/lit/ - Literature

Video games art? Probably no, but if you insist--why not; it won't however change the fact some art is better than other art and the truth is that video games as art is an infinitely inferior art to literature, music, etc.

Video games are art.

Literature is just books.

>>7048502
Behold! A philistine walks among us.

All video games are art. Some of it is shitty commoditized art that's mindless, but that also describes a majority of books, film, photography, etc.

Don't engage in medium elitism. It just makes you look like a crass ass.

>>7048512
And by "some", I mean most.

>>7048514
By "most" I mean all.
Video games are dog shit.

>>7048489
No. Games are games.

A game is logic. It's an algorithm. It's a collection of instructions and conditions.

You can play games with any tokens. You can play chess with torn pieces of paper. You could play an FPS if all you see are hitboxes.

The tokens are arbitrary. They can be aesthetically compelling, or just barebones.

Likewise gameplay can be accompanied by or fused with musical elements, but the essential game remains logic, not art.

So, the ornamentation and accompaniment of games can contain art, but games qua games are not art--they are games.

>Are video games art?
No, get over it.
>>7048512
Back to /v/, faggot.

>>7048512
>I hold the opinion that video games are art, therefore video games *are* art.
You don't hold the power to define what universally falls under the rubric of 'art', I am afraid.

Also, it is not elitism, it's just fucking common sense--I even granted that video games *are* art. But that doesn't mean that they are on par with all the high-end literature, music, film, etc.

>>7048519
Games can be art. Coding can be art. The visual design of the game can be art. The narrative can be art. The way the player interacts with the game can be art.

All of it is art. The game is just the medium that carries the message. It doesn't make that creativity any less artistic than say a film or novel. Even non-video games are art.

Your argument about mixed media was used by many to argue film wasn't art by the way (It contains elements of other arts, but isn't an art itself). Like it was with film, this view will eventually be abandoned by everyone except out of touch stuff elitists. Hell it's already happening.

>>7048518
Great argument, philistine.

>>7048519
>the implication that videogames are not a compound medium in which the gameplay itself is only one component
Literally any human construction intended as a form of expression is 'art'
Videogames are almost universally poor art, as the constraints of the medium don't lend well to high expression, but they are still 'art'
The only videogames with any inherent strength in expression imo are SotC and Half-Life, but even those are basically fingerpainting compared to the expressive depths of other genres.

>>7048532
>Coding can be art.

>>7048532
No, they can't. The essential characteristic of games--the gameplay--is not art.

You've just made "art" useless as a word, you unbelievable faggot.

Why is everyone so desperate to be an "artist"? There are other good things in the world.

>>7048528
You mean, no one has made a video game that in your subjective opinion has reached the level of quality you associate with the greatest pieces in other media. It seems you're the one who is trying to be the one who holds power over what is and is not art, or at the very least way "real" art is (whatever that could mean).

That isn't surprising however, since video games haven't even been around for 50 years. Give it another 50 and I'm sure it'll have all the respect of film.

Writing off an entire medium because it makes you feel good to sneer at those that don't is nothing more than masturbatory nonsense.

>>7048532
Calling me a philistine does not make me so. I'd actually accuse you of being the philolistine, trying to value everything as art associating actual art to shit.
Well, modern art might have done a better job on that, so maybe it's pointless for me to discuss this anyways.

Yes, video games are art.

They could be theoretically, but they are not.

>>7048512
He didn't say books, he said literature, which means artistic books.

>>7048540
Art is any creative endeavor.

You're glorifying a basic human activity. Yes, everyone can be an artist. It isn't a magical class of people.

>>7048541
The "artistic games" of today are ones where the gameplay is effectively vestigial. They're better described as "interactive stories" or "interactive cinema."

>>7048547
Any creative narrative is art. Some art is good art. Most art is bad art. This is true in all media. Bad art in book form we call "genre fiction" or something. Good art in book form we call "literature". But regardless, it's art.

>>7048540
>No, they can't. The essential characteristic of games--the gameplay--is not art.
Spoken like somebody who thinks all games are Pac-Man or Tetris
Videogames, through the inherent power of their medium to allow the player to make choices within an imaginary realm and see those choices cause events, have a lot of artistic promise. There just haven't been a lot, if any, games that really capitalize on that ability.
People had the same opinion you have about videogames about movies, back when they were black-and-white and silent. Like film, as videogames become a more advanced medium - assuming that ever happens - opinions like yours will fall to obscurity.

>>7048549
And this is how western civilization died.

>retards are still clamoring to participate in b8 arguments

>>7048552
Ironically those are also typically the ones with the least amount of artistic or expressive value, since they're stripping away the inherent strength of their medium, namely interactivity, in favor of serving as a vessel for 'cinematic' experiences from sub-par producers and developers who couldn't even hack it in Hollywood.

>>7048555
That's the appropriate definition of game, shit for brains.

What people are calling "games" today are barely interactive fiction with no fail conditions. It's watching a movie that requires you to press "play" every 20 minutes.

The best way to think of a game is "sport minus physical excellence." Is basketball art? No, it's a sport, unless you're a faggot.

>>7048563
It's almost like you're implying Hollywood actually has a standard of quality.

>>7048555
>player to make choices within an imaginary realm and see those choices cause events
How the fuck do you call these series of events ART? Is my taking choices in a *real* realm and see these choices cause events ART too?

What the fuck are you talking about

>>7048556
>legitimately believes that artists are a separate class or grouping of people
>probably legitimately believes that artistic 'talent' is inherent and based on birth and not nurture
How can people who pretend to be smart all day end up so fucking stupid?

>>7048552
That's because people have a silly understanding of what artistic games are. They feel that a focus on narrative is necessary for it to be "artistic", but this actually just makes it weaker.

