Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

I keep wanting to respond but keep forgetting, can't get this off my mind.

I'll have to admit, Kajenx pretty much laid it down with how believing that games can be art makes the profession seem that much more important to me. Like I convince myself that I wouldn't be wasting my life if I were to keep making games all my life, and that I could be somehow influencing people through my work.

I think about the topic of whether games are art or not, or which games are art, depends on your definition of art.

Mine is that art is anything that can express or convey emotions in ways that simple communication cannot. You could tell someone how it feels to be betrayed or to lose a dear friend, and he'd pity you maybe. And if he never felt anything like that, he may not really be able to sympathize. Through art however, you could express the emotion of that feeling, put the person in the same place, whether that be through a piece of prose, movie, picture or a game.

Maybe I'm thinking too narrow, but with that mindset, yeah, a game where you shoot blocks would not be art, whereas taking the same game and adding some profound layer or something would be.

I don't know...how do you define art?

What I still believe in is the fact that games still have a lot of potential to be something greater. They're the only form of media that are truly interactive and so could express things in ways other mediums cannot.

Haha, alright man. That's what most people say to me eventually. :P I don't care about the word, I was just sad to see you feeling somehow inferior.

The problem is exactly as you say: everyone thinks "art" is better than "not art." So, I'm not going to accept the idea that there are "art games" and "not art games," especially when most art games aren't better.

It goes a little further too. Art has a heritage, a history, a body of work to draw from. I'm making games inspired by Boucher and Bierstadt, who were artists. I don't like the pretension of modernism and how it devalued those guys all while inheriting the respect that they earned just because they also use the word "art" to describe their work. I REALLY don't like it when that pretension is carried over into legitimacy in people's minds. Especially in someone like you who actually seems to care.

The truth is, the word art DOES have a set of values and importance attached to it. No one is going to suddenly change their preconceptions when they're talking to you just because you point out that you think the word is meaningless. If you wanna be literal, the word has become so far stretched, it IS meaningless. But it would be better for you to own the word instead of abandoning it to people who probably don't deserve it.

You can be something new: a modest artist. :3

Haha, so I think we may agree then.

I DID read what you wrote, but I also read between the lines. I thought you were saying that art games legitimized games, as something worthwhile or important, because you were hoping the movie would somehow explain it all to your family and friends, who you describe as not taking it seriously. Maybe you don't want to believe you think the same way as the TigSource guys, but are you sure you don't?

Why is subtext the only thing that makes something artistic to you? Why can't design itself be the art behind the game? You used to believe that, why did you change? Basically what you're saying is that allegory or subtext or implied meaning makes games something that you feel more confident trying to explain to people you know rather than resting on the laurels of what ACTUALLY makes games great.

Look here:
"A couple years ago I decided that what I really think is worth exploring in games is how they feel and how they workâEU¦I used to call that the real art of designing games.
That's not exactly true though, cos that's not what art is. Literally: The word doesn't apply to something like that. It's VERY fun and interesting and respectable to do that kind of game design and I'm happy with it, but what do the people in this movie really mean when they talk about "games as art" ?
They mean making a game with a message, or to reflect how you feel, or to tell a parable story."

This is wrong in my view. Art isnâEUTMt about the extra pieces you add on to something, itâEUTMs the fundamental machinery behind what makes a thing great. A great painting is not one that has some extra meaning. A great painting is one thatâEUTMs meaningless, but is able to exceed that meaninglessness through the technical mastery behind it. You said it yourself, the games that focus on subtext and ignore the game design are failures. This means subtext is an extra piece, like particle effects. It makes the game a little more exciting if it's already good, but looks stupid if the game isn't solid in the first place.

I donâEUTMt like Thomas Moran because he painted landscapes that commented on the times he lived in. I like him because his paintings are beautiful. The art historical context is an added curiosity. The same thing applies to games. The only worthwhile criteria in a game is how fun it is. That IS the artistry. The rest is particle effects.

Very interesting discussion!

I-smell, you might interested in seeing this episode of Extra Credits if you haven't already seen it.

http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/narrative -mechanics

It talks about how a very simple arcade game, with no cutscenes or anything, could portray a very strong message about nuclear disaster by putting the player in just the right mindset through mechanics.

And I really think (or hope) that in the future games would be more accepted as art because it really is the only expressive medium that is not passive. Like here's a very simple example, Wolfire Games, a bunch of indie devs, just made a quick game jam for themselves recently and made this innovative first person shooter.

