lmitchell0012
Wi-Fi Blacklisted
Final Fantasy II/Final Fantasy IV for the DS. Awesome remake. HIGHLY recommend this one
Right, so you're redefining fine art? Err. I might be transferring to a Fine Art BA degree this year - I'll be sure to let them know that video games should be on the curriculumI couldn't disagree more. Fine art is art without practical application. Painting does nothing but furnish. Theatre is for entertainment. A well made chair can be art but it's not a fine art because chairs have practical applications. Video games are just for fun.
Historically art connoisseurs are associated with collections of art as well, so there's that. It may be harder, but many of us are willing to play old games the hard way because it is what we love to do.
It may be harder, but many of us are willing to play old games the hard way because it is what we love to do.
I didn't redefine anything, I looked it up. Google "definition of fine art". It is at best a centuries old debate. Whether or not video games are art is a newer one, but it exists. Games as art is sure as hell should be a discussion your Fine Arts degree should discuss, and it's not a discussion that could be confined to this thread.Right, so you're redefining fine art?
Games are not appreciated primarily or solely for their imaginative, aesthetic, or intellectual content. They are appreciated for their entertainment value. Therefore games are not a "fine art".fine art
noun
1 (also fine arts) creative art, esp. visual art, whose products are to be appreciated primarily or solely for their imaginative, aesthetic, or intellectual content : the convergence of popular culture and fine art.
Wait so video games don't have a practical purpose? So I guess the people that buy them just throw them away once they get them? If they don't have a practical purpose, how the hell does the industry manage to market them?I know people these days throw around the words fine art, but if something is art it's either a fine art or a craft art. Video games are not a craft art. They don't have a practical purpose (and you could say "relieving stress" about any fine art).
First, you are making that up. Find me an actual definition with this criteria.For art to be fine art, there needs to be an artist.
Shadow of the Colossus disagrees with you. Also Starcraft and moreso Starcraft II to some degree. Games can have storylines that make sense; just not all games do.I hope for you're sake you're just joking. Video games are NOT an art.
They dont have great dialogue or memorizing imagery. The story lines never make sense and they don't involve the player at all! Video games just give people another reason to avoid the sun.
I mean for fuck's sake here we are 20 years later with tremendous leaps in technology and I still gotta read the booklet that comes with the game to get an idea for the lore and character profiles.
First, you are making that up. Find me an actual definition with this criteria.
Second, games do have artists. Like Fumito Ueda, whose vision became Shadow of the Colossus. People actually do have to design these things, and it's not hard to figure out who the designers are if you care.
Who cares if videogames are or at least can be fine art. Please make your own topic for that if you want to continue this.
That being said, let's get back on topic.
I make card games. And I mean by myself, so authorship isn't a question either. Yes, I do consider what I do to be art. One game in particular is creative, unique, and was built to counter problems with other card games, so there's the expression element too. Through serious hard work in concept design, graphic design, and playtesting, I have made a game that I've played with and successfully brightened the days of friends, relatives, and strangers. I get to tangibly express my creativity, and you don't know how beautiful that is unless you've done it yourself. So yes, card games are art.But going by your logic, couldn't I say that a card game is an art because somebody crafted the cards?
It's one of the distinguishing features of Kant's Aesthetics, which has heavily influenced modern art theory.First, you are making that up. Find me an actual definition with this criteria.
Second, games do have artists. Like Fumito Ueda, whose vision became Shadow of the Colossus. People actually do have to design these things, and it's not hard to figure out who the designers are if you care.
Ueda is the designer. He's more creatively responsible for his games than a single person is for most movies, and those are still called art.It's one of the distinguishing features of Kant's Aesthetics, which has heavily influenced modern art theory.
Is Ueda the complete creative mind behind the game? And is his primary goal to appeal to beauty and intellect, or rather entertainment?
but maybe you should include a picture of yourself with a beret and martini just so that I know you mean business here.
Hollywood and mainstream films are usually not fine art, though. Auteur films are, and are completely driven by the vision of the director.Ueda is the designer. He's more creatively responsible for his games than a single person is for most movies, and those are still called art.
And setting aside the fact that entertainment as an extension of imagination is indicative of fine art, I can safely say that Ueda's primary goal was towards beauty specifically.
i couldn't have put it better myselfwho gives a shit if video games are art or not shut the fuck up and quit ruining the topic