Look at this:
http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2009/06/24/can-you-make-a-board-game-about-the-holocaust-meet-train/

The artistic quality is inseparable from the gameplay. You don't get the entirety of the message unless you engage with it. That's how games as art works. It NEEDS to be played to have an audience.

It's only because film is given so much more respect that "serious artists" in game making are attempting to emulate it. If this stigma didn't exist, you'd be able to have games that use the unique strengths of the medium to transmit their messages and artistic gestures.

>>7048568
Bad taste is all around us, and a drooling retard can't learn to paint. You have to acknowledge the existence of talent at the bottom extreme of the spectrum--the developmentally disabled can't learn to do much of anything but drool.

So, do you acknowledge there's a grey area between "developmentally disabled" and "normal" or "gifted"? Then congratulations, you have acknowledged the reality of talent.

>>7048564
>Is basketball a sport
Yeah. It's not very GOOD, but there is a value of expression in sport, even basketball. A group like the Harlem Globetrotters is closer to expressing themselves through their actions in Basketball than, say, the Miami Heat, though.
And still, Basketball would be a very weak form of expression.

>>7048567
Because those simulated actions and choices give rise to expressions of real world thoughts, place, or ideas. Basic fucking definition of art.
The point of music or literature or painting is to imbue a value to the audience; a videogame is equally capable of doing so, the medium has just poorly been utilized so far.
Again, SotC and Half-Life would be the only games that come even close to having notable expressive strength, and even then they're still very early in the developing stages.

>>7048575
>and a drooling retard can't learn to paint.
If a drooling retard puts paint on a canvas, they are literally painting.
Their painting is probably shit and displays no thought or expression but it's still fucking painting. How up your own ass do you need to be to not understand this? By your logic, every single art movement that has been called "non-art" at any point in history is obvious dogshit because those painters didn't have their era's conception of 'talent'.
Dadaism
Cubism
Impressionism
the entirety of film
Portraiture, according to the Muslim community
According to you, this and more is not art

I'm a fucking art objectivist who hates modern visual art but I still think you're a fucking moron.

>>7048591
You just have shit taste, I'm afraid. If you consider "peeing in a bucket" to be art, you have no sense for the aesthetic.

>>7048553
So pop music is art music?

>>7048603
All music is art. Pop music isn't my cup of tea, but I wouldn't say it isn't art.

>>7048595
>still attaching a subjective value to the concept of art
>offering no defense for your worldview
Alright mate see ya
Come back when you learn to separate your personal taste about what is and isn't good from the rest of human experience

>>7048591
He said *learn to paint*; that assumes some competency. That's totally different from JUST putting paint on a canvas.

>>7048606
This anon gets it
And hell there's actually been some fairly solid pop music. Nothing revolutionary, but you can use it as a medium to express ideas to others abstractly just like anything else.

>>7048570
Games will always be an inappropriate meaning for this kind of expression.

They're an innately Romantic medium in the Randian sense. You are the Player. You are Empowered. Your Decisions Matter. You are an Individual. You are the Hero.

This is the real cause of GamerGate: all these nihilistic, whinging, pathetic academics trying to subvert "player agency" and making worthless "games" where player outcomes don't matter or result in something awful.

Gone Home, for example, is a naturalist failure of a "game." You... "the player"... wander around a house and discover some morally reprehensible failure of a lesbian's story. Your agency is completely brushed aside. You are not on an adventure. You are not a player. This is not a game.

You are to sit down and read a book inside a non-game.

There is no "playing" and no "game" here, and Naturalistic games fail because the soul of any game is Romantic. You have a Goal. You can Achieve it, if you make the right Choices and Strive.

>>7048611
So this isn't art?

>>7048606
But it's not, unless you want to widen the definition of "art" to complete uselessness, to the point that you can say fast food is culinary art.

>>7048617
*inappropriate medium

>>7048617
What about a game like The Stanley Parable, where you have a goal, your choices matter, but playing to achieve the "win state" completely misses the point?

Or is that not a game?

>>7048620
All creative expressions are art. This isn't a controversial definition.

Culinary art is definitely a thing, by the way.

>>7048618
That's not what was argued.

But to answer your question: a highly primitive art, yeah.

>>7048631
So you could just as easily argue that "drooling retards" applying paint to a canvas are making "highly primitive art".

>>7048611
>He said *learn to paint*; that assumes some competency. That's totally different from JUST putting paint on a canvas.
No, it isn't.
Painting, as a concept, does not involve some objective level of forethought or competency. You cannot set a quantifiable or provable value on the idea behind a painting. That's subjective, and to try to push your subjective view as a standard for the entirety of human experience is pants-on-head retarded.

If a machine paints a picture of a house on a canvas through a totally randomized program, and a person walks by and sees it's a painting of a house, you can't jump in and say NO IT'S TOTALLY NOT A HOUSE BECAUSE IT WASN'T INTENDED AS A HOUSE! That's you, trying to make your subjective thought an objective one.

That view, taken to the logical extreme, would destroy the human capacity for abstract thought, since no idea would be valid unless it were already expressed intentionally. Nobody could ever invent a new concept, because somebody would have to express that concept of purpose first.

I'm an aesthetic objectivist; in my mind the goal of great art should be the imitate reality to the highest possible form, with some exceptions for pleasing aesthetics. I hate modern art/performance art/etc, but I'm not going to say they're NOT ART and brazenly disqualify the experiences of the rest of the entire human race who have taken away expressions, intended or otherwise, from things I don't personally enjoy.

tl;dr get your head out of your ass, just because you don't like or approve of something doesn't mean it's not art.

>>7048629
Culinary is definitely a thing. Fast food definitely isn't it.

When someone asks "are video games art?" they aren't asking, "are video games a man-made thing?"

>>7048631
Also

>Malevich on Black Square
>“It is from zero, in zero, that the true movement of being begins.”[9]
>"I transformed myself in the zero of form and emerged from nothing to creation, that is, to Suprematism, to the new realism in painting - to non-objective creation."[9]
>"[Black Square is meant to evoke] the experience of pure non-objectivity in the white emptiness of a liberated nothing

His thoughts on his own piece are literally more incoherent than anything Hegel ever wrote.

>>7048636
culinary *art

>>7048617
>misunderstanding what GamerGate was about
>posting Ayn Rand
God damn son scamper back on to Reddit

>>7048625
People play Chess and Checkers all the time not strictly to win; people play sports all the time recreationally not to win. Does that make those not games, retroactively?
As long as a fail state and win state are present, it doesn't matter if you're subjectively seeking them, that's just player agency.

>>7048603
yes? theres plenty of artistic pop music

>>7048636
No, they're asking "does this man made thing involve creativity?"

And it does. Even Pong.

>>7048636
Then that's a lexical gap in either that individual's vocabulary or the common language of their surroundings. they mean to ask, are videogames 'high art' which is a largely subjective term based on both individual experiences and common zeitgeist, and therefore meaningless.

>>7048625
"Game" in the traditional sense captures something useful, and it's a powerful word with a long history, so there's natural resistance to expanding its definition.

On the other hand, there are powerful economic incentives to get your art labeled as a "game", because that's where all the money is.

I hope we can create a rich, precise new vocabulary for describing subgenres of interactive experiences that preserves the traditional meaning of game while allowing for all kinds of novel forms.

>>7048641
Sure, and there's plenty of fast food that is culinary art.

>>7048643
Explain to me the distinction between man-made and man-created, since you are stressing creativity so much.

>>7048640
And some people read purely to cross a title of a book off some mental list. The going through the prose is in some sense a game where finishing the book is the win state. Does that mean the books they read aren't art? Or that they aren't art for those people?

>>7048651
This is the fundamental defect of the leftist mind: always rationalizing (i.e. weaseling), never setting hard and fast rules and nailing down precise definitions.

>>7048634
Except that it is not "pants-on-head retarded"; some concepts are better defined than other concepts. To include competency among other, reasonable criteria for what it means to LEARN TO PAINT, probably SHOULD involve a notion of competency. Learning to paint is to paint COMPETENTLY and most would understand it in this way.

Didn't read the rest of your drivel.

>>7048646
They mean are video games an aesthetically or philosophically sophisticated medium of expression, which challenge the imaginations of both the producers and consumers--that is, something beyond popcorn with variegated seasonings ranging from butter to caramel and prizes. Which video games are not.

>>7048651
No? I'm arguing that games ARE art, you seem to be a little turned around, or else I'm confused by your wording.
To rephrase, people's subjective interactions with media do not retroactively decide whether that medium is 'art'. All human creations intended to express or convey an ideal, emotion or image are art.

>>7048650
When I said "Creatively" I meant "creative expression", like when we use the term "creativity".

I suppose when you get down to it there isn't much difference between "man made" and "man created", but I wasn't using the term "man created", I used the term "creative" meaning "creative expression".

A utilitarian object can be art as well, by the way of design.

>>7048640
I was in GG since the very beginning, and it dawned on me that this was exactly what GamerGate was about.

Anti-GG wants to remove player agency. It is not permissible for the OPTION of killing prostitutes to exist in GTA5.

They want the game to prohibit you from killing prostitutes, even if you want to do that and bear the in-game consequences.

That is why anti-GG will fail. A suppression of agency is a nullification of the entire idea of "game" or "playing a game."

If you can't decide and have no freedom, if you don't matter as a player, you don't have a game.

And that's what the academics want--"sit down and receive my message, plebeian."

Well, that's not a game. Games are about players and fulfilling their wishes.

>>7048665
Everything man-made is an expression of something from the imagination.

>>7048658
Like he said, if it's "high art". It isn't regarded as such, but since they are a medium of expression, they're art. Even if that expression isn't "sophisticated".

>>7048657
But you don't need to "learn to paint" in order to paint. Even toddlers fingerpainting are making art.

>>7048657
Okay then, I guess every artistic revolution or movement since the beginning of time is no invalid, since the propagators of those movements did not possess the subjective 'talent' recognized by the peoples of their era.
Congratulations! Nothing is art! You did it!

>>7048658
>They mean are video games an aesthetically or philosophically sophisticated medium of expression, which challenge the imaginations of both the producers and consumers--that is, something beyond popcorn with variegated seasonings ranging from butter to caramel and prizes. Which video games are not.
Who buddy, slow down there, you're putting a lot of words into a lot of people's mouths - and those assumptions are not really backed up by anything but your own definition of what art is that you'd have a pretty fair amount of trouble corroborating with any other person, especially the masses at large.
Secondly, you're assuming that a medium intended for basic entertainment can't contain higher philosophical or moral ideals; and that a philosophically rich medium can't be enjoyed for it's entertainment factor. And that's simply not true.

>>7048672
No. Even if we acknowledge that taste is subjective, we should at least reserve the term "art" for things that meet a high standard of our personal taste.

1) Browse /lit/

2) Bring up videogames

3) ????

4) PROFIT!

>>7048676
Enjoying the karma? XD

>>7048668
That was my last point, yes.

I know it's shocking, but art isn't some grand separate holy thing that is only produced by "masters". It's just human creativity expressed through a medium.

>>7048666
GamerGate was about getting corrupted pseudo-journalists exposed you rambling autist. There is no conspiracy illuminati group trying to actively poison the minds of consumers to make sure that the games you happen to like will fail and be replaced by slightly different games as part of Gawker media's scheme to take over the world.
People like you are why GG was turned from a justified media witchhunt into an engineered victim-culture propaganda piece.

