/vr/ - Retro Games

Beat 'Em & Eat 'Em

>>1616305

Any and all of them.

Art is the result of any creative effort, not a measure of quality.

Mario Paint.

>>1616343

Just shut the fuck up.

>>1616343

>trying this hard to be a fucking hipster

>>1616305
What exactly do you mean?

>>1616369
>>1616526

Hipster? Are you fucking kidding?

That's what art means. Go look it up, dumbshits.

>>1616305
I'd say Ecco and Kolibri.

Possibly Prince of Persia, and Don Bluth's set of games (Dragon's Lair, Space Ace).

Scum games.

>>1616537

>Ecco

A million times this.

It's not just a damn good game, it's a fantastic sci-fi piece and a lesson in ambience and mood.

Killer7
Shadow of the Colossus
Silent Hill 1 and 2
Myst, Riven
Knytt and Knytt Strories

>>1616546
>Killer7
>Shadow of the Colossus
>Knytt and Knytt Strories

>>/vr/

People should just stop with trying to call things "art".
It really should be limited to paintings and sculptures. Anything near Andy Warhol's shit should already stop being considered "art".

Because if you start with that there will be no end. "The art of playing soccer", "The art of eyebrow designing", "Videogames as a form of art".

The more you study art and it's makers, the less you want things you enjoy to be considered art.

>>1616550
>Because if you start with that there will be no end. "The art of playing soccer", "The art of eyebrow designing", "Videogames as a form of art".

>>1616550
You know art just means something that you do, right?

Like Martial arts.

Doom for the Doom board.

>>1616554
1 [MASS NOUN] The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power:

By your example, the art of dog shearing should be then in the same category of video games then.
Dance is the 4th art of the 6 (or 7) arts. Dance for fucks sake.

>>1616554
Art used to be a craft but with the advent of photography the artist suddenly had to redefine their craft and modern art was born as a way to express feelings of the modern world.

Redefining what art was brought forth a lot of pretences and disagreements of how to do things correctly like with any other booming medium.

>>1616562
>By your example, the art of dog shearing should be then in the same category of video games then.

>>1616536
Why are you such a hipster?

>>1616570

>>1616570
>>1616576
>>1616562
>By your example, the art of dog shearing should be then in the same category of video games then.

>>1616570
>>1616576

What kind of horrible, nameless crime did those dogs commit to deserve that.

Look at the eyes. Did you ever read I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream?

>>1616583
>Hate. Hate.

Takeshi's Challenge is the Trout Mask Replica of video games, a blistering postmodern masterpiece which, using every game design trick in the book, brilliantly satirizes the banality of contemporary video game conventions by way of an absurdist parody of the Japanese salaryman.

(I'd love for this to be an actual article.)

Earthbound

:^)

>>1616546
I agree with Riven. SH is too derivative of the works it took its ideas from to be relevant, and I assume you're joking when you mention Knytt.

>>1616305
Majoras Mask is the one that does it best through mechanics and enviromental storytelling which separate videogames from other art forms.

Silent Hill is worth mentioning too.

Aside from that there is a lot of examples that communicate through more conventional means, mostly adventure games. For example:
Planescape Torment
Earthbound
Grim Fandango
I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream

i believe that the sole unilateral purpose of art is to uniquely express in a way that provokes emotion or thought. that goes for any medium and any time period, and for me, is the universal judge of artistic strength/merit.

there's music that's designed for a distinctly non-"artistic" purpose--elevator jazz, commercial jingles, minimalistic dance music. people acting in a commercial for the latest cuisinart product are not acting in a way that is traditionally perceived as artistic.

while elevator music is definitely music, and the canned acting we see in the sham-wow commercials is indeed acting, their strength as art is extremely limited. and that is validated by the lack of provocation. one could argue that a catchy jingle may provoke you to think about buying a pepsi, and they'd be right--but that counts more towards commercial strength and financial gain than unique expression.

let's take this idea the next step further and apply it to roger ebert's argument that video games can never be art.

"One obvious difference between art and games is that you can win a game. It has rules, points, objectives, and an outcome. [One] might cite an 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 is right in his way of thinking; video games *as a whole* can never be art. they are experienced differently by each person.

but if we take ebert's thought process a step further, and if we look at how the experience of video games has provoked thought, moved people; how stories in video games have caused people to feel bonded to a character; or the thousands of people out there who buy game soundtracks and make remixes... what we see is provocation through unique expression.

video games can do this, so they are art. the games that do this best make the best case for art in video games.

