting made over Neil Druckmans head.

>>714505548
they're a collaborative art project

>>714505685
>making an artistic representation of something by using reference photos
>fitting it into the art style of the game
>shaping the aesthetic identity of a game
you've never done any of that so don't try and get semantic

t. map, environment, and 3d artist

>>714508630
>Child
Patrick Thomlinson? Is that you?

>>714508683
>you've never done any of that so don't try and get semantic
First of all and again: Semiotics are not the same as semantics.
Second of all, you absolutely idiot, you literally did not say anything that would contradict what I said.

>>714503693

STFU retarded. You sound like an intellectually challenged nigger. Nobody cares about your opinion. You are a worthless excuse for a human, kill yourself loser, you are a disappointment to your family and friends.

Disgusting low iq faggot.

>>714508759
>Patrick Thomlinson? Is that you?
I think you might be genuinely going through some kind of clinical mental episode.
Do you need us to call someone? If you are too scared to do it yourself, give me your address and I'll call the paramedics for you.

>>714508271
>You should probably think of the term "art game" like "art film". Just because the term exists doesn't mean the rest of the medium doesn't deserve the protections we grant to artistic expression more broadly. Like some anon mentioned art nowadays seems to mean high art/concept specifically rather than just any artistic medium.
Yeah that makes sense, we already think of "art games" as their own thing. Even though those types of games are very often worse art than non-"art games" in my opinion, we all know more or less the type of games we're talking about. Stuff like Gone Home.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_art_games

If vidya is art then it's kitsch

>>714509046
>Nobody cares about your opinion. You are a worthless excuse for a human, kill yourself loser, you are a disappointment to your family and friends.
I see I REALLY struck a nerve there.
Realizing how incredibly easy you are to read must hurt you a lot. And makes it all the funnier for me.

>>714509048
>Dox yourself so I can say you are mentally insane and send the government to lock you up for not having the same opinion as me
Lol.
What an unhinged cry baby faggot.
They are words on the internet.
Don't like em, don't read em.
Simple as

>>714504642
What a fucking retarded nigger, you should kill yourself you're doing a favor to the world by doing that.

You are a loser whose dreams will never come true, you will rot forever alone in your bedroom where not even the sunlight will reach you, forgotten by even your family because you are a disappointment.

Ahhh, console video games (or vidcons as I call them), the ultimate medium of expression, able to convey any emotion ranging from hatred to love, loyalty to fear, all in front of our eyes. Ah, and with lovingly crafted art, music, and the ability to control the action, vidcons are the ultimate combination of the high arts. While I tend to play the stoic, I will be the first to admit that vidcons have driven me to cry, to scream and shout, to feel actual hate; such is the power of this force beyond our wildest reckoning. And here I am, before you, to tempt your tongues with the taint of such a tantalizing topic. And the Japanese, the true geniuses behind the world of video games. Pah, I throw my scorn upon such incompetents of the West who would mock the true art of the Japanese with 'games' such as Baldur's Gate and Madden. Perhaps it is that the West is not as intelligent as the East, but this is a matter for another day. Japan has given us such masterpieces as the Final Fantasy series, Star Ocean, Wild Arms, and of course, Arc the Lad. Yes, some of the finest vidcons in the world were created by Japanese. I come to you today to ask you in all earnesty, what is your favorite vidcon? I will reveal mine after the grand debate has illustriously begun, but not before the first poster falls victim to my plot of discussion.

>>714509209
>If vidya is art then it's kitsch
I mean, yeah. Most games are kitsch. In fact I don't think there are any other media these days that would embrace that fact as happily as games do.

In the past it would be comic that would hold the crown for being most eager to embrace kitchiness, but I feel like a lot has changed about that in the last few decades, and now, games are absolutely it.