>>7048669
Art has existed long before the idea of "high art" vs. "low art" has, which didn't come to fullness until Victorian times. Shakespeare wrote before there was such a distinction, for instance, but his work is undoubtedly art.

Literally everything man-made is a "vehicle of expression", if you want to try to use these simplistic definitions of complex things. Let us define "expression" as formulating something from one's imagination: that's the definition of "man-made". Condoms and chewing-gum wrappers are now art.

>>7048673
>dly, you're assuming that a medium intended for basic entertainment can't contain higher philosophical or moral ideals; and that a philosophically rich medium can't be enjoyed for it's entertainment factor. And that's simply not true.
I neither said nor implied any such things. I simply say it is not the case with video games, which are not a "philosophically rich medium". It might have the potential to be one, but it is surely not one.

>>7048675
Then art loses literally all meaning. You might as well call all art 'corn' since you're just going off what a person as an individual thinks of as corn.
Your personal taste does not mean shit, language exists as a means of denominating ideas. if you wish to further explain your ideas about what is good and bad art, or what you like, then do that instead of trying to artificially restrict how others can express their thoughts.

>>7048680
You make it a useless word because you are incapable of appreciation a distinction between things like literature and pulp, art music and pop. Even though these are academic distinctions.

>>7048681
>There is no conspiracy illuminati group trying to actively poison the minds of consumers to make sure that the games you happen to like will fail

They've been caught on tape conspiring to do it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ia4iKP6T97g

There really is, dipshit, and I consider you the actual enemy. You're the reason GG turned into a neutered non-movement.

"D-Don't b-be corrupt guys! Even though your entire business model runs on payola!" BAHAHA

The real issue with GG is academic cultural appropriation/reformation of game culture.

>>7048675
but then we have no definition of art that is meaningful at all. What is art to your standards may not be art to my standards. You're not doing anything to make the definition of art in any way an objective definition.

>>7048684
>It might have the potential to be one, but it is surely not one.
Then the argument that you're making is that videogames are BAD art. Which nobody itt to my knowledge has disagreed with. But you, by your own admissions that videogames could possess the capacity to display deeper thoughts, can't say they're NOT art. Otherwise you're contradicting yourself outright.

>>7048690
Sure we do. It's the aesthetic equivalent of "delicacy."

>>7048688
That distinction is "high art" and "low art", not whether something is or is not art.

When you tie the definition of art to a subjective measure of taste, you're making it impossible to have any meaningful definition of what art is. Art is what you think it is, or what I think it is, or what that guy over there thinks it is. But none of that is congruent.

Art has to be either very broadly defined, or not objectively defined at all.

>>7048696
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/art

>something that is created with imagination and skill and that is beautiful or that expresses important ideas or feelings

>works created by artists : paintings, sculptures, etc., that are created to be beautiful or to express important ideas or feelings

Video games are not art.

>>7048698
>Video games are not art.
Thank God.

>>7048689
>cultural appropriation
HAHAHAHA HOLY SHIT
You're literally using a term made up by the same kind of tumblr internet 'activists' who use GG and other elements of victim-culture to line their Patreon accounts, as an insult against people who actively speak out against victim culture.

This is doublethink in real fucking life. They've got you so afraid of everyone else that you think anyone who's not chasing the same chemtrail crap as you is secretly 'on their side'.
I'm not fucking Goldstein son, and there is no Big Brother. You've got so wrapped up in the rhetoric of the 'fight' that you don't see everyone else has walked off the battlefield.

>>7048691
I'd like to know exactly where you're getting your ludicrously broad definition of "art"

>>7048698
From this link
>Examples of ART

>It's a remarkable picture, but is it art?

>>7048694
So what's a delicacy? And why aren't delicacies aesthetic in nature?

>>7048672
But I wasn't arguing that it wasn't art. I said that LEARNING to paint suggests the notion of COMPETENCY. To LEARN to paint is to acquire a set of PRINCIPLES, SKILLS--however good from a scientific perspective--and applying them.

The guy I was originally responding to misrepresented that other guy's point. Of course the drooling toddler is painting when he swings his brush on to a canvas, that doesn't mean he is actually *learning* to paint, though. He skipped the learning part of the equation.

>Okay then, I guess every artistic revolution or movement since the beginning of time is no invalid, since the propagators of those movements did not possess the subjective 'talent' recognized by the peoples of their era.
I have no idea what you're talking about; we're probably just talking past each other.

>>7048701
And now, predictably, you've been triggered into a denialist meltdown.

SJW are real.

>>7048698
>one subjective definition of art that could be twisted to leave holes
Guess all of film is not art, huh. Or any of the artistic movements that people historically said were not valuable or important during their time. Impressionism is dogshit huh

>>7048698
>not using the OED

https://www.oxforddictionaries.com/us/definition/american_english/art

>>7048681
gamergate started out with people harassing zoe quinn (who is NOT a journalist) on twitter for cheating on her boyfriend.

>>7048707
Yeah, a hundred years from now academics will be saying Skyrim was in fact an artistic masterpiece.

>>7048715
That's like saying Gavrilo Princip's assassination caused World War I.

>>7048708
Fails by that definition as well.

>>7048679
This isn't poultry! >:(

>>7048720
or that the civil war was about slavery.


gamergate was about exposing the fact that zoe quinn literally fucked her way into getting her game to be advertised, her cheating on her boyfriend was just the icing on the cake.

>>7048702
>I'd like to know exactly where you're getting your ludicrously broad definition of "art"
As another anon said, art needs to be defined broadly or else it loses any congruence in meaning. The definition I, and a lot of other people use who are along similar lines of thought, is as broad as I can paint it without beginning to include clearly redundant or incorrect things.
For example, a rock just left on the ground is not art. It's not a man-made or produced item, it wasn't put there by anybody. It -may- cause somebody to feel an expression or idea, but that alone does not make it art, since it was not created, and being created alone does not make something art.
Intention is not part of the equation, since many things not intended to do so have granted stirring emotions or great thoughts among people.
It must have been created by a person and it must have the capacity to express an idea, emotion, or image.
Anything smaller and you begin to exclude well-known art that already exists; anything
broader and you get out of the realm of reason.

