I do tend to err on the side of inclusivity, but I don't think it becomes meaningless to say that anything can be art. Is there anything physical that can't be

I do tend to err on the side of inclusivity, but I don't think it becomes meaningless to say that anything can be art. Is there anything physical that can't be made as sculpture? There is engineering and craft in most art to realize it in a permanent form. I disagree that unbridled self-expression is a requirement, heck limitation is often the enabler. Maybe I'm missing your point, though, and it sounds like I'm saying everyone with a paintbrush is an artist. Certainly many games, even those much less complicated than your game engine diagram, are just made to "work": look pretty, hook players, shift units, sell replays. But I think we can criticize these games for what they lack just as we would for poor visible or audible aspects. We can recognize the existence of an "art film" on the same spectrum as a popcorn-munching AAA blockbuster, if maybe at the shallow end. I'm not very well-versed in this argument, though I know it has been going on for a long time, sorry if I'm boring you with the easily-rebuttable stuff. I may be trying, as a former game developer and hobbyist game designer, to appropriate something that is better understood much differently. If art has to be the pure expression of one mind, unfiltererd through commercial necessity, engineering, and cooperation, then I have it wrong. I wonder if there's a better term for whatever it is I mean, entertainment doesn't seem to do it justice. (Edit) fwiw I am trying to understand where you're coming from, too, sorry if this got too argumentative. I was intrigued by your observations about playing games and just a bit confused why you seem to reject game design as an art, as small a part of the whole product as it is.