like it seems fucking obvious, right? any medium that can contain degrees of symbolism, has the potential to provoke viewer interpretation, has the potential to contain specific or vague messaging from the creator, and just generally can be used for self-expression has the potential to be an art form.

Why the fuck is/was this a point of discussion? to the point of heated discourse, even! Was it just the most geriatric people they could find on the street? Weird snobs?

like, the second games started having narratives this should have been a moot topic. why the fuck did Kojima parrot it?

reading his statement, i feel there's two different discourses happening, the already solved (:lt-dbyf-dubois:) point of "can video games be art" and the more interesting question of "does the video game industry currently have a culture that promotes artistic endeavor over mass appeal"

to which my personal answer is 'no, but we're slowly getting there with the rise of auteurism (despite some of the problems inherent to it) in acclaimed development teams (:praise-it:) and the indie scene's entirety, and we'll see if it starts to push against the corporate board schlock in the future.'

but still, god damn, half of this debate comes from the same place as the video games cause violence bit and the other half is just people being annoyed with call of duty schlock, which, fair. but why is the former even a debate that happened/is happening. i'm genuinely curious.

  • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
    ·
    3 years ago

    any medium that can contain degrees of symbolism, has the potential to provoke viewer interpretation, has the potential to contain specific or vague messaging from the creator, and just generally can be used for self-expression has the potential to be an art form.

    I mean, I think the Ebert perspective is that Video Games don't do those things. Or, at least, they don't do those things well enough to be considered worth critiquing.

    He was ultimately forced to issue a mea culpa because - duh, obviously wrong, its a highly mutable visual/audible medium that's going to have plenty of content capable of clearing the bar.

    But also, as mainstream games strive to become more artistic (heavy reliance on cinematics and forced narratives), they become less game-like. The sweet spot between Game and Art tends to be relatively simple exploration or puzzle games.

    • MeatfuckerDidNothing [they/them]
      ·
      3 years ago

      But also, as mainstream games strive to become more artistic (heavy reliance on cinematics and forced narratives), they become less game-like.

      More cinema-like =/= more artistic though, games borrow from film because it is an already well establishedl language, not necessarily because you can't communicate through gameplay

    • WhyEssEff [she/her]
      ·
      3 years ago

      But also, as mainstream games strive to become more artistic (heavy reliance on cinematics and forced narratives), they become less game-like.

      true in mainstream def (except for :praise-it: maybe?), but i've found indie goes in a different direction a lot of times due to their ability to explore more unconventional storytelling mechanisms.

      Plugging :lt-dbyf-dubois: and :trans-undertale: again here in terms of artistic expression that is very responsive to player exploration, as well as OMORI, OFF, and OneShot as games that I'd consider artistic and not very cinematic even though those three are much more linear and railroaded

      • zifnab25 [he/him, any]
        ·
        3 years ago

        i’ve found indie goes in a different direction a lot of times due to their ability to explore more unconventional storytelling mechanisms

        There's definitely some exceptions to the rule. Although, I'd argue that the isometric style with wall of text (Disco Elysium, Fallout 1&2, Baldur's Gate) are bordering on digital books given the amount of tiny-font text I'm expected to wade through in order to get to the end.

        But I'd also argue that the Artistic angle is fundamentally distinct from the gameplay. And you get that in so far as you're not really supposed to die in these games. Failure is just a reset button, not an element of the storytelling itself. If I were to defend the "games aren't art" argument, I think the real place I'd aim for is how the puzzle-system of combat/conflict resolution - the fundamental "game" part of the video game - is distinct from the meaning and expression the game is intended to convey.

        A game in which you really aren't supposed to fail at gameplay in order to get the complete unvarnished story only conveys meaning to an individual that can complete the game flawlessly. And a game that prohibits you from advancing until you solve the next puzzle-box / combat simulator / RNG engine in the story sequence is functionally obscuring the author's intent. Putting an oil painting behind a big door with a combination lock and claiming you've created an "art game" - particularly when the combination lock guarding the door isn't intended to convey meaning - really just amounts to a kind of artistic gatekeeping rather than artistic expression.

        :trans-undertale: , I think, is the real exception that produces a fluid game/art hybrid. The gameplay puzzles tie back to the narrative. Failure is routinely an option and can often open up meaningful story paths. I'd also point to games like Journey or Shadow of the Colossus or The Stanley Parable as true fully realized "Art Games", rather than mash-ups in which the art and the gameplay are incidental to one another.

        But these are more often exceptions than the rule. A random selection of released games - even top rated games - is unlikely to yield anything of this caliber.