It has a bunch of features but the one I really liked was that, to sprint, you didn't hold down a button. You had to tap a button. And the faster you tapped the faster you ran. This really put the player inside the world, where when he would be running for his life he'd be raping that button as hard as he could, feeling all the tension.

And that's really my definition of art. It's anything that communicates on an emotional level.

Also, I hope the post below doesn't sound like I'm attacking you or anything. I'm actually full of love and butterflies. :3 Talking about the word "art" always makes me bristle, though, because I had to deal with everyone calling my paintings illustrations all through "fucking art skool" lol.

Your response to 4 is, like, everything that frustrates me about this silly debate over art and games (and art as a whole, for that matter). What is important? What is worthwhile? Blah blah barf! It's all a bunch of bullshit to me. There are no "art games." You're basically just glorifying the role playing aspect of a game and saying it somehow makes it more important or meaningful if it makes a social message. This is the same silly reason modernists used to justify replacing interest and technique in painting with philosophical mumblings and paint splatters.

Forget about the word "art" and judge a game by how much you enjoyed it. None of these "art games" would be interesting to people if they weren't fun in the first place, so it's just adding pretension to say they're superior to this or that because they somehow mean more to you. Why is a story about a bunch of space marines somehow less relevant than a story about a dude who can rewind time? What if the writer of Gears of War released an artist statement talking about his war experiences and how they informed the game? It doesn't matter. If the game is good, it's good. If it's not, it's not. The reasons have nothing to do with why it was made or what allegory it might represent. Tolkein made this same argument about fantasy writing.

People who make things are artists. However, art is useless. Thus, the label doesn't matter in the slightest. Call yourself, or me, or Jonathon Blow whatever you want. We all make different things, different people enjoy them in different amounts. None of them have any degree of "importance."

Maybe I'll get it when its super-cheap on steam. Even though I could spend that much on a decent length game than a two hour movie. O WELL

Great summary of your thoughts, man. (Why is that the best sentence I can come up with?)

I had a very similar reaction regarding what I thought an outsider might think of it. It doesn't bother me as much because I still saw the movie as extremely accessible to non-gamers and non-developers. That's pretty much the definition of a great documentary: making you care about something you did not have an interest in before. I'm glad it was able to play both sides of the line.

I feel I can really connect with your post about hoping the movie would finally show games as an expressive medium that affects people's lives rather than just a mild distraction, and I actually think the movie portrayed that.

At the very end when Edmund says that making the game was worth it because he knew that out there, some kid spent all night waiting for the release and playing the game. And that one day he may look to the game and when he realizes it was made by just 2 guys, he may be inspired to make something of his own.

Just knowing that the games you make, someone out there has spent hours (if it's a flash game) or weeks (if it's a PC game) playing the game, and then thinking about it. A game like "Company of Myself" broils you with emotions and the experience lasts with you. And a lot of these art games can really get people to rethink something in their lives.

This isn't even limited to art games. Super Meat Boy doesn't really have any deep meanings, but it can still inspire people, and just by being this really fun game that could turn into someone's solace everyday after a long and boring day at work/school.

The fact is, the games you make influence people. Millions of people. Game developers are artists. And an artist's work is no less important than any other in society. In fact I'd argue that it's more important. Artists give people reason to live and motivation for work.

(I'd love to hear your thoughts on what I just wrote!)

Also, 3D game is 3D. ^^

Haha, why do you care so much about what your family thinks? Games are silly bits of entertainment. If you feel deep playing one, that probably just means it has good music. ;)

I saw it at Doc/Fest in Sheffield. Very interesting seeing it with bunch of doc lovers rather than game lovers.

It's just strange when you're so used to being totally in this community of ppl who know and get it, then to be surrounded by people who are like "What's an indie game? wow, he's so lonely"

I watched it last month negro.

And the commentary tracks aren't available for the Steam version...greeeaaaaat. This morning's 3GB update was essentially a "re-download" so they could change ONE WORD in the credits. I'm pissed; I was planning on watching it again today with the Team Meat commentary.

Thanks for the tip on this, Hadn't heard of it till you posted here - I just watched it and loved the insight to the process.

Even knowing before hand that the game was a success, It sure felt good watching those guys succeed, I must say.