>>714492746 (OP)
>you disagree, doesn't make it art
It does, that's how art works. If I say my poo is art then it's art

>>714493039
Anon argues that video games are not art and that treating them as such harms the medium. They assert that art grants for video games have not improved the industry but instead function as a "hipster welfare program" for untalented developers to produce propaganda. Anon emphasizes that video games should be preserved as history, not art, highlighting their cultural and historical significance without equating them to artistic works. They challenge the notion that "everything is art" by stating that if everything qualifies, the term "art" loses meaning. Anon further argues that evoking emotions, a common defense for games as art, is insufficient, as mundane experiences like customer service frustrations also evoke emotions but aren't art. They acknowledge that games contain artistic elements (e.g., visuals or music), like a deck of cards has art, but maintain this does not make the games themselves art. Addressing a dismissive counterargument ("I don't care, they're art"), Anon notes disagreement doesn't validate the art claim. Finally, they concede respect for a perspective that acknowledges games as art but agrees treating them as such worsens their quality, aligning with their conclusion.Anon’s argument hinges on separating games from the art category to protect their integrity, suggesting that labeling them as art invites pretentiousness and lowers quality. They counter the strawman’s defenses—universal art status, emotional impact, and contained artistry—by emphasizing specificity, historical value, and the risks of misclassification.

>>714492879
https://humanbenchmark.com/tests/reactiontime
yo this gameplay so fire

>>714509046
All I'm seeing is a crybaby faggot screamming
>WAAAAAAHHHHHHHHH YOU ALL HAVE TO SAY VIDEOGAMES ARE ART OR ELSE MY HOBBY IS JUST A HOBBY THAT WON'T BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY BY BIG BOYS AND ADULT!
>I DON'T CARE, I DON'T CARE SO MUCH I'M GONNA CRY ON AN IMAGE BOARD

Lol, what a fag

>>714509275
Well, you did have two successive meltdowns and then apparently concluded that I must be someone from your immediate social circle despite this being, well, fucking 4chan.

Those are genuine symptoms of a genuine and severe mental distress. I was trying to be equally genuinely helpful.

>>714492746 (OP)
Yahtzee hated the System Shock 2 soundtrack. He's a midwit bong faggot

>>714509546
Videogames are art, that's a fact.

It's ok if you want to live in imagination land, but in the real world games are art and there's nothing you can do about it.

>>714509298
Lmao
Oh he maaaddd
Did I remind you of mommy and daddy telling you not to waste your entire life playing videogames all day then you tried to convince them it was art and you were actually becoming cultured and sophisticated by screaming NIGGER in a GTA lobby again and again?
Keep REEEERing for me boy.
The screams are beautiful music to my ears

>>714492879
>Gameplay is the only thing that matters.
Not true. Even beyond things like visual and audio cues mattering for gameplay, how good a game feels depends on the art. Even in a game not emphasizing story, an interesting storyline can enhance your experience of playing the game.
>"Story in a game is like a story in a porn movie. It's expected to be there, but it's not that important."
See, this is where Carmack is wrong (or at least incomplete). Games can work without story just like porn can work without story. But even when gameplay is the focus, story can make games better. Just like stories can make porn better.

The milf being a step-mom stuck sharing a hotel room together with her "son" makes it better to some people.

>>714508628
>I define myself as correct, jump off a fucking bridge
Why are you angry about this?

>>714509826
>Basedjak

You will never fit in newfag. Go back you don't belong here.

>>714509779
according to kojima they are not art.
A painting from 1500 years ago can look amazing today but a game from 30 years ago doesn't and most modern gaymers would never play them, they are history at best,

>>714510069
>summer child doesn't know about /qa/

>>714510094
>but a game from 30 years ago doesn't
Super Mario World 2: Yoshi's Island still looks great (yes it was 30 years ago)

>>714509565
>I'm not melting down, YOU ARE MELTING DOWN
I miss when the NO, U! Defense was laughed out of a room.
Also what is your obsession with the term meltdown while ironically melting down over words on the internet?
I'm having a discussion in a thread.
You are desperately trying to label words you don't like as DSM disorders to get the government involved.
You clearly are mentally unwell and should not participate in online discussions for your mental health.
>I genuinely want to help you
Lol.
How did your parents react when you told them you were gay?

>>714510175
>qa

You mean the contaiment board for retarded niggers that were ruining the board culture?

>>714510069
Lol.
Naw, cry some more faggot

>>714510182
how many modern gaymers have played that vs. looking at the mona lisa?
the mona lisa looks like it could have been painted today. Old games objectively have jank most of the time that don't make them as timeless as boomers think.
most if not all of the nes library aged like shit even though saying this gets boomers foaming at the mouth.

