>“I remain convinced that in principle, video games cannot be art. Perhaps it is foolish of me to say “never,” because never, as Rick Wakeman informs us, is a long, long time. Let me just say that no video gamer now living will survive long enough to experience the medium as an art form.“ Slavoj Zizek

Is he right, can games ever be art?

What's the source? I don't remember him writing that

>>716516278 (OP)
I cant take anything this guy says seriously because his accent is so silly and this picture makes him look like a fat ugly bastard

>>716516443
It's a quote from Roger Ebert, famous film critic, not Slavoj Zizek.

>>716516443
Nevermind I found it. It's a quote by Roger Ebert. Fuck you for lying

https://www.rogerebert.com/roger-ebert/video-games-can-never-be-art

>>716516278 (OP)
I can't believe i mistook Zizek for Emir Kusturica and got my hopes up that there was a thread on /v/ about Kusturica.

>>716516278 (OP)
All of Ebert's objections are tertiary to his central misconception:
>One obvious difference between art and games is that you can win a game. It has rules, points, objectives, and an outcome. Santiago might cite a immersive game without points or rules, but I would say then it ceases to be a game and becomes a representation of a story, a novel, a play, dance, a film. Those are things you cannot win; you can only experience them.
He thought that just because quarter munchers have mechanics and win conditions, they can't tell real stories. This is as stupid as saying film and stage plays can't tell stories about unrealistic fantasy because you're limited to what the camera can capture.

>>716516278 (OP)
>not real communism, [insert 500 lines of pedantic bullshit]
>t. Slavoj
>...
>money plox

>>716516579
>>716516965
>Her next example is a game named “Braid” (above). This is a game “that explores our own relationship with our past…you encounter enemies and collect puzzle pieces, but there’s one key difference…you can’t die.” You can go back in time and correct your mistakes. In chess, this is known as taking back a move, and negates the whole discipline of the game. Nor am I persuaded that I can learn about my own past by taking back my mistakes in a video game.
He's just being a righteous cunt here. I bet Ebert would have shit his pants if you asked him, "How can a series of pictures of the daftest dramawhores in hollywood make me feel anything but irritation and pity for anyone who enjoys movies?" Ebert was only 20 years from movies themselves being stupid spectacles for perverts

>>716516278 (OP)
Video games are a product.

>>716516278 (OP)
Zizek is still too scared to debate Nick Land.

>>716517308
All art is a product. Art has never existed outside of commodity, which is why patronage exists in the first place

>I allow Sangtiago the last word. Toward the end of her presentation, she shows a visual with six circles, which represent, I gather, the components now forming for her brave new world of video games as art. The circles are labeled: Development, Finance, Publishing, Marketing, Education, and Executive Management. I rest my case.
I wonder what he would have said if someone brought to his face the several images of people who make movies by committee under the same guidelines. It's not like Ebert died before Marvel took off

>>716517870
bro never played fixed camera 3D games

>>716517540
Patronage existed to keep artists from starving to death. If you're a rich artists, you're not an artist.

If it's made for profit, it's not art. Simple as.

>>716518116
>subway sandwich brain
That's a good one.

>>716518132
>Patronage existed to keep artists from starving to death
...so that artists would stay alive to make art for people.
>If you're a rich artists
if you're a rich artist, you're rich either because of others' patronage or because of other careers.
art is commodified because most people want it but very few people are willing to talk about how valuable it is because it isn't a gun or a piece of food.

>>716516278 (OP)
Who cares what Mark Hamill thinks about vidya

>>716517870
>3D games bad because frame composition
If Jim July doesn't hate movies then he's a stupid hypocrite

>>716516278 (OP)
Refuted by subahibi and retroactively by superior modern philosopher of levantine roots NASSIM NICOLAS TALEB

>>716516579
>fuck you for lying
Russian desinformation-bots do be like that. Please understand

>>716516278 (OP)
>>716518132
>>716519869
Art can have value, sure, but it's extremely subjective, and unfortunately for you, most people don't care enough about your tumblrcore 'fan art' to spend money on it, let alone think of it ever again after scrolling past it and several thousand other, nearly identical drawings.

Art, art education, and materials/resources have never been more accessible for the general public. I don't believe something has any inherent value simply because someone spent time on it, just like I don't believe art should be a career, let alone for people with no life experience and nothing authentic to express. Go wage and do it on your spare time like everyone else.

>>716516443
>>716516278 (OP)
Slavoj Žižek’s stance on video games is nuanced and not easily reduced to being "pro" or "against." He doesn’t explicitly endorse or condemn video games but uses them as a lens to explore philosophical and psychoanalytic concepts. Žižek sees video games as culturally significant, reflecting shifts in subjectivity, ontology, and ideology. For instance, he discusses how games create a state of "obscene immortality," where players can die and restart, embodying a pre-Oedipal, undead-like subjectivity (,). He also suggests that the virtual nature of games allows players to explore their "true selves" through actions like sadism, though he frames this within his broader theories of desire and repression ().

However, Žižek admits to limited personal engagement with games, often stating he knows little about them and views them as "basically stupid" (). He’s expressed fascination with their philosophical implications, arguing that modern philosophers should study them (), yet he’s critical of their ideological underpinnings, such as reinforcing capitalist or violent narratives (e.g., in Call of Duty). His interest lies in their theoretical potential rather than their entertainment value.

In short, Žižek is "pro" video games in the sense that he finds them philosophically rich and worthy of analysis, but he’s not a gamer or an advocate for gaming as a pastime. His perspective is primarily academic, using games to critique broader societal and psychological dynamics.

>>716516278 (OP)
Zizek is literally referenced by Disco Elysium developers before that game made 200 million burger bux. Get your quotes rights dumb MAGAt>>716517063
t.has never studied philosophy

>>716516278 (OP)
Why are people desperate for video games to be art? Can it be that you hunchbacks sit here twenty four seven and want to elevate your excessive time investment?

>>716517870
>>716518116
I think games can be art but ER is genuinely fucking ugly.

>>716517323
Nick Land ran off to China after he ruined his own academic credibility. Zizek is not going to chase a nobody when he has already won a debate against Jordan Peterson.

>>716516278 (OP)
I absolutely do not care whether some philosophically grumpy fart-sniffer "Neo Marxist" thinks anything I like can be art. For one, my personal experience trumps his second-hand one, utterly flattens it into shit.

For another, such useless fucks are not even genuine. They're fake personas who produce nothing of value, who only sell the *semblance* of intelligence and taste. We're talking shit with less actual depth and cultural weight than Dragon Ball Z and Mega Man, for fuck's sake. This includes Neo Marxist philosophers, professional critics, professional atheists, and pill-popping self-help swindlers like Peterson.

>>716524045
>Nick Land ran off to China after he ruined his own academic credibility.
Good riddance. Regurgitating Yarvin (whose own work was primarily modernizing and restating Carlyle) without half the verbal skill should be a capital crime.
>>716516278 (OP)
>can games ever be art?
Some games are. Most games are not.
Just like film.
The better question is this: who gives a fuck? The whole debate is incredibly boring.