>>1616601
>you can win a game
Seems like an arbitrary reason to not consider games art.

>they are experienced differently by each person.
Different people experience everything differently. Why else would they disagree about what makes a painting, movie or song good?

is there even a contest?

>>1616601
I always thought that "You can win a game" was just the last grasp of a man who has no argument. Nevermind that when you complete a game you don't always win (bad endings abound). He just wanted to rephrase "You can finish a game" but apparently ran out of time to rethink it when he realized you finish stories and movies. It always stuck in my craw like someone who had to change shit just before a deadline, or someone who had no firm basis for argument.

Because really, what is winning in video games? It's the completion of the story. For whatever value the creator put into the story, that's all that winning is.

>>1616305
I have a better question: How is any videogame not art??

>>1616607
if you read a novel or watch a film or listen to an album, you're experiencing the creator's carefully crafted output. output they've intended to be experienced in a specific way, to conjure thought and provoke emotion and to express a point. with gaming, the terminal objective is to entertain the player by getting them to try to win. that's no more art than the seahawks playing the steelers with the intent to win a game of football... and it's the concept video games are built around.

video games are designed to be played, to entertain one by attempting to win. that is not an objective of art--the concept of winning has no artistic merit.

you're right that everyone experiences everything differently, but the difference ebert is talking about here is specifically between the way we experience a novel or a movie as opposed to how we experience a game. when playing video games, everyone chooses their actions differently, and may or may not see the same elements of the story, experience the same feeling of loss, care as much about one character as another because of their individual experience.

how does that make video games any less of an artistic experience? maybe it doesn't. but it makes a case for video games as a whole to be classified solely as gaming entertainment.

much of the reason we don't experience games the same way has nothing to do with plot or story. the reason they're experienced differently is because one guy wanted to grind for three hours before this boss and the other just wanted to try his luck with an inexperienced character. these aren't artistic qualities, and they detract from any provocative value the game might have.

>>1616664
Christ, that fucking picture.

>>1616625
i would disagree. winning is the motivation for one to play a game.

Custer's Revenge

>>1616671
>winning is the motivation for one to play a game
I think most people look forward to more than just completing the game when they are playing it. In fact, I'm sure people would be happier if some games would last longer.

>>1616664
>if you read a novel or watch a film or listen to an album, you're experiencing the creator's carefully crafted output. output they've intended to be experienced in a specific way, to conjure thought and provoke emotion and to express a point
And this isn't true for games as well?

>>1616687
but ultimately the reason anyone plays a video game is to beat it. they are designed to be beaten, to be played better to get a good score. as beautiful and artistic as the music, art, and story may be, defeating enemies and acquiring points and discovering items are integral parts of gaming, and they are not artistic in any way.

>>1616690
it's not the same thing. the output you receive from video games is different depending on your input. this is not the case with traditional forms of art.

>>1616693
>but ultimately the reason anyone plays a video game is to beat it.
That's really a baseless assumption. You can only speculate about the motives of the players.

>>1616664
I don't think that's always the case. Arguing subjectives aside, a lot of art is designed to be viewed only one way. Nobody would see Munch's The Scream and assume that it's about butterflies in springtime. There are art pieces that have a definite intent by the creator. Likewise there are art pieces that are created for pure entertainment or to be interpreted by the viewer. Michaelangelo's Papal frescos routinely showed not only a reverence of faith, but if viewed closely, had some pretty snarky material about the church at the time. Then there's the whole modern art thing that's completely open to interpretation.

I do not see how a game designed structurally is not carefully crafted output.

>>1616671
Winning isn't the only reason to play a game. I still play Ecco for the themes and emotions it evokes. I still play sonic 2 because I just find it fun. Winning doesn't matter. If I lose all my lives before the final boss, I still enjoy the experience. I like the artwork. The moods. etc.

>>1616696
That doesn't mean it's not carefully crafted, wasn't intended to be experienced in a specific way, and isn't meant to provoke an emotion or express a point.

>>1616697
what about the motives of the creators? are there true video games that are made without the intent of being beaten? or to get a high score?

>>1616703
I'm sure some creators are happy if people enjoy a game without completing it.

Better question: what games would Piero Scaruffi consider artistic masterpieces?

