Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I don't understand how games can't be art.

Creating images is art. 3D modeling is art (like sculpting). Writing stories is art, as well as creating interesting characters. Animation is art. I'm intentionally not mentioning things like programming or gameplay design, but some people might call these art too (not me, though).

So many artists are involved in these projects. And yet, when all of their art is fused together inside the game engine, to be presented to the player in all of its interactive glory, it somehow becomes NOT art? How can this be?



Because the fact that a game contains art doesn't necessarily imply that it is art. I can also take a gymnasium, commission art for the walls and music to be played as people exercise and so forth. I doubt that people would consequently consider the gymnasium to be itself art, despite the fact that art no doubt went into its creation.

A film could also feature excellent writing and beautiful visual art, but the art of film comes not from those individual elements being present, but the artistry present in their use together. The thing that makes film an art is the combined whole of those individual elements, which is why you can have a film that is not good as a film despite having, say, spectacular acting or sharp cinematography or a beautiful score.

So the question is, can the artistic elements of games be combined in such a way that the whole result, not just the individual elements, is artistic?


Most people don't consider soap operas or game shows to be art, but they undergo all the same stuff movies do. (And some people regard them as different kinds of art and other people as simply "bad art".)

Differently, it bothers me that people hear "game" and think "on a computer". Is football art? Or is Remember the Titans art? Or is National Football League 2012 art?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: