5 ms·

> You can't separate the commercial aspect, from the medium. What does this even mean? If you mean that all video games are produced for commercial benefit, th

> You can't separate the commercial aspect, from the medium. What does this even mean? If you mean that all video games are produced for commercial benefit, that's certainly not true. Maybe most of them are, but you could say exactly the same about movies and books. > But what are we referring to when we talk about Video Game Art. The visuals and sounds, or the game play itself? Isn't this just trying to unnecessarily force games into the mold of existing media? A video game is an interactive composition that consists of visuals and sound and narrative and control mechanics and game logic, just as a painting typically consists of shape and color.

ArtWomb 6y ago
It's the old form vs content debate. The average movie goer probably won't purchase a ticket and sit through hours of Andy Warhol's "Empire" or Christian Marclay's Clocks. In same the way they would go see the Coen Brothers' Scarface re-make. Film as Art is often considered under Auteur Theory. The entire body of work is investigated. To glean a unique vision specific to the director. One of the more popular retrospectives at MoMA pre-lockdown was the films of Mae West. Depression era escapism for the audiences of those days. But nearly a century later, they have a very different impact. In 500 years, Super Mario Bros may be more important than Hamlet. As a society, we are on the cusp of playing games directly with our minds (via Neuralink). It's not a question of the immersion or interactivity these simulations will have. But in how they advance our understanding of our humanity. I know it all sounds a bit snobby and elitist. But looking at some games that attempted to transcend. Bjork's Biophilia for instance. Or the CD-ROMs of Theresa Duncan. I can't help but feel the pinnacle has not been achieved yet. And is still very much up for grabs ;)

ArtWomb 6y ago

It's the old form vs content debate. The average movie goer probably won't purchase a ticket and sit through hours of Andy Warhol's "Empire" or Christian Marclay's Clocks. In same the way they would go see the Coen Brothers' Scarface re-make. Film as Art is often considered under Auteur Theory. The entire body of work is investigated. To glean a unique vision specific to the director. One of the more popular retrospectives at MoMA pre-lockdown was the films of Mae West. Depression era escapism for the audiences of those days. But nearly a century later, they have a very different impact. In 500 years, Super Mario Bros may be more important than Hamlet. As a society, we are on the cusp of playing games directly with our minds (via Neuralink). It's not a question of the immersion or interactivity these simulations will have. But in how they advance our understanding of our humanity. I know it all sounds a bit snobby and elitist. But looking at some games that attempted to transcend. Bjork's Biophilia for instance. Or the CD-ROMs of Theresa Duncan. I can't help but feel the pinnacle has not been achieved yet. And is still very much up for grabs ;)