Using wikipedia's definition, facial expressions are art.

Quote:

Original post by pinacolada A shooting game might have elements that are artistic

This reminds me of the time I took to a corpse in HL and painted the walls red.
[EDIT]
...took to a corpse with a crowbar... Just to clear things up a little.
[/EDIT]

Quote:

Continued... but there's no moment where all the elements conspire to produce something greater. To me, "art" means that the whole thing becomes greater than the sum of its parts.

I agree with you here. A true artist can wield their instrument (brush, musical instrument, voice, source code, etc.) to produce something at is truely awe inspiring. Some artists can produce marvelous works, while others pour everything they have into something simple. A dot on a page, while insignificant, could hold a far greater meaning if it was able to capture the artist's feelings at the time. Then again, it could just be a dot on the page, but unless you actually knew the artist, you'd probably never really know.

[Edited by - Gorax on August 3, 2005 11:25:03 AM]

Quote:

To me, "art" means that the whole thing becomes greater than the sum of its parts.

Nearly everything made by man would fall under this category.

Quote:

Original post by Daniel Miller Quote: To me, "art" means that the whole thing becomes greater than the sum of its parts. Nearly everything made by man would fall under this category.

I meant that as a requirement and not the definition. There are other requirements.

Quote:

Original post by Daniel Miller Using wikipedia's definition, facial expressions are art.

Yeah, I guess they would be. [smile]

I was going to say that art should be restricted to things outside the human body, but then I remembered tatoos, piercings, etc.

This reminds me of the "body artists" who make art displays by painting their bodies chrome or silver and then holding strange poses for hours.

But I'm not sure I see the importance of determining whether games absolutely are or absolutely are not art.

By some definitions they are, by others they are not.

If you consider them to be art, then so be it. If you don't, then so be that as well.

In my opinion, the purpose of games is not to trigger emotions in the player, but to let the player have fun, however that might be achieved.

Certainly this fun could be achieved by making the player become emotionally attached, but it could also be achieved without such attachment.

Than what are the other requirements? Whenever you create a definition, most things become art (or very, very, few).

Quote:

Original post by Daniel Miller Using wikipedia's definition, facial expressions are art.

That wasn't a definition, that was a bunch of characteristics.

As soon as someone claims to have a "definition" of art, I will join you in poking holes in it. But so far all we have are descriptions, which are inherently incomplete.

Quote:

Original post by Daniel Miller Than what are the other requirements? Whenever you create a definition, most things become art (or very, very, few).

Quote:

Original post by pinacolada I don't have a definition of "art",

Quote:

Original post by Daniel Miller Than what are the other requirements? Whenever you create a definition, most things become art (or very, very, few).

I think the definition is going to have to fall into the first category (most things become art), because there are many different uses for the term.

Just look around here to see.

Whenever I use the word "art", I mean it to describe something that is awe-inspiring. Considering I usually use the term around Korean Starcraft players, I usually use it as an adjective: "that was an art game".

Yes, it isn't the normal definition, but I don't think the normal definition of the word has any use other than to make people feel intellectual.

In general, games are still in a very immature stage when it comes to understanding themselves as art. Literature, poetry, painting, and sculpting have defined themselves as art through years of practice. Gaming still has a long way to go-- but that's not a bad thing. The movement has begun. Dialogues/debates such as this are the second most important thing to advancing games art. The most important thing is to just keep making games and let nothing stifle the imagination and innovation. Indie developers, the core members of sites such as these, will inevitably be the trailblazers, maybe not in terms of graphics, but definitely in terms of the most definitive artistic traits of games- gameplay and visual imagery.