>>1616698
see
>>1616693 and
>>1616703

winning might not be the only reason anyone plays a game, but it's how they're created.

>>1616698
Going further with my point about winning, I think people are missing a lesser point for their own point.

The player isn't the reader. The player is the musician. Not all of us can play Liszt's Bohemian Rhapsody No. 2, but if we keep trying we will succeed. The artwork is still there, the piece exists whether we succeed or fail. If we succeed we feel a sense of gratification. And then we share our experience with other.

For the argument of "not the same way", that again goes back to music. The song is written in classic 4/4 measure, but someone plays the melody in ragtime. The original piece is still structurally intact, but the player/musician has interpreted it in a new way.

>>1616709
To add more fuel to the pyre of people being musicians not readers, video games and music are active forms of art. Books and movies are passive.

>>1616705
i think what you're staying steps outside of the discussion. are the creators happy people are enjoying what they're making as creators of art, or as creators of a game? how many people are involved with the creation of what the person is enjoying? what was the player enjoying specifically--level design, character sprites, the music, the gore effects? what exactly quantifies as art, or the enjoyment of art, in all of that?

it's a lot to think about, but i'm not sure that someone's enjoyment while experiencing something qualifies it as a work of art. i enjoy my new set of kitchen knives.

>>1616698
>designed to be viewed only one way
>Munch's The Scream
That's why he made like ten different versions of it, right?

>>1616305

Its obvious that video games are art, anyone with an open mind can see that.

If I had to pick a game made before 1990 that would be perhaps the greatest work of art, it would be either Zelda 1 or Super Mario Bros.

For some reason people think that, for video games to be art, they need to have stories or emulate movies. There is art in game and level design. Super Mario Bros. is absolutely art.

>>1616718
>i think what you're staying steps outside of the discussion.
You brought up the creators motives...

>i enjoy my new set of kitchen knives.
I'm sure they have plenty of artistic merit in terms of craftsmanship and design.

>>1616728
They were all made to evoke one emotion.

>How many versions of Green Hill Zone does Sega need to make?

>>1616717
i disagree. i think there are elements of video games as art, even active forms of art, but the whole cannot be judged as such because of its nature and the intent of its creator(s).

>>1616732
there is art IN video games. that does not qualify the whole as art.

>>1616739
So you'd argue it is dual natured? Creator's intent is way too broad of a point to argue.

Ecco of course had a very focused artistic intent. Zoop has next to none.

>>1616743
So? The stone a sculpture is made of isn't art either and it doesn't stop the sculpture from being art.

>>1616743

I don't get what you're saying. Not all videogames are art. But a game like Super Mario Bros. can be called art.

>>1616749
>Creator's intent is way too broad of a point to argue.
Apart from being irrelevant considering we have either none or poor insight into their motivations, and the fact that motives can be irrational and thus nonsense.

>>1616735
i actually meant to say "we're." and elements of my kyoceras are beautifully, even artfully designed... but that does not make them works of art.

>>1616749

Art should not be judged on the creator's intentions.

>>1616756
We have some insight into a few creator's intents. But I agree, artistic intent is too sparse on much of the medium.

>>1616759
Not attempting to be sullen but, why not? If a creator intends to provoke certain emotions why can't we weigh their ability to succeed? Doesn't artistic intent help people define what a piece means?

>>1616749
the larger part of the creators' intent when making ecco was to make a game that the player could win.

>>1616751
what is the sculptor's intent?

>>1616752
elements of something can be artistic. look at the work of andy warhol--taking popular advertisements and recreating them as art showed that there was artistic merit in the design of the traditionally commercial subjects he was using.

that doesn't mean that the creator of a can of tomato soup is creating art.

applying that to video games, one could say that the character design, music, and story were artistic, but the end goal of playing a video game is to win it. making it not art, but a medium that bears many elements that can be called art.

>>1616769

Well I think you can consider artistic intent. But some people think that art should be fully judged on the creator's intent, which I think is ridiculous.

That pretty much ignores the person who is experiencing the art. I am a human being playing this video game; how does that make me feel?

>>1616775
>what is the sculptor's intent?
It doesn't matter if we're talking about the material. At least, not if the material wasn't also crafted by the artist. The point is that having elements with no artistic value doesn't stop something from being art.

>>1616775
>the larger part of the creators' intent when making ecco was to make a game that the player could win.

You've never read anything said or written by Ed Annunziata. Or even bothered to play Ecco. This much is clear. You wouldn't say such a thing knowingly unless you were trying to troll at a shitty level.

>>1616776
>But some people think that art should be fully judged on the creator's intent, which I think is ridiculous.

That's entirely fair.

>>1616775
>but the end goal of playing a video game is to win it

Not necessarily.

I feel for the guys who try to argue from the developers' side of intent. It reminds me that nobody sees Michaelangelo's David as a monument to terror - but if you look him directly in the face from a height, he looks like he's going to faint from fear. Nobody sees that, though. They only see the body posture that suggests confidence.

>>1616781
great point. but what if the overall intent of something is not artistic in nature? as in video games?

>>1616782
i am not "trolling." i simply disagree with what you're saying. ecco consists of many beautiful, artistic elements, but it remains a game. it is played with the purpose of winning. from my perspective, that fact discounts it as art as a whole.

>>1616784
name a true video game where the intent is not to win, get better, acquire points, or advance some other non-artistic gaming prerogative.

>>1616795
>but what if the overall intent of something is not artistic in nature? as in video games?
If the intent stops it from being art, can it also make it art? Does a developer merely have to wish for his game to be art in order to make it art? The intent is ultimately pointless in detirmining if something is art or not.

>>1616795
>>>1616782(You)
>i am not "trolling." i simply disagree with what you're saying. ecco consists of many beautiful, artistic elements, but it remains a game. it is played with the purpose of winning. from my perspective, that fact discounts it as art as a whole.

But that's not what you said. Parphrasing what you said (Annunziata) merely wanted to make a game a player could win.

I'm not going to quote mine all the times he's talked about how it's about nature, and keeping balance with technology, or all the times he's talked at length about how it's to save the oceans. I'm just going to quote one line.

"I was paranoid about game rentals and kids beating the game over the weekend. So.. I.. uh... made it hard." —Ed Annunziata

>>1616668
>.gif
>Doesn't move

>>1616795
>it is played with the purpose of winning
Again, you can only guess at the purpose of someone playing the game. I'm sure people play it for the purpose of exploring the themes and setting as well.

The Smithsonian exhibit "The Art of Video Games" is probably the most serious exhibit to have occurred so far on this topic. Their methodology was to try to create a gallery that accurately represented the development of the media. Video games were categorized by four Eras, "Start!" "8-bit" "Bit Wars!" "Transition" and :Next Generation" then four genres per Era, "Target" "Adventure" "Action" and "Tactics". Four games were selected by Academics for each genre in each Era on each platform then one featured game was selected by the public through online polling. The final featured list was

>Space Invaders
>Pitfall!
>Pac-Man
>Combat
>Zaxxon
>Pitfall II
>Donkey Kong
>Star Trek: Strategic Operations Simulator
>Star Strike
>Advanced Dungeons & Dragons
>Tron: Maze-A-Tron
>Utopia

>Attack of The Mutant Camels
>Bard's Tale 3
>Jumpman
>Sid Meier's Pirates
>1943
>The Legend of Zelda
>Super Mario Brothers 3
>Desert Commander
>After Burner
>Phantasy Star
>Marble Madness
>Spy vs Spy

>Gunstar Heroes
>Phantasy Star IV
>Earthworm Jim
>Dune II
(Turbografx-16 notably excluded)

>Diablo II
>Fallout
>Doom II
>Starcraft
>Starfox 64
>Occarina of Time
>Super Mario 64
>Worms Armageddon
>Rez
>Shenmue
>Sonic Adventure
>ChuChu Rocket
>Panzer Dragoon II
>Panzer Dragoon Saga
>Tomb Raider
>Sim City 2000
>Einhander
>Final Fantasy 7
>Metal Gear Solid
>Final Fantasy Tactics

You can see all the nominees at the Wikipedia article and get butthurt about your favs not being nominated as well as see the non-/vr/ exhibits. I personally think some platforms got more recognition than they deserved and some deserving platforms were overlooked but apparently I don't know Art.

>>1616305
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lWaQe8LPW0

>>1616821
Shit I left the SNES games out

>Starfox
>A Link to the Past
>Super Mario World
>Sim City

>>1616821
An honorable mention that didn't seem to make your list:

>In 1998, the series was recognized by the Smithsonian Institution for contributions in the field of Art and Entertainment, and became a part of the Smithsonian Institution's Permanent Research Collection on Information Technology Innovation. The arcade cabinets are currently kept at the Smithsonian's National Museum of American History.