>>714510317
>Also what is your obsession with the term meltdown while ironically melting down over words on the internet?
Child, my offer still stands. You genuinely do need help. You do realize that, right?

>>714510094
Chrono trigger still looking great and plays great. You could easily release the game today as it is and people will still like it.

>>714492746 (OP)
video games becoming art would be good if it werent for every other ""art"" form being woked to fuck

>>714492746 (OP)
You are mentally ill and likely transgender

>>714510483
No stalker child, it is YOU who is having a meltdown. Enjoy prison stalker child!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NPjCC8H_j2s

>>714510539
sure but that's like the .1% of games that came out back then.
most zoomers have still never even played that, meanwhile paintings on the other hand are valued more the older they are. Most people don't care about modern art, in video games it's the opposite where everyone wants the newesr games.
Who in the art world would give up starry night or the mona lisa for something that came out today?

>>714510430
Artless faggot trying to tell us what classifies as art and what not.

You are nothing more but a peasant, you think you know what beautiful is but the reality is that such a plain and lowly person cannot understand the true nature of beauty.

It is pointless discussing art topics with such uneducated and ugly indivuals, have a good day.

>>714510784
>No stalker child, it is YOU who is having a meltdown. Enjoy prison stalker child!
You are really not making your case any better. Stalker? Is there a stalker in your life? Why did you bring that up?

>>714510910
do you think kojima is a artless faggot? he doesn't think games are art either, and he's considered the best by many if not most.

>>714510430
>how many modern gaymers have played that vs. looking at the mona lisa?
Not really relevant. I think people spend more time playing old games than looking at the Mona Lisa, even if they're aware of it. How many other Renaissance paintings are forgotten or ignored by most people?
>the mona lisa looks like it could have been painted today.
Yoshi's Island looks better than most games made today.
>Old games objectively have jank most of the time that don't make them as timeless as boomers think.
Maybe NES games, but not really SNES (we're talking 30 years ago). Even then, the jank is exaggerated and mostly things that can be overcome when you adapt your mindset.
>most if not all of the nes library aged like shit even though saying this gets boomers foaming at the mouth.
Disagree, but I'm a boomer so whatever. On a side note, I will say the NES always had a bunch of janky games on it, that we recognized as janky even back in the day (same with Playstation). But there are way more good NES games than you're giving credit for, should explore the library more.

I'm not sure it matters for the discussion though either way, because it doesn't say anything fundamental about the value of games. You're just talking about the early days of games where technology was still evolving. But now it's at a point where it's not huge limitation. Games 10 years ago aren't much different than games now, and I can't see games changing so much in 100 years that people will find stuff from nowadays unplayable.

>>714510787
>most zoomers have still never even played that, meanwhile paintings on the other hand are valued more the older they are.
This is a very odd line of reasoning considering it hasn't been that long since Mario was introduced as an exhibit in New York's Guggenheim museum.
Like, I'm not saying I personally approve of that stunt, but... it's a weird hill to die on.

>mona lisa
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wut1rhas50A

>>714497192
>so they can be censored
>books have never been censored
>movies have never been censored
>paintings have never been censored
get real

>>714510787
What a flawed argument you have here.

So you think the monalisa was the only painting release that century? If you know anything about art you would know that that it doesn't matter for the average person, most paintings and artist are forgotten, because art is not a product that is made with the masses in mind, it is something made behind a vision of an author or group of authors.

If you seriously think that monalisa is not part of .0001 percent of paintings that people care about you are delusional. Most people don't care about drawings or paintings neither classical or modern. Most of those old artist died in poverty or struck by tragedy and were forgotten until someone discovered their works.

>>714510963
Lmao... I'm gonna laugh if this is the real Fatrick Tomlinson and they got figured out cause they can't control the retarded way they talk online.

>>714492879
>>714492746 (OP)
the art in games is tying all the parts together (including well built and intelligent mechanics) into a great package that has good pacing, is rewarding to play multiple times, rewards player skill and game knowledge.

i.e. game design
you fucking retards. and that is definitely art.
it's just not "artsy", which already makes it more legitimate than most pieces of mainstream art made in modern times

>>714511303
You are genuinely fascinating. What broke you this badly?