>>7048705
Lel keep going on with that doctored rhetoric about being 'triggered' and an 'sjw'
What social justice am I fighting for, exactly?

>>7048701
oh wow, you actually think tumblr invented the term cultural appropriation?

fucking take a second to familiarize yourself with the other side of the argument, you're embarrassing yourself.

go back to /v/

>>7048717
You might be surprised. One of the most praised films of all time is a Soviet propaganda piece.

Not that I'm necessarily suggesting that Skyrim in particular will be viewed as a "masterpiece", but all I'm saying is that you can't really say from here what will have the enduring legacy that will interest future academics.

And by the way, there are already academics who study and write about games as art. Pic related.

>>7048717
>Yeah a hundred years from now people will be saying Pixels was in fact a cinematic masterpiece
Don't play retard, bub. Nobody in this thread has argued that videogames are GOOD art, only that they have the capacity to be.

is manga art?

>>7048727
excuse my misspeaking, of course tumblr did not invent the term, but they've been instrumental in bringing the term into the modern rhetoric of internet political debates and have contributed to widespread misappropriation of the phrase along the same lines as that anon's earlier usage

>>7048726
Everything created by a person has the capacity and intent to express an idea, emotion or image.

>>7048726
If you're not an SJW, you should be aware that people are actively working to exert pressure and turn games into a bullhorn for their agenda.

I wouldn't have a problem with that if they were making their own games, but they can't, so they are exerting pressure on others.

For example, look at what happened to the Mozilla CEO for not supporting gay marriage. He was shitcanned--his career was assassinated through directed pressure.

Regardless of where you stand on that particular issue, the problem is the METHOD.

Objectivity and political tolerance--the common standards by which we are to interact with each other--is being abandoned. If you are not the right kind of zealot, you must be disposed of.

>>7048728
>not posting RPO
You missed your chance to crash this plane with no survivors, anon

>>7048489
I think we should move away from the notion of art as skill. Great skill should of course be recognised. The problem is that when we characterize art in this way, we open ourselves to conceptions of art that are political. One may be very skilled in implying political and ideological ideas in fiction. Likewise certain pieces from both painting and installation art enjoy way too much attention on account of being interpreted as politically important.

This is just my opinion, but i would like that the word "art" was only used about objects that presicely did not lend themselves to interpretation. The human mind will of course attempt to interpret everything. With this in mind we should say "art" about those things which at some point in time, according to popular discourse, did not at all fit into the place in which they were to be found.

>>7048721
Looking at the first definitions:

"The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination TYPICALLY (as in not necessarily) in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power:" (my emphasis added)

"Works produced by human creative skill and imagination"

"Creative activity resulting in the production of paintings, drawings, or sculpture"

Just because it's saying paintings drawing and sculpture doesn't mean it is only limited to those. If you think it does, note that it doesn't include literature either. Is literature not art, or are they merely listing a few examples that do not encompass all of art? I'd bet on the latter.

So yes, it does include video games.

>>7048730
"Bad art" doesn't mean who you think it means, and saying whether or not something is "bad" is even more arbitrary than arguing whether it is art. There is good art music, there is bad art music. There is good pop music, there is bad pop music. But pop music is not art music, full stop.

>>7048738
I'm not familiar with that. Please, explain.

>>7048742
Is Bjork pop music or art music? Why?

>>7048733
Therefore everything created by a person is art! Thank you for proving my point

>>7048735
The logical leap between seeing videogames 'journalism' used as a vessel for shilling and agenda pushing, and larger overall agendas and character assassination is bigger than a Kenyan could make on Mars.
If you'll remember at the height of GG there was exactly ONE accredited journalist, from Forbes iirc, who gave any amount of a shit. Nobody else cared. And it is specifically because the agenda-pushers ARE NOT REAL JOURNALISTS that nobody cared, otherwise the higher media would have had a field day canning everybody involved on either side of the argument simply to fuel the scandal for ratings.

The rabbithole on GG went down a good bit deep, but to think it even brushes the surface of actual political/media bedfellows is hilariously naive and is exactly what the internet 'left' wants you to think so that they can legitimize their victim culture.
The more important you believe the likes of Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkeesian are, the more they become that important.

>>7048742
>But pop music is not art music, full stop.
Back up your claim or leave. Of course good and bad are subjective terms, but so is claiming one thing to be art and the other not to be. Only by relegating those subjective ideas to descriptors, not qualifying titles, we can at least prevent ourselves from retroactively disqualifying other established art forms.

>>7048745
Ready Player One was a big LE NERD CULCHUR XDDD book that came out a few years ago, lots of pseudo-intellectual 'geeks' think it's hot shit but it's fairly mediocre, /lit/ is absolutely allergic to it but it's brought up often as an example of videogame 'literature'

>>7048746
Bjork is pop music.

It doesn't fall under the academic definition of art music.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_music

Love how so many people here are willing to write multiple-sentence posts about retarded shit but not about literature

>>7048754
Oh ok. What I posted was more of an academic analysis of interactive media.

>>7048754
>>7048757

>>7048758
love how people here are willing to bitch about topic they don't like and bump that conversation instead of generating their own discussion about content they perceive to be better suited to the board

>>7048757
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_music
This is making it sound more like a genre than a suggestion that "art music" is ART and anything else is not.