I remember when they first got a VF2 machine.

>>1616802
>>1616804
we're discussing the creators' intent as opposed to the nature of video games themselves, which was what i was trying to get at.

the story in a video game can be art. the music, the characters' visual representation, the voice-acting--they can be considered art as well.

but the level design? the points system? how much damage weapons deal, how enemies behave, what kind of punishment you suffer for your character being killed? these are necessary elements of gaming. without them, video games would not be games, they'd be interactive experiences and they would qualify as works of art as whole. but because they are games, they serve the purpose of entertaining the player by encouraging them to win. that is their nature, and that is not art.

any game creator can make any game with whatever intent they want--but at the end of the day, they're still making a game... not a work of art.

>>1616821
>No Vagrant Story

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GVE4a8ULww

>>1616821
It wasn't even remotely a "serious" exhibit. Whoever put it together is hardly a hardcore game enthusiast. I still remember voting on this crap and being pissed those jackoffs didn't even have Super Metroid on the available SNES choices. Their scrolling shooter choices were appalling as well.

>>1616593
But it really is art.

>>1616828
>any game creator can make any game with whatever intent they want--but at the end of the day, they're still making a game... not a work of art.
So the intent doesn't really matter after all? Then why do you keep going on about it? It seems like you're contradicting yourself.

>>1616834
>>1616830
Because you guys artistic sensibility is more reputable than a Smithsonian selected panel. Cry harder, Philistines.

>>1616828
>they serve the purpose of entertaining the player by encouraging them to win.
Games can be entertaining without encouraging you to win though. People can be entertained by many aspects of a game and may even enjoy losing in amusing ways.

>>1616842
>we're discussing the creators' intent as opposed to the nature of video games themselves
i don't understand how i contradicted myself there

>>1616849
you're missing the point. i was talking about the purpose the game serves on its own; a medium for the player to interact with according to the rules in order to win.

i'm not denying that there is value--even artistic value--in many aspects of a video game as the player experiences it, but the overall point of a video game is still victory/defeat oriented. that's what makes it a game.

>>1616828
And I told you repeatedly the artist's intent in some games like Ecco is not about winning.

. "I don't want to just make him cute and give him big, stupid-looking eyes and then just have him collect coins," Annunziata says.

Ed Annunziata: I agree with you. I am excited about how big the market is and how great it responds to well crafted and unique games. Like I said earlier, its easier to make games so creativity should thrive. I LOVED the game Limbo and other indie artsy games. Games as art, it’s a great time to be into games, as a player and designer.

How long does Chakan have to wait before the end comes to him? It was not an easy decision, we could have just ended the game with the story and credits, but something was nagging at me – it’s NOT the end for Chakan. Imagine after so much pain and suffering, thinking the end is near, only to find out it has hardly just begun. Artistically, we were obligated to share his pain, for Chakan. The hour glass where YOU wait forever was for Chakan.

>>1616860
>i was talking about the purpose the game serves on its own
Now you're just being silly. It has no purpose on its own, just like any inanimate object.

>>1616848
>Because you guys

*Because you guys'

>>1616863
let me ask you this: is ecco a video game? or, more directly, is it a game?

>>1616868
so video games are not "a medium for the player to interact with according to the rules in order to win"?

>>1616848
A Smithsonian selected panel that doesn't include the likes of Super Metroid is not even trying

>>1616305

Lee Trevino's Fighting Golf

>>1616876
>It doesn't have my favorite game in it so it's shit.

Okay.

>>1616305

I hate to even pretend to take this masturbatory nonsense seriously, but how about Another World/Out of This World? It's all dark and atmospheric and minimalist and brutally violent, it has an ambiguous ending, and it's by a fucking Gaul.

That's gotta make it art, right you FUCKS!?

>>1616885
Sure it's art. So is Donkey Kong. So are all games.

I wish people would learn that "art" is a neutral adjective and not something that describes its worth or quality.

>>1616885
We got a real patron of the arts right here, Guys.

>>1616551

Am I the one person who gets this joke?

Also, there are different usages of the word 'art'. Do I really need to explain this? The 'art' of doing something refers to the skill of doing it properly.