>>714510067
There's zero point in discussing art with someone who sees it as a linguistic construct only. The professional task of texture authoring exists before it is named, and the name that it gains means it.
But you're asserting that the specific word cannot mean any thing. In general this means that no words mean any things, including any of the words that you've put into your argument. Asserting this has removed you from the set of entities that are reasonable.

>>714511292
Yeah, if we're going by percentage that people care about, there are far more forgotten paintings than games. Countless insignificant paintings are created and discarded, more so than indie games even. By the nature of games, they're better preserved percentage-wise too - we have collections of practically every old published game to play on emulators. It's not a great metric either way.

>>714510094
>a game from 30 years ago doesn't
entirely subjective and also wrong

>most modern gaymers would never play them
most people don't care about most things, period. not an argument

>>714501270
this post needs to be permanently pinned

>Giving a shit about "art" in big 2025
Art nowadays it's just some piece of shit a retard made for the purposes of money laundering (in the best of cases).

>>714505685
>Language can be confusing, I guess.
not confusing, intentionally shaped by people to fit a narrative or sell something

>>714505548
movies could also be looked at as a container containing other arts. they are functionally not different to games in this regard

>>714495821
i used to do that on /tv/ with christopher nolan and it caused so much seethe lmao

>>714511029
>>714511110
>>714511292
think of it like this: is a youtube video considered art? What about making food? Or someone that's a school shooter and really good at shooting up schools, are they an artist?
The word art in the modern day is very vague and can basically be applied to anything.
Old school art is objectively timeless and good, and this is not the case for 99% of video games, which is why they get remastered and remade all the time while having to remove jank and introduce QoL features.
Most art being forgotten doesn't change the fact that a forgotten piece from 1400 years ago can still look like it was made today, however in a blind test people could very easily identify old games vs. modern ones.
The reason gamers are so obsessed with graphics is because they want video games to imitate art and look timeless too.
If video games were art then I think classical games would be better than modern games by most people's standards like actual art/paintings are, but we can see that's not the case. Retro gaming is nothing more than history in the average gamer's mind.

>>714511658
>There's zero point in discussing art with someone who sees it as a linguistic construct only.
Man, semiotics really should be part of basic education. "Meaning" is a very powerful component of our existence. It's probably a good idea to learn something about it.

But for the record: I never actually said that art is only a linguistic construct. Understanding the history of the term and its use is necessary to get a bigger picture, but it does not mean it completely supplants the bigger picture.

>The professional task of texture authoring exists before it is named, and the name that it gains means it.
Yes. And? I don't see what your argument is. I pointed out that the technical terminology itself cannot be used as evidence of artistic merit of the tasks involved. Which is by no means the same as saying that there can't be artistic merit in them.

Merely that arguing from the base that "it is called "art" therefor it inherently has true artistic merit" is a false argument.

You really did not make your own argument clear, so I'm left to guess a lot, and the best I can make out of you is that you seem to be somehow personally insulted because you feel like I haven't explicitly acknowledged the (potential or otherwise) merit of these jobs.
I assume because it's your job and you are feeling insecure and are projecting your fear onto me.

So let me clarify something. I believe any creative job can attain artistic merit. I think there are asset artists and even sound designers who genuinely deserve accolades and recognition of their true artistic abilities more than fucking Maria Abramović ever deserved. Genuinely. This is not about potential for artistic achievements though.

It is simply about use of language, and valid or invalid argumentation. You cannot argue that "asset artist" means the same thing as "Abramović, the artist of a generation". The two words simply refer to entirely different things, they just happen to sound the same.

>>714512320
the average gamer is a philistine who doesn't know what makes a good game. classical games are largely considered better by most people who know ehat they're talking about.

furthermore, the average person who "likes music" also mostly listens to whatever is the flavour of the month slop.
I guess music isn't art then, according to your explanation. Same with movies.
Same with visual art.

