wingo84 posted...kamikaze135 posted...
Video games aren't art.
Art is subjective. Therefore what qualifies as art is subjective.
The artist is the only one with a true voice regarding the piece. Everyone else is just responding to the piece and even saying "it isn't art" is a response that may have been the artist's intention: to have the viewer think about what is art. Art is always objective first, subjective afterwards. The artist setting out to make a statement or provoke deeper contemplation, through a piece, as the primary function of the piece, is what defines a piece as art.
That's what makes video games not art. The first purpose of the game is to give the user a sense of achievement, not enrich life through contemplation of the piece or make a statement. Those might be secondary goals, but I haven't seen that as the primary goal in any game. This is also why Okami isn't art. 'Deeply moving' or 'beautiful' is not enough to define something as art. Even a rendering of a bowl of fruit, if created with purpose, will cause the viewer to think past the fruit and wonder deeper, perhaps about the artist themselves.
If someone can name a game with no goals and it seems to exist just to make a statement to the viewer or stir the user to deeper thought, that one might be art.
Facebook | 
Twitter