>>1616893

I disagree with you there. If the word "art" is to have meaning, it should refer to things that deserve to be called art. I suggest reading Pauline Kael's essay "Trash, Art and the Movies".

>>1616893
The question wasn't "which video games are art?" it was "which retro games make the best case for video games as art?"

>>1616875
Because X therefore Not Y is a shitty point to start arguing now. Unless you're seriously going to argue that Juicy Fruit jingles and Blue Danube are both music therefore music isn't art.

That's the road you're on now. Moving goalposts from artistic intent to "But it's called a game!" is bad form.

>>1616897
Just you and me so far, buddy. I can't believe me dropping the joke sucked me into the debate. That's one thing I didn't foresee.

>>1616881
Super Metroid has pushed the hardware of the system it got made for. It was a game with little narrative past the opening, it is all done through visuals, not dialogue boxes, much like Another World. How is that not worthy of being included when you include games like Earthworm Jim in it? Earthworm Jim is a fine game in visuals, but Super Metroid got as much right to be included, especially since it is less broken in controls. If the game was a chore to control, I see this less worthy of being included than a game that used better controls while it also excels at the same things the other game does.

>>1616897
You're just the only one who thinks it's funny enough to reply to.

I think the main thing causing anger in this thread is that the best video games are not necessarily the ones that have the most artistic value. Super Metroid is a great game but does it powerfully effect the player emotionally, even philosophically? Does it fully take advantage of, even expand the scope of the medium? Being fun and challenging aren't necessarily synonymous with artistically valuable.

>>1616875
>a medium for the player to interact with according to the rules in order to win
>for the player
You're not going to convince anyone that that's the same as "on its own", bro. Not to mention that it's painfully transparent that that definition is extremely limited and that you only quoted it because of how convenient it is for you.

>>1616912
A side note to you, I don't think anyone has really gotten angry in this thread.

Reply or not, just my own observation. The threads been rather civil.

>>1616895

>have self-fellating conversations about 'games as art'
>think it makes you smart

Pretentious games wankery is this way:

http://killscreendaily.com/

I stopped reading it when they referenced fucking 'a la recherche du temps perdu' in an article about some old Alien game for the Dreamcast or something. You lot should enjoy.

>>1616898

Pauline Kael would beat the shit out of everyone in this thread if she weren't fucking worm food.

>>1616901

>still honestly not understanding that the answer is 'any of them which succeed in their design objectives' and having a discussion based on some retrograde academic elite formulation of what art is

>>1616917
The one thing I noticed about art critics is that their opinion is worthless outside of the art world. All the different interpretations, the mistakes of upside down paintings, the bullshit madeup to sell more works, dead artist scams.

They truly are the VGA of the art world.

>L@@K RE@L PICASSO ART CRITIQUED 90+!!!!!!!!

>>1616927

You would probably only say this (usually it's true) if you didn't know shit about Pauline Kael.

>>1616936
I admit I don't. But there is quite a vocal majority in the group you can't deny.

But to do credit I will take your implied advice and read her work.

Why would even something like Metal Slug not be art?

Someone explain it to me.

protip: if you have to justify something being "art", it isn't.

>>1617141
This discussion always seems to me to be made up, almost entirely, of some people who are insistent that video games aren't art because [reasons], and a bunch of other people explaining how that's quite possibly the dumbest thing they've ever heard.
There's little "justification", mostly just shooting down of really stupid arguments against the idea.

>>1617169
No, the discussion is focused on try hards who want to elevate games beyond something associated with basement dwelling and "kid centric" and those who claim they are making mountains out of molehills.

The industry will survive and thrive regardless if games have subtext or not. In fact, the golden age of games saw very few titles with deep motivating themes but rather skilled based games with very little emphasis on story other than "There's a problem with X, fix it!"

>>1617194
What makes you think only story focused games can possibly be art?
Why not something like R-Type?

>>1617201
That's like saying the operation of a microwave is art. Pressing the buttons and getting the desired reaction of heating your food is its intended purpose and nothing else can be derived from that.

R-type is a fun shooting game yeah and introduced some neat ideas into gaming control wise, but again so have microwaves evolved from their initial incarnation.

>>1617204
That is quite possibly the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

>>1617208
>Says its dumb
>No counter argument

That's not how debate works amigo!