>>7048757
What about Sjon, is he an art poet because he won a prestigious prize or a pop poet because he works with Bjork

>>7048757
"While earlier musicological approaches tended to consider art music in an elitist way, asserting the superiority of art music over other forms of music (for example Adorno[22]), many modern musicologists (most particularly ethnomusicologists) dispute the notion of superiority. In a recent international musicology colloquium dedicated to music and globalization,[23] some ethnomusicologists such as Jean During insisted that no matter the technicity and difficulty of music, every musical tradition has the same dignity and no one can claim any superiority over another."

Did you even read the article? It's not saying what you think it's saying.

>>7048762
>academic definition of art music
Genres titles for music were literally invented to help keep track of sales, any genre titles in music are inherently meaningless or at worst purposefully counter-productive and manipulative in the case of Metal.
We're talking about a definition in lingua franca, not whatever arbitrary group decided to call arbitrary types of music for sales.

>>7048750
No, "ignore them so they can do what they want" is not a viable strategy. I agree that attacking professional victims and giving them negative attention that they exist to monetize is a bad idea, but, regardless, I believe GG has been a net massive gain.

It doesn't matter if they're "REAL JOURNALISTS" or not. They're what gaming has, and they've been bringing their politics into review, docking points for "creepiness" or whatever--and this is often at the "most credible" sites. See Carolyn Petit at Gamespot.

Reviews have repercussions. MetaCritic scores have repercussions. "Reviewers" have shifted from serving their customers to self-important soapboxing and downvoting.

Worse, still, they've been trained and encouraged to use their clout for these clauses. See the Wikpedia edit campaigns that come out of Gender Studies programs. It's political for them. This is the kind of person called an SJW--someone who is politically motivated, abandons objectivity, and wants to purge people who aren't members of the party.

>>7048757
And there is an academic category of "art games", by the way
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art_game

But it mainly came out of the idea of "gender critiquing" games, and it has been applied almost zip to actual titles by academics, and more employed by bloggers and reviewers. It's functionally more of a hypothetical than actuality.

>>7048765
Prizes don't really mean anything, Kissinger wont the Nobel Peace Prize. That said, there's not reason someone can't produce both.

>>7048763
You are a braindead idiot. If you post a thread about video games, discussion automatically generates itself, whereas if you post a thread about a famous author you just get a bunch of retarded one-line meme replies, and if you post a thread about a lesser-known author, no one bothers to even click on it, no matter how thorough a discussion of the author you offer in the OP. People here, especially yourself, are fucking flatheaded piece of shit retards who don't actually read.

>>7048770
>No, "ignore them so they can do what they want" is not a viable strategy. I agree that attacking professional victims and giving them negative attention that they exist to monetize is a bad idea, but, regardless, I believe GG has been a net massive gain.
Then you've been living under a massive rock. Everyone on the victim side made huge amounts of money, Sarkeesian and Quinn died and were reborn as Martyrs, Gawker media managed to trim the fat off of its least productive sites while redoubling the strength of its hands in the pots of sites like Reddit, and I wouldn't be surprised if the whole debacle had huge aftershocks in the internet game community down to nuances of Youtube's copyright policies, Twitch.tv, SGDQ/AGDQ, and dozens others.
GG fell off the wagon as a completely justified purge of corruption, centered around consolidation of hard facts and falsifiable evidence, to a bloated meaningless flamewar where nobody on the offensive side had any viable credentials to back up or enforce the flailing actions of the anonymous mass throwing their weight behind the movement for political and bandwagon reasons.

The professional victims won handily specifically because people with no idea what they were talking about overstepped their bounds and brought unwarranted and indefensible political claims bordering on conspiracy theories, and of course death threats and other stupid shit, into the mix. The most we got out of it was a few memes and a great episode of Law and Order that inadvertently advertised us as winning.

>>7048766
No, it is very much saying what I think. Just because the idea of art music being superior is disputed, does not impact the integrity of the existence of the category, especially when the substance of the dispute is le "dead white males", since there is plenty of art music that isn't about white men, such as Eastern art music and more sophisticated works of jazz.

>>7048787
LIke why are people talking about this goddamn shit oin a fucking literature board. Why the fuck does anyone here give a fuck about gamergate. What the fuck is wrong with you faggots. Get the fuck out of here. You should all be fucking banned.

>>7048778
>people who don't want to talk about what I like are stupid!
>better keep their thread bumped or they'll never stop talking about videogames!
Report and hide, sage goes in all fields, and shut the fuck up

>>7048793
It's going to keep happening no matter what unless I yell at you for what a retarded piece of shit you are for incessantly running your mouths about this stupid garbage on a goddamn ltierature board

>>7048789
>these other people with important sounding names think I might be right!
Literally an appeal to authority with nothing else to back up your claim. And that authority's view is being actively disputed, so I don't know what you thought that citation would accomplish.

>>7048795
Guess what son
You yelling is not gonna change my posting habits

>>7048789
But the article also states the integrity of the category (which again is a category more like a supragenre than "this is art and everything else isn't") is blurred:

"azz is generally considered popular music. (Adorno for example refers to jazz as some kind of popular music.[21]) But some more technical forms of jazz have blurred borders between art music and popular music."

"many art music composers have made reference to popular music"

"in some cases the distinction between popular and art music has been blurred, particularly in the late 20th century.[8]"

Just admit you didn't read the article and jumped to a conclusion about what it was stating.

>>7048804
Then I'll report you, and maybe everyone else in this thread as well.