Furthermore, defining art is really simple:
>Self expression through acquired and cultivated skill(s)

the problem is, now it means something and can't be applied to anything to make money or sell an idea or ideology, or to have a tax write-off

>>714512320
>is a youtube video considered art?
It can be.
>What about making food?
Even this can be.
>Or someone that's a school shooter and really good at shooting up schools, are they an artist?
Probably, though people wouldn't appreciate his art of shooting up schools. It can be art in the other sense if he's trying to express something and make a performance out of it. Few people would appreciate his performance art, but it would still be performance art.
>Old school art is objectively timeless and good
Only the small percentage that survived and is appreciated. I think percentage-wise games have been better. Remasters and remakes are ways to get money, they're not necessary by any means and often make the games worse.
>Most art being forgotten doesn't change the fact that a forgotten piece from 1400 years ago can still look like it was made today, however in a blind test people could very easily identify old games vs. modern ones.
You can identify what period art came from too most of the time.
>Retro gaming is nothing more than history in the average gamer's mind.
I'm not sure why the opinion of the "average gamer" means anything for whether it's art or good or not.

>>714512041
>not confusing, intentionally shaped by people to fit a narrative or sell something
I mean, that does happen sometime, but not most of the time. There is no agenda behind the fact that asset creators are called "asset artists". It's just a minor curiosity at best.

>>714512320
You seem to have a poor understanding of what art is. I can also look at a painting and tell you if it's old or new.

> the fact that a forgotten piece from 1400 years ago can still look like it was made today

This could be true for someone who doens't know anything about art of history. The reality is that all art is a product of it's time, good art is usually a way to express the author's vision using the limited resources they had avaiable. You can identify old art as old by things such as the colors used, the material on which was painted.

In the case of cinema you have even different types of films and techniques to achieve color or certain looks.

I think your opinion is coming from a place of ignorance, which is not wrong, but you can inform yourself more about art before making such statements.

>>714512784
the agenda is that "artist" sounds more important.

but also it is true in that case, because they have learned and apply a craft skillfully. art and craft really should be still synonymous, or at least be understood to be interlinked.

if they're not, then anything can be art, as long as you can justify it ad-hoc with a bunch of word games, which is an affront.

>>714512320
I really can't follow a single line of your reasoning.
Why are you brining up youtube? A video is a video, there is a lot of videos that are considered timeless works of art, and many of them are actually uploaded on youtube. Where was this argument going?

>The word art in the modern day is very vague and can basically be applied to anything.
If you think that, you are using that word wrong.

>a forgotten piece from 1400 years ago can still look like it was made today,
No, not really? You do realize there is a major group of people whose job is literally to identify a date in which a work of art was produced, down to a decade, based on characteristic and unique technology or stylistic trends used in creation of it, right?
I can fucking tell a 13th century Madona from a 15th century one, hell I could probably even tell you which part of europe is it from, and I'm no fucking kunsthistorian.

This whole argument of "older things looking differently" is completely absurd. Have you ever like, opened a book on art history at all?

This is almost a surreal attempt at reasoning. I genuinely can't follow it.

Art reflects era in which it was made. That was absolutely always fucking true, how is this somehow an argument against potential artistic merit of games? How does it work?

Does it mean that old movies can't be art too, since it's pretty fucking easy to tell between a movie from 1925 and one from 1935. Like, literally, you can tell the difference in a SECOND.

Why is this an "argument"?

>>714513092
>the agenda is that "artist" sounds more important.
Does it? Why don't sound designers or graphic designers call themselves "artists", why do they settle for "designer" instead, which should sound a lot less important or impressive?

I think you are reading a bit too much into this. I mean, again: this does happen. I talked about how meanings got switched around between terms "art", "craft", "high art" etc... And there was genuinely a lot of politics and powerplay involved in that process. I even mentioned how "art and crafts movement" genuinely got a LOT of attacks from Marxists just for the name alone, because "craft" was considered to be a bourgeois concept.

So yeah politics and manipulating narrative is part of semiotic history. But I really, really don't think it's an issue in relation to game occupation terminology.

