Our discussion this week on Robert Ebert’s opinion as video games not being art is one I wanted to continue discussing in the discussion post. He discusses the different definitions of art and explains that he believes games cannot be art because they can be won but the other forms of expression he considers art “can only be experienced” (Ebert, 2010). This led to the obvious question: What is a video game other than an experience? Not only can games be an experience but can also be a particularly unifying one. People who make games are carefully crafting a balance of incentives and rules with whatever platform (digital, cards etc) to create a human experience that can be spread and enjoyed. Any definition of art that does not include the delicate creation of games is not one that I would refer to. Art is all about the human experience and how it is expressed to other humans. Anything at all that is used to express the agony and joy of conscious existence is art, whether it be ancient paintings of cave walls or the character models in a video game.
I found that Brian Upton’s piece about the definition of a game and the idea of what play really is, supports the argument that I made above. In “The Aesthetic of Play” Upton wrote about how games had the special ability to transcend cross-cultural boundaries and allow a uniquely crafted experience to spread amongst many populations. He explains that games are essentially a set of boundaries (rules) with freedom to move around within those boundaries. As Upton explains his way into this definition, we see the complexity and great variety that comes with games and how they function and can change over time from person to person. The elaborate intricacy of games and the immense diversity of how they operate is artful within itself. Humans are complicated creatures with endless ways to express themselves and share experiences with each other. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the complex idea of play is included in what is to be considered art.
Works Cited:
Ebert, Robert. 2010. Video Games Can Never Be Art. Received from http://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/video-games-can-never-be-art
I completely agree that video games is a type of art. For instance, the casing of video games have illustrations on them designed by artists. Different player emotions can play out throughout depending if you enjoy it or not. In my experience I love playing Apex Legends, because I get to experience something fun with friends, I get to see great map and character designs, and it’s free for anyone to play! By saying video games is not a type of art is like saying maroon is not a type of red…
LikeLike
Your post really pushes the idea that games are a form of art. I wholeheartedly agree. The idea of games and play are all about immersion, which in turn creates an experience. In my opinion, the experience of a game is the most important part and is unique because it changes from person to person. As mentioned in Upton’s article, everyone has a distinct view, but regardless we all come together to enjoy and play one game.
LikeLike