>>7048810
Then do so, but for god's sake stop bitching you're just bumping the thread. Besides bans don't mean dick anyways

>>7048805
>>7048804
>>7048801
>>7048795
>>7048793
>>7048792
>>7048789
>>7048787
>>7048778
>>7048776
>>7048771
>>7048770
>>7048767
>>7048766
>>7048765
>>7048764
>>7048763
>>7048762
>>7048759
>>7048758
>>7048757
>>7048754
>>7048750
>>7048746
>>7048745
>>7048742
>>7048740
>>7048739
>>7048738
>>7048735
>>7048733
>>7048732
>>7048731
>>7048730
>>7048728
>>7048727
>>7048726
>>7048725
>>7048723
>>7048721
>>7048720
>>7048717
>>7048715
>>7048708
>>7048707
>>7048705
>>7048704
>>7048703
>>7048702
>>7048701
[and everyone else because i'm too lazy to keep going]

reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048801
You could argue that same with dictionaries in general.

No one is actually disputing the category of "art music", just whether or not it should be considered superior to other mediums.

>>7048810
stop being gay

>>7048815
>>7048816
>>7048817
>>7048818
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048821
you realize you're breaking a rule where you cannot announce your reports?

>>7048821
>>7048822
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048787
You're being entirely too negative. LWs were already cash rich and/or deified prior to GG. The entire SJW community is old money trust fund kids laundering money and shuffling it between them.

Also, I don't have the details, but it did get a lot of people fired and cause massive advertising damage to several sites. People listened.

GG raised awareness and gave us a lot of information. If it accomplished nothing else except "SJW" entering the public lexicon, then it is a win.

It was far better to do something than nothing, and we were the ones willing to do something, and we did. We even made history, really. I'm pretty sure the scale of GG and its methods were all but unprecedented.

We'll probably be in textbooks.

>>7048816
>announcing your reports
god damn could you be any more newfag? where do I upvote? where's my karma at?

>>7048821
>>7048816
>>7048810
U DARE

>>7048824
>>7048825
>>7048827
>>7048828
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048817
But at the same time no one in the article is claiming that "art music" is the only type of music that is art. They're saying it's a more complicated form of music compared to popular music. Complexity doesn't make something art. Malevich's Black Square is art and it's literally just a black square.

>>7048829
>>7048830
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048830
>Malevich's Black Square is art
What if I told you... it isn't?

>>7048805
That's partially because the category of jazz is blurred. In fact, frustration has been expressed by black musicians who don't even consider their music jazz, but have to deal with that label simply because they're black and their music features saxophones.

>>7048825
>Also, I don't have the details, but it did get a lot of people fired and cause massive advertising damage to several sites. People listened.
>getting fired from an online blogging job where most of your money comes from donations
Oh noes! My tiny amount of faux-responsibility has been swept out from under me! If only I could plead to daddy and the internet about how cruel I was treated and how I need more money!

GG raised no awareness, it has become synonymous with typical 4chan shitlordery and the fallout of its collapse has rendered many, like me, very skeptical of those reinstating the rhetoric.
>we'll probably be in textbooks
Okay now I know you're trolling. Alight man you got me

>>7048831
>>7048833
>>7048834
>>7048836

reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048833
>it isn't
Do you have a single fact to back that up?

>>7048839
>>7048840
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

DOOM is art, but videogames are not.

life's too short to post in bad threads
oh wait just did
lmao

>>7048833
You'd be wrong.

>>7048834
That's nice, but you said that the integrity of the category wasn't an issue, and the article states otherwise. And again, nowhere in the article is it stating that "art music" is art and "popular music" is not.

>>7048836
You're really just a negative nelly. Stop being a little bitch, if you please.

I'm beginning to think you're an SJW shill and I should take up the sword again.

>Okay now I know you're trolling. Alight man you got me
Google GamerGate and read the dozens of articles calling it a "fascinating phenomenon" and opining on what it means for online activism. We kicked ass.

>>7048843
>>7048844
>>7048846
>>7048847
>>7048848
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048839
Dude I'm literally just bumping to see if you get publicly banned for announcing reports, then i'll screencap it and use it as fuel for dank meme threads and other off-topic shit on /lit/
Thanks for helping me help you turn /lit/ into /v/ two-point-oh!

>>7048849
>>7048850
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048847
I said that the integrity of art music isn't an issue, not that the integrity of jazz music isn't. There's jazz that is clearly pop, and jazz that is clearly art music, but there is also pop, and particularly art music, that is in dispute whetehr or not it's jazz.

>>7048853
>>7048854
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048848
dozens of articles written by the exact same tier of internet pseudo-journalists who got the whole shebang started? Who we've already acknowledged are not legitimate sources of information?

>durr I dont like you ur an essjaydoubleyoo
This mentality is what keeps their victim complex fed and what killed GG.
You are the cancer, anon

>>7048856
>>7048857
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

Yes I'm Reporting My Own POsts. Deal W/ It.

>>7048857
Nah, you "journalistic reform" tards were the idiot wing.

"WRITE OBJECTIVE REVIEWS ABOUT GAMES THAT PAY YOU TO ADVERTISE ON YOUR SITE!!!! YOU CAN DO IT!!!" XD

Game review has always been a Mountain Dewrito joke. It's the political component that changed.

"Journalistic reform" tards were fighting for something naive and impossible, and something that hadn't changed since the early days of video games.

>>7048848
> We kicked ass.

Those articles don't seem to agree.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielnyegriffiths/2015/08/16/a-somewhat-illuminating-mess-gamergate-on-stage-at-airplay-opinion/

http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/8/the-invisible-hordes-of-online-feminist-bullies.html

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/gaming/2015/08/17/year-after-gamergate-women-say-online-harassment-still-big-deal/31053009/

Most major media outlets seems to think gamergaters were a bunch of bullies out to harass women.

>>7048868
>>7048865
>>7048869
>>7048870
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048870
>mass media was right about the iraq war and it's right about gamergate

We weren't, though, so it was a mass redpill for anyone involved with it. Seeing how ridiculous and distorted their claims were just made the media's bias apparent.

