Shigeru Miyamoto "I have never said that video games are an art"

#41STE573Posted 2/13/2013 4:42:36 AM
Aren't movies and books products first and foremost as well though. You do get exceptions, but over all they are. I perceive videogames as art, because an enormous amount of creativity goes in to them. Same with movies and books.

Panda is right, the subject is a subjective minefield.
---
Im British!
GT- x STE 90 x, PSN ID- X-STE-90-X NNID- XSTE90X- currently playing Forza Horizon (360) Xcom (360) Gravity Rush (Vita) Motorstorm Apocalypse (PS3)
#42Virtue777Posted 2/13/2013 4:48:14 AM
I would actually say that most Nintendo first-party games are not artistic at all. They're solid, gameplay-focused games, and there's nothing wrong with that. There are plenty of artistic developers out there anyways...in fact, I would say the vast majority of console game developers at least attempt to make multiple statements and invoke various emotions with their games.
---
Coolest guy/gal on the planet: http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/user.php?=2426382
#43EoinPosted 2/13/2013 4:52:37 AM
First off, this story is three years old. It's difficult to see why it's coming up again.

Secondly, if Miyamoto doesn't think games are art, then he probably should have turned down his membership of the French Ordre des Arts et des Lettres.
#44mashuPosted 2/13/2013 5:02:03 AM
Kiro_nami posted...
It's just him being humble.


This. His reply is very Japanese.

Video game design is as much an art as any other design field, which to me includes directing in a very loose sense, not just graphic design, industrial design etc. Design aims towards a commercial product, but within that purpose one can apply standards and sensibilities that can potentially make one product rise far beyond another in terms of entertainment, function, aesthetics. I'm sure he knows this, and it wouldn't surprise me if in the past he's made statements similar to what he is now denying, but he is denying it within context of receiving an artistic award. Very Japanese to do so.
#45diebuster2Posted 2/13/2013 5:26:25 AM
EarthLord_CJ posted...
P_A_N_D_A_M_A_N posted...
Videogames as an artform is a shaky subject. While it is undeniable that many artistic qualities go into making a game, the argument that games as a whole being art is debatable and I understand the reasonings behind both arguments. While I tend to think of it as an art, I see it worrisome that developers refuse to call their products art unless it's actually convenient to them. While Miyamoto hasn't ever said games are art, stating that it's a product made to entertain the masses, I've seen many cases where devs have claimed their creations are art only to retract those statements when questioned about its contents. To paraphrase a poster from another site, "until developers are willing to defend their 'art' games will not be universally accepted as an art form."


+1.


+2
---
One does not simply state a reasonable, negative opinion on GameFAQS without being called a troll.
#46Robotron2084Posted 2/13/2013 5:27:15 AM
Have you seen what passes for art these days? Who would want games to be in that category?
#47bleedingelitePosted 2/13/2013 5:40:51 AM
Art is an indefinable quality that varies on an individual basis. There are several things to consider when asking yourself "are videogames art?"

1. Who ****ing cares?
2. ...

Well, there's really only that one thing. Thanks, good night.
#48nonexistingheroPosted 2/13/2013 5:52:39 AM
kaiser ryu posted...
That's a shame. Not that I resist the concept of games as products first really. Just that it's apparent he doesn't value his vision and expression of it as art. Art can be as commercial as anything else. The commercial nature of a given piece can even lend to the message it gives overall. A product like Zelda that shares his fond memories of exploring his world as a youth with millions is his art. For someone with such a clear artistic voice it's a shame that he's apparently unaware of it. Then again, keeping people focused on a product and stifling their inner Unique Butterfly feels like a sound leadership tactic, ensuring his vision shines through their work.


You don't seem to understand art. Art isn't supposed to be commercial. Art is all about expression. And it usually doesn't even become valuable until after the artist dies. Games are all about entertainment. Yeah, the end result may be beautiful, but the starting point is completely different.
---
Read the mania: http://www.fanfiction.net/~nonexistinghero
In SA2, it's Super Sonic and Hyper Shadow.
#49nonexistingheroPosted 2/13/2013 5:56:28 AM
STE573 posted...
Aren't movies and books products first and foremost as well though. You do get exceptions, but over all they are. I perceive videogames as art, because an enormous amount of creativity goes in to them. Same with movies and books.

Panda is right, the subject is a subjective minefield.


Art doesn't have to be creative though. Like I said, it's about expression. One's personal vision of certain subjects, areas/buildings, people and feelings/emotions. That's very different from creating a product that is made to sell to as many people as possible.
---
Read the mania: http://www.fanfiction.net/~nonexistinghero
In SA2, it's Super Sonic and Hyper Shadow.
#50JobocanPosted 2/13/2013 6:05:34 AM
STN79 posted...
Do you not need some artistic talent to make them?


If Heavy Rain or Call of Duty are any indication, it's not required. But then again, it's not required for any form of art. Nicki Minaj, that painting of weed at the dollar store, Twilight, that really crappy play you saw last night... Art isn't something that requires talent.
---
www.vgcollect.com/jobocan - My Collection