>>1617213
What is there to argue against? You're comparing video games to microwaves. It's so absurd that only a total layman could ever possibly accept it.
Do you have even the slightest idea how video games or microwaves work, or what they are used for?
PROTIP: one is purely utilitarian, and the other serves no practical purpose and is something you will only ever experience because you want to.

So again, I repeat: That is, quite possibly, the dumbest thing I have ever heard.

>>1617228
Well here's a better example. Is the act of flying a kite art? Not the aesthetics of the kite itself, but simply the act of putting it into the air and sailing.

>>1617239
I don't know enough about kite flying to really answer that, but I would think that, yes, the act of flying a kite can be art.
You know they have kite flying competitions, where the way kites are flown is judged sort of like figure skating or synchronized swimming or whatever?

I don't think kite flying is comparable though. It's a device that you are able to use or fly in any way and in any place that you see fit, while a video game has strict parameters.
An autoscrolling shooter like R-Type is especially limited. The developer has total control over what shows up on screen, when and where it shows up on screen, how everything syncs up to the music, and so on. The entire experience short of where you put the ship and when to shoot is more or less totally planned out.

What is your issue anyway? Just that video games are interactive?
If so, explain how interactivity prevents something from being art.

Video games should be considered art. Art is representative of the current society and culture, and taking one look at the state of those popular and respected within our shared cultures, video games would be very fucking fitting as art of today's people.

>>1617284
Actually, forget that. The comparison is faulty for a more important reason:
Why the act of flying a kite and not the kite itself?
Is anyone claiming that playing a video game is art?
Would you ask if staring at a painting or hearing a piece of music is art?
The point is the work itself - the video game or painting or piece of music - not the act of experiencing it.

>>1616848
Why yes, a "serious" art exhibit on scrolling shooters that doesn't include Soukyugurentai or Darius Gaiden as possible choices for voting should get fucked.

>>1616904
>>1616913
had a two hour conversation with my girlfriend about the definition of art this evening, inspired by the discussion in this thread. i argued my position, and she argued hers (which is that the definition of art is up to the reader/listener/viewer/consumer/user/participant). i'm still digesting a lot of it, but i think i have to concede that she made some really great points and i've changed my mind. if the medium has provoked you, then who am i to say it isn't art? it's completing the same objective any piece of music or literature could hope to achieve. that being said, i'd like to shift my input in this thread to being more relevant to the OP.

>>1618136

>being convinced by a woman's argument

I suppose there's an outside chance that she's bucked the trend and is actually really intelligent, but the more likely option is that you're a TREMENDOUS fucktard.

many retro games are weak in their artistic value and make no case whatsoever that video games are art. i propose this mostly because of the inherent design elements--the story, music, and visual design may be fun or memorable, but lack any qualities one might impose on traditional works of art.

if that line of thinking is applied to the experience of the user--how they experience these games as art--that can only be defined by the individual. but a weakness can still be inferred. the video games craze of the retro era positioned itself around the game- and fun-oriented aspects of video games, and i think that was because of a lack of artistic merit on behalf of the medium.

when looking at the examples selected for the smithsonian exhibit, i'd like to think that the unique experiences presented in some retro games would have influenced different choices.

as has already been brought up in this thread, super metroid is an extremely important example of creating atmosphere and mood (to say nothing of the visuals or music). it is a great piece of story-telling, utterly immersive, and has effected countless players who revel when they find anything comparable in modern games.

another poster mentioned another world. if one were taking the analysis of games as art seriously, you'd have to include it--you'd have to draw correlation as well, between it and super metroid, between early games that created atmosphere. show an evolution over time. discuss the future of the medium.

i'd like to discard the list entirely. it lacks the hallmarks of sincere analysis.

retro games i think make the best case for games as art:

rogue/hack
the magic of scheherazade
silent hill 2
rygar/metroidvania games
shadow of the ninja
dragon warrior 3
final fantasy 6
kid icarus
secret of evermore

>>1618179
who says she can't be intelligent and i can't be a tremendous fucktard at the same time?

>>1618195

Well played. You're a real human being.

