Kojima: 'Games Are Not Art'

[thorbahn3]

What he says makes sense... in bizzaro world.

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2098&Itemid=2

[Mr Unoriginal]

He must think video games are movies then.

[CheapyD]

He must think video games are movies then.Right...or in his case, movies that make no sense whatsoever. ;)

[FurryCurry]

It makes sense. You gotta get towards the end to hear the simplified version.

Video games are like a museum. The levels, the characters, the game play mechanics, etc. are like the art. For instance, the level design in MDK2 really speaks to me like a piece of art would while being a personal favorite game of mine. However, a friend of mine doesn't really feel the level design like I do but loves the game anyway.

Pieces in games can be considered art but as a whole I don't think a game can be considered art.

But you could have a game that speaks to you on every level... So, hmm.

It's actually an interesting discussion.

Opinions?

[mykevermin]

Eh. Modern literature isn't considered "art" either, for the most part (examples don't come to mind).

Music and movies tend to be, and video games can be excluded from being categorized as "art" as well. It appears to be a very arbitrarily drawn line as to what can have artistic merit and what can't; as such, I can't explain it.

I don't know if I'd categorize games as "art," but I don't think I'm prepared to say that it currently isn't and never could be.

[Supercake]

The thing is, art is something that radiates the artist, the person who creates that piece of art. If 100 people walk by and a single person is captivated by whatever that piece radiates, it's art. But videogames aren't trying to capture one person

I'm just not so sure about this. I mean, there's just no way Killer 7 was created in mindset that every person playing it would enjoy it. Though every game should appeal to anyone idealy. I try and picture that 100 person example as this: Imagine yourself in an exhibit, like a see thru box. You are playing something that most gamers would consider "art", or at least deep. (Silent Hill, Rez, Metal Gear Solid, Killer 7) Are people passing by really going to be able to take notice?

[FurryCurry]

Kojima tries to think big and out of the box a lot, but he falls on his face.

Like all that mess about Meme and Gene and that other one for substance. WTH is that about?


Human effort to imitate, supplement, alter, or counteract the work of nature.

The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium.
The study of these activities.
The product of these activities; human works of beauty considered as a group.

High quality of conception or execution, as found in works of beauty; aesthetic value.
Games can be art.

[AHEADAMUS]

I think Furry Curry starts getting to this, but remember that we are talking about <i>what is art and what is not art</i>. We are NOT talking about what is "good" art. Those are two separate debates.

[kakomu]

Art is highly subjective.

In my opinion, if there's a noticeable restriction on the production of something, then it can't totally be considered art. I don't mean works restricted by a lack of skill, but rather restricted by hardware or software issues. For instance, take video game music. In the earlier days when all people had to work with were synthesizers and tracker systems of samples (Genesis for the former, SNES for the latter), you're going to find the music quite limited in their ability. However, music of today can be recordings of fully composed realizations (or much higher quality trackers). i would say music of today's games (if any good) can be considered art, whereas not so with older generations. Of course, chiptune music can be considered art, since it's part of some sort of post-modern retro segment. The limitations aren't there, but the choice in sound was deliberately chosen.

Video game graphics are always being scaled down in the interests of efficient processor usage. Therefore, I couldn't consider in game graphics to be "art". However, cinematics that are recorded, rather than rendered in real time I could consider art.

Speech could be considered art...but the quality of acting usually makes it bad art.

I see gameplay to be as artistic is playing a sport. That is, it isn't very artistic at all.

I really can't say code is very artistic.

There are plenty of facets within a game that can be considered artistic and many facets within that aren't very artistic at all. I think it's up to everyone to determine what parts they do and do not consider art. I don't believe the game as a whole is art, but that many things inside can be considered art.

[Apossum]

my take is that anything can be art, it depends on who is viewing it and how they react and that kojima really has no choice, since it doesn't really matter if a certified "artist" made it or not. if joe gamer finds stealth action games are symbolic of something or other and is consequently touched by MGS in some way, then MGS has become a piece of art to joe gamer whether kojima likes it or not.

also, I imagine many developers, designers, and perhaps more interesting programmers would consider the production of a game to be an artistic process on a certain level.

[rockhero]

As a game programmer, this is something that comes up in conversation occasionally and I've spent a decent amount of time thinking about. I don't have time to write up my complete thoughts now, but I'll post this so that I remember to in the future.

For the record I don't believe that games are art either. But it's definitely a fuzzy subject. Mainly because there's really no good, complete, unified definition of what "art" means.