>>714512717
>>714512732
>>714512845
>>714513540
>the average gamer is a philistine who doesn't know what makes a good game. classical games are largely considered better by most people who know ehat they're talking about.
by classical games do you mean nes era or even before that when people were playing things like pong?
I wouldn't consider them as good looking, interesting, or even as fun to play as modern games.
It's only around the snes era where I think games started to break that barrier, but most of them objectively don't age well because they're a product of their time.
And while yes paintings are also a product of their time and someone that knows art history can identify an era a painting was made, those markers of that era aren't considered jank the same way the first mario game not having saves is considered jank. Or the fact that arcade games were nothing more than quarter munchers.
Paintings aren't identified through history with "jank", it's based on stylistic markers of the era or a certain type of material used.
Video games are jank because tech just wasn't good, it's a big difference.
>Probably, though people wouldn't appreciate his art of shooting up schools. Few people would appreciate his performance art, but it would still be performance art.
I don't agree with your liberal application of the word art. To me and many other people art is restricted to a handful of things. Acting for example is just being a good liar, and I don't consider being a good liar art. I don't consider being able to move your body a certain way as art either.
Anyone can learn to dance or get better at lying, but show me how many people can draw something as good as the mona lisa. The barrier to that is much higher, and it's also something that can be displayed in a museum for people to ponder and extract meaning from unlike other forms of things you consider art like food or something performance based.

>>714492879
A game without a story is pure nihilism. There needs to be things worth caring about in games.

>>714492746 (OP)
Hey look, the schizo is posting the same thread again.

>Cucktzee

>>714514101
>Pacman, Breakout, and Tetris are purd nihilism
lol dumbfuck

>>714513967
>>714513540
>>714512845
>>714512732
>>714512717
anyway I gotta go but you should look up that kojima interview and see why he doesn't consider games as art and what he means when he says something along the lines of "a game being its own museum".

>>714513967
>Acting for example is just being a good liar, and I don't consider being a good liar art. I don't consider being able to move your body a certain way as art either.
We're mixing two separate things here. There's art as in expression and art as in skill, like "doing something artfully" or "martial arts." There's certainly the art of lying and the art of moving your body well in terms of skill. And then there's applications of these "arts" for the purpose of creating "art" (acting and dancing respectively, among other examples).

>>714514905
Fun talking to you anon, have a good day. Here's the thing with Kojima you're talking about I think, in case someone wants to read it.
https://www.eurogamer.net/news240106kojimaart

>>714514905
>anyway I gotta go but you should look up that kojima interview and see why he doesn't consider games as art
Why?!
It's Kojima. He is mentally like 10 years old. He isn't a wise or educated person. The reason why we like Kojima is precisely because of his insane childishness, which is charming and liberating and entertaining to watch.
But for fuck sake, why would you treat him as an AUTHORITY?! Of all the people in the business, he is literally the last person I'd look up to for an advice on what constitutes art.

I love Kojima but what the fuck happened in the last few years that people completely misconstrued his personality? Did you actually play any of his games?

>>714492746 (OP)
>Art grants going to videogames
Are those the only actual result of videogames being recognized as art? I don't think so.
>So does working as a customer care rep
That's an interaction between people, of course it isn't art. Art is when the emotional experience is intentionally put into the piece.
>and being frustrated with an assembly instruction manual.
See above, the writer is just stupid, he wasn't putting his frustration into the manual.
So, yeah, something that contains and communicates emotion is art. A customer service call is an interaction and not a thing, and a badly written manual isn't "conveying" frustration, it's causing it.
>but a game isn't conveying feelings either!
Even something as simple as how movement feels can be tuned and tweaked endlessly and feel different every time. The movement you settle on is not an attempt to give the player an objectively correct way to go from A to B, it is a way to convey how moving through the game world feels.

>>714492746 (OP)
I might have been the "niche trash", "one and done" sister that led to shit like Concord but this faggot indirectly ruined Sony's singleplayer too with "ludonarrative dissonance" shit.
Before that we'd get idealised protagonists in action adventure game with skippable cutscenes. Now everything is movies with "interactive narrative sequences" because that's what Half-Life 2 did.

>>714516406
That's not what ludonarrative dissonance means althoughbeit

>>714516406
>breaking wind podcast

>>714492746 (OP)
Not reading all of this. Videogames are by mere fact that they are representations that are culturally significant. Kys