>>1618206

Final Fantasy VI
Shenmue
Earthbound
Paper Mario

I think all these are good representations because each one was approached from a way that the end product was set apart from anything else at the time. All the stories are intended to evoke emotions from the player, and each one is presented as something larger than it actually is. Not only that but ask were visually stunning when they were released

the art communities and institutions declare what is and isn't art, it's why art collectors are different from regular nutcase collectors, it's because they say so.

just get together with the art crowd and you can make any game be art, there are a bunch at moma if i recall correctly so that's that, those are the art games.

there are also the more explicitly concept art games, they get recognition as well in the art community.

gamers have nothing to say in art sadly, as it has always been, not up to the fans but to the creators and their peers, as with all other entertainment industries. that's why we have shakespeare and twilight, godard and michael bay, mozart and avril lavigne, etc etc etc it's fairly easy to see what goes and what doesn't.

even if a bunch of people say something is great until the art people say it's cool then it means nothing.

>>1617297
>Art is representative of the current society and culture
Yeah,but videogames are not this most of the time,and when they are is because the creators intended to do it
> and taking one look at the state of those popular and respected within our shared cultures
>respected
this is kinda valid but with respected it gives me doubts,i expect that if there is a musem that exposes videogames as art i will see a lot of infamous and bad games. and with cultures,people like different things and the same applies for art so its passable
> video games would be very fucking fitting as art of today's people.
In my opinion,videogames wont fit as art of today's peoeple since it's not like the art of the old days,it's more like the equivalent of composing orchestas in the old days since both of them share 2 important things
-development
-being made for entretainment

Well just talking off the top of my head, I know that Ninja Gaiden was one of the first games to have cinematic cutscenes, and helped advance the idea of using games as a storytelling medium. So there's that.

>>1618223
i don't think it means nothing. a huge portion of the money spent on media these days is spent on video games... and that doesn't just give power to the creators. games are being catered differently because more players want to be challenged.

>>1617309
here's a link about kites and art
http://www.drachen.org/learn/art-kites
here's a japanese kite artist
http://www.japantimes.co.jp/life/2013/03/27/people/kite-artist-tetsuya-kishida/#.U3Gyp_ldWSo

there you go kites can be art, THOSE kites, not your kite though, if you made it and exhibit it on a gallery be it your house or whatever and convince everyone it's the real deal then hey, maybe your kite will get the recognition you want it to have as art, too.

here's an article on an artist that used games as art
https://videogamesoftheoppressed.wordpress.com/2014/03/05/oyvind-fahlstrom/

see those games are art and Operation isn't
same with videogames

>>1618238
>i don't think it means nothing.
it's your opinion what means nothing
you don't get a say in these things
especially not though 4chan

>>1618195
>the video games craze of the retro era positioned itself around the game- and fun-oriented aspects of video games, and i think that was because of a lack of artistic merit on behalf of the medium.
I don't understand. What exactly prevents gameplay from being art? Why can't something like really well designed levels or incredibly well implemented mechanics be artistic?
You bring up Super Metroid and praise its atmosphere and mood, but surely you must realize that the game's gameplay plays an enormous part in creating and enhancing that atmosphere and mood.
The way it dumps you into an alien world with no instruction or direction, the way different areas connect in multiple different ways, the way you feel when you have low health in a difficult area and don't know how far it will be before the next save point, and so on. Without that stuff, Super Metroid would be nothing, regardless how well it told a story with minimal exposition.

>>1618271
>What exactly prevents gameplay from being art?
i wasn't trying to say gameplay can't be experienced as art. my point was more that the community that celebrated retro games looked more like a community devoted to table top gaming or sports, as opposed to circles interested in literal art or music appreciation. the point is that if you were to qualify the artistic value of a medium by how it is experienced by the individual, it would follow that the community surrounding it would look like an artistic community.

on the other hand, the gaming community in the retro era was in its infancy, and that might have had something to do with it. most of the widely spread information was controlled by marketing and advertisements.

>You bring up Super Metroid and praise its atmosphere and mood, but surely you must realize that the game's gameplay plays an enormous part in creating and enhancing that atmosphere and mood.
i do realize that and i appreciate the value gameplay has in enriching the experience.

Keep this thread in your memory next time you want to put the words "video game" and "art" in the same thread again, OP.

It always, always results in a shitstorm of pedantry.

>>1616572
Did your uncle hurt you in the butt as a kid?

>>1618675
>discussion of topics i'm incapable of understanding results in "pedantry"

>>1620042
>people discretely trying to shove their opinions on each other's throats
>discussion

>>1620069
>on
>not down

>>1620170
Nobody cared about who you were until you put on the mask

>>1616305
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sWm_lpyfyDQ