>>7048872
>>7048875
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048854
>There's jazz that is clearly pop, and jazz that is clearly art music,
But there's also jazz that isn't clearly either, according to the article. This is what compromises the integrity of the category. There's a blurring of the lines. It's not just jazz either. They specifically mentioned about 20 "art music" composers who "referenced popular music" further blurring the distinction between the two. It isn't as cut and dry as you're making it out to be.

And again, "art music" doesn't seem to be about what music is art and what isn't. At least not from anything that article had to say.

>>7048869
Nobody wanted non-journos to be held to journalistic ethical standards, we wanted everyone to realize they didn't have ethical standards, that's why Quinn fucking around to win awards and get promoted was the perfect catalyst

>>7048877
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048875
But the masses don't even give a shit.

No one gives a shit except for bloggers who are payed to give a shit. On both sides. Others see it as a curiosity, or more commonly, children whining about their toys.

>>7048879
>>7048880
>>7048881
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048883
>>7048884
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048883
I'm sorry you have clinical depression. The impact GG has is obvious to anyone deeply involved in it.

>>7048886
>>7048888
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/, nice quads doe

>>7048888
But that's the point. Most people aren't deeply involved with it. Go outside and take a poll. See how many people have heard of it. Then after that, ask them if they care.

>>7048890
>>7048894
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048896
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048900
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048894
The correct perspective is to consider the impact GG has had relative to the impact GG would have had if it didn't exist.

The different between 0 and something is infinity.

>>7048903
>>7048906
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048908
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048911
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048906
actually, mathematically, the difference between zero and the first number greater than zero is infinitesimal.

>>7048906
But again, no one cares unless they'd previously cared. And no minds were changed. Feminists are still mad at big titted video game characters, and manchildren are still convinced of a SJW conspiracy to ruin video games. The same views they already had and helped establish which side of the argument they'd be one when the lines were drawn. So really it didn't have any impact, because it changed literally nothing.

>>7048914
>>7048917
>>7048918
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048917
Substantively, the difference between no-thing and some-thing is inexpressibly vast.

>>7048921
>>7048922
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048918
>a butterfly flapping its wings in australia can change the weather in tokyo
>but GamerGate changed nothing because i'm depressed and nothing really matters :(

Just commit suicide already. Some of us are passionate about life.

>>7048925
>>7048928
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048930
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

This is simply not an important argument you fools

>>7048932
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048933
agreed. not reporting you

>>7048933
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meOCdyS7ORE

>>7048928
>a butterfly flapping its wings in australia can change the weather in tokyo
But that isn't true either. The butterfly effect doesn't actually work like that. It's just a metaphor.

It's nice that you're passionate, but your passion didn't change anything.

>>7048935
>>7048936
>>7048938
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048941
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048947
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

>>7048938
My experience is exactly the contrary, in that everything I've ever done has been far more influential than I imagined it to be.

Contacting and arguing with particular people at particular times, or writing rants on here, has had echoes elsewhere in the Internet, with people paraphrasing me.

You can say I'm delusional or have a sense of importance, but I've been quoted verbatim.

What is an "illusion" is your lack of influence. You can't NOT influence things. You are influencing things all the time.

And, something as large as GamerGate, that had who knows how many articles and even a television episode about it, effected things in a profound way. There's no way to estimate just how much it changed.

>>7048949
>>7048950
reported for posting in a thread about video games on /lit/

bump

>turboautists keeps thread he doesn't well bumped into 200 posts instead of hiding like any normal person would

spooked as fuck tbh

>>7048950
That's some real bullshit right there, but whatever. I know arguments on the internet don't actually convince anyone of anything and I don't feel like continuing this one anymore.

Enjoy your "influence". I'm sure when you're lying on your death bed you can take comfort in all the energy you devoted to complaining about video games. Because that's super important stuff.

>>7048950
anecdotes are not evidence, your subjective experience is meaningless
Gamergate was not large, it barely broke mainstream media if at all, Deflategate was literally a thousand times bigger.

Video games are art as much as a Warhammer novel, there is craft in creating it, but in the end it is just entertainment.

>>7048958
>>7048959
Enjoy thinking about this argument before you go to sleep tonight...

It has already nestled in your subconscious and will modify your actions going forward in innumerable ways.

Just my distracting you momentarily, here, altered the course of your life.

>>7048962
this tbh

>>7048965
>>7048964
>>7048962
>>7048959
>>7048958
>>7048957
>>7048955
>>7048952
reoproorted

>>7048964
pull your cock out of your ass, you barely even understand memetic psychologically
no playing MGS2 does not qualify you to talk about information dispersal

>>7048968
While you are worried about "qualification", I am busy changing the world.

How does it make you feel, to be impotent, when an "unqualified" one such as myself is busy instigating radical change?

>>7048967
>>7048968
>>7048556
>>7048555
>>7048703
>>7048721
>>7048538
>>7048532
>>7048512
>>7048828
>>7048827
>>7048827
>>7048827
>>7048827
>>7048827
>>7048830
>>7048971

>>7048829
>>7048618
>618▶>>7048631
>File: Malevich.black-square.jpg (41 KB, 820x812)
>>7048620
>>7048624
>>7048968
>>7048489
>>7048505
>>7048512
>>7048514
>crass ass.
>>>
>Anonymous 08/30/15(Sun)01:49:14 No.7048514▶>>704
>>7048514
>>7048528
>>7048532
>>7048702
>>7048701
>>7048700
all of you niggers are reported for being huge fags

Wish everyone with an opinion on GamgerGate would be abducted by extraterrestrials and hurled into the sun for le epic science

>>7048964
I doubt I'll remember it ten minutes from now, pal.

Things read online tend not to be stored in long term memory.

And thus the thread dies. Not with a bang but with a shit post.

>>7048971
You seem like one of the sorts of people who thinks they can influence the nature of physical reality because "quantum physics" and "the double slit experiment", even though you don't really understand what those things are.