Skyrim is art, the fact you don't like this kind of art doesn't make it less art. The "depth" thing is not relevant here in my opinion, sure you can blame Skyrim for not having depth (in story, in dialogue, in meaningful choices) from a gameplay perspective, that has nothing to do with its artistic quality. The art of Skyrim is in style, in music and world design. I think Trine, Prince of Persia, are fine art and those are not "deep" either. And I'm no Skyrim apologist at all, I share your opinion that it lacks depth and cohesion, but I think it's a piece of art.

Gameplay isn't art. The music is art itself, it doesn't make Skyrim a work of art, maybe a collection of artistic pieces - like a museum.
The world design could be a form of art I guess, it depends what genre of art you try to fit it into.

http://americanart.si.edu/exhibitions/archive/2012/games/

Hard to argue with that.

VNs are considered games by some people. Im still not 100% sure what to classify them as myself.
But VNs hit much harder, maybe its just because they can handle topics that wouldnt be suitable in games, and unlike an anime you have input, so it gives it more impact if the [censored] hits the fan becuase of your choices.

Im guessing your thinking of Clannad ?

Speaking of great VN's try G senjou no maou.

Eh im not so sure. Not talking about skyrim in particular, but I dont think you can remove parts, leave them alone and have the same effect. The music and visuals are all part of the product. The impact together can be much greater, and you need the game to bring them together.

Gameplay for the most part sure it may seem meaningless, but if the atmosphere changes in a certain way, and its becuase of your actions. For me, it makes it hit harder.
If you just got a happy ending, sure thats great, but its much better if you had to work for that.

So Beth forum moderators are the go-to authority for deeming wether something is art or not?

That's why I suggested games are more like museums, collective works of art that overall create a 'masterpiece'. I think collective art piece is the proper term for a game. Or even a collage.

I don't see how running into a room, spraying an M60 or swinging a mace can be considered art in any way. (Unless it is Modern 'art') Adding a song to your actions doesn't really give the actions anymore of an artistic feel or depth. It's just a song over an action, and only the song is artistic.

That's like sayin, me walking to the shops is meaningless until I play the Benny Hill theme tune, then [censored] gets serious

I didnt say all games were art. Thats like saying every drawing is art.

Music changes the atmosphere alot.

Drawings are art though

Yeah but it doesn't make the 'gameplay is art' point more valid

Depends on your view. If I just drew a few random lines in paint, if that can be art why not a game even if its CoD ?
Its got more going for it than the lines.

Games are interactive, I find it great I am able to change situations, and see as the world reacts to my actions.
My actions in some games can change how things go. Which has more impact, your friend is destined to die, or he died becuase of your failings ?
The second one is something the player plays a role in. Due to you as a player, the game has changed. You made it what it is, the creators didnt.

I saw the 'The Art of Video Games' exhibit at the Smithsonian American Art Museum in DC the other week. So that exhibit implies video games are art. And even Minecraft is included

There is no such thing as art. (Mind. Blown! Right?)

If we're talking about that material upon which pretentious persons prop their egos, however, there are quite a lot of games that might fall into this category, depending on how one interprets the material.


That exhibit was severely flawed. The most fundamental of these flaws: the titles exhibited were chosen by popular vote. Since when is something's artistic merit decided by popular vote?

And what has http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2010/04/alot-is-better-than-you-at-everything.htmlgot to do with art?! Leave the poor monster alone!

OMG, it's my newly favourite mascot, the Alot is! Thanks for the link, TESFanner!

I like alots a lot too.

Not very good pets though

No, video games are not art. Art can only be painted and sculpted, you silly, silly person.

Thats what I was saying about games being 'modern art' opposed to real art like painting, drawings etc. A few lines like you said to me doesn't count as art, it doesn't even sound like a drawing, but hey it'd pass as 'modern art'. I don't really care what game you want to nominate as art whether it CoD, Skyrim or Peggle, they're not art in the same sense as Van Gogh, Picaso or Michelangelo.

What does this have to do with it being art, you're just pointing out a game can have choices? Plus as a player you don't make the game what it is, the creators do, you just make choices that are already set for you and get the ending scenes that you are given for your choices, by the creator.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTxWhN1FEKw&feature=player_detailpage#t=60s?

Well, let's consoder other mediums that are considered art.

Movies
Telivision
Music

So, to ask if video games is art is like asking if Monet, Rembrandt or DaVinci is art. To say video games is not art is absurd.

It seems like everyone wants to accociate entertainment with art.

I know, right? It's like people actually think they can enjoy art. Art is about pain, suffering, and being incredibly boring. Nothing else.

In my opinion, art is often enjoyable, but one should not mistake entertainment for art.

All cows are animals, not all animals are cows.

Entertainment itself is not art, yes, but I believe art is a fundamental aspect of entertainment.

Nothing is art on its own because it's an abstract human concept by its very nature. Something only becomes art to us once we personally interpret it as such. If we point at something and say it's art, I don't think we really mean what we say in a literal sense. Much like we can point at a photograph and say it's a woman, but we know it's really just a picture of a woman.

Arguing wether games are art or not just seems useless to me. I think what most people really mean in these discussions is wether video games deserve the same sense of legitimacy older mediums have in the mainstream.

Games are interactive art. The scenery is art. The story is art. The music is art.

Game play allows you to interact with the art, but the game play itself isn't art.

I think a good definition for art is some form of media, be it written, visual, auditory or interactive, that examines the human condition.

Most games don't do that.