Well recently i was reading gameinformer and i came across the craziest article and in short, its talking about this person who is going on a rant saying video games aren't art, as they don't give you any freedom. And everything is set to one condition. So im asking you guys:
making video games is art. video games is a really big category though for instince, pong is not art but assassins creed is full of amazing in game architecture and paintings. you have to be more specific
its supposed to be general. like games themselves, the category, for example music or paintings are considered art. it might be crappy "art" but none the less if you consider games art, pong will also be art. games however only get to be called "art" by some people, others think that they are just simply things set to a certain thing, you cant change the game.
for me its art, and i dont know what this guy is talking about cause if he thinks that a a few colors on a piece of paper is better then the art of game development he can s*ck my balls
Video Games are definitely art, if you think about it, Graphics, such as thing you make in Photoshop would be considered art, so why wouldn't the graphics in video games?
I was reading the same article and I have to say that even to put my opinions of gaming aside and use a strictly technical definition then yes, video games are definitely a medium of art.
art
â"noun 1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.
Even to digress from that and to think of art solely as something expressive, creative, and provoking of both thought and emotion then we still find that video games would fall under this definition.
A lot of debate rages as to the legitimacy of games as an art form, however people need to remember that video gaming is in it's infancy. I can still remember the first games coming out for Tandy, Commodore 64, Atari, and finally the first NES.
If anyone needs any more evidence of gaming as art then they are hopeless >_< (hint, hint, Roger Ebert)
Try quoting what you got from the article or add Italic to it. Like this...
art
â�"noun 1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.
Even to digress from that and to think of art solely as something expressive, creative, and provoking of both thought and emotion then we still find that video games would fall under this definition.
A lot of debate rages as to the legitimacy of games as an art form, however people need to remember that video gaming is in it's infancy. I can still remember the first games coming out for Tandy, Commodore 64, Atari, and finally the first NES.
or
art
â�"noun 1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.
Even to digress from that and to think of art solely as something expressive, creative, and provoking of both thought and emotion then we still find that video games would fall under this definition.
A lot of debate rages as to the legitimacy of games as an art form, however people need to remember that video gaming is in it's infancy. I can still remember the first games coming out for Tandy, Commodore 64, Atari, and finally the first NES.
It shows that you did'nt actually write it but someone else did.
â�"noun 1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.
i figured it would be self explanatory as the definition i used was preceded by 1.