I admit I went to go watch it wanting to hate it. I thought itd take the usual hipster angle to it. But it didnt and I actually came away with a better understanding of programmers and their struggles and investments into games. As an artist sometimes you dont take that into consideration and you just shovel graphics and are like hey make this.

But yeah I found it to be a pretty good movie. I will have to get around to seeing the one with commentary on it.

Hmm, I'm interested to see that movie, but I'm not going to go out of my way to watch it.

tom made me comment or he would buttfuck me,and yes I read the posthing

Would you prefer us to watch the movie then critique about your post with a comment, rather than reading the post and then comment?
it leaves me a bit bewildered.

I have yet to see the movie, but have been meaning to. while I never had a game crunched out to the caliber of those games I've had smaller games and definitely felt those experiences mentioned here to a smaller degree. Ive had to deal with the whole "closet artist" vibe all my life. growing up I was pretty much made to feel ashamed I was into it, and usually it was taken away from me when ever I fucked up in school or something. Which is why Id used to get overly offended whenever I saw one artist putting down another, on this and other sites.. it used to really hit a cord..
But There were a few rare instances where I worked on a project with a team of other artists and I finally said to myself ' yeah, this is where I want to be.'
I finally just now started to not care of what people around me thought I did, and simply do it because Its what I'm happiest doing.

"why are we all making games for 6 yr olds?" ~ This question kinda confused me. I'm guessing you're half-joking, but there's still merit in answering it. Edmund, Phil, Jon, their goals in development were to make games based on their own lives and their own preferences. So they made games for people who think like them. I'm sure Super Meat Boy wasn't made specifically for a young audience, considering its difficulty and the nature of its adult jokes and semi-obscure references. But it's designed well enough for its purpose that a six-year-old could conceivably pick it up and play it without much instruction. It's also clear that Braid was meant for older audiences, but because its purpose is different, the game is not nearly as accessible to gamers outside of the target audience.

The first time I saw the film it was super inspirational because it was just a few weeks before we were releasing Closure and I got all the same feelings Ed and Tommy were getting. I also felt the same way during release, a slight worry, but also kind of just going about regular business, sitting around. When edmund talked about a kid staying up late to buy it and not going to school the next day it struck a nerve in me, about how the young kids today will look back and ask each other if they remember the games we're making today - almost nostalgic. Because I totally remember how much the games I played when i was young meant to me.

Anyways, I thought the film itself was well done overall. If i had to complain about one thing, is that it doesn't really touch any bases on the small victories here and there during development. It's mostly filmed during these guys' crunch times so there isn't really any sigh of relief or victory cheer until later in the movie. There should be a decent amount of 'sweet, we just added this awesome thing to the game' or else they wouldn't be working on it at all. I think the devs were just so stressed they didn't vocalize any of that to the cameras. It just makes the film a little depressing during the development stage with no hint of satisfaction while actually making the game. They also started filming well after the game's development started so there was no exciting brainstorming part either, where they build up all their energy.

ALSO EDMUND IS SO OFFENSIVE, HOW DARE HE COMPARE HIMSELF TO AN AUSCHWITZ GAS CHAMBER CAPTIVE

"This post isn't very interesting. maybe I should delete it."

It's funny you said that. I read this news post moment you posted it, and spent a good 10 minutes typing out a [lengthy] response, but refrained because I shared your sentiment. I wanted to say I pretty much agree with you on all accounts about the film (Kotaku's review also said it better than I could have). I feel the critics showering this film with praise are doing so because something like this hasn't been done before, and they feel it's good because for them it sort of has to be.

I honestly think "Kevin Smith Explaining the Meaning of Life as an Artist" on YouTube would be better fit to convince an outsider why artists do what they do (and that's not just because it's an hour and a half shorter).

Making a living as an artist is pretty much a sink-or-swim deal, and I hope that someday people understand the possibility of the former is no good reason to discourage someone.

Lots of people will probably read this and find it interesting even though they don't post a reply... Like I wasn't gonna post a reply but here I am! We really need view counts on blog posts / user pages. ANYWAY fun read, I still have to listen to that Team Meat commentary track.

why would you delete something you worked on to inform?
So what if you or others view it as boring; it's still there as proof that you put effort into it.

Every little bit of work towards art has some meaning whether or not its completely agreed upon by the collective popular perspective. Just being there means you believe it will help someone who will come across this and want to hear the insights of those who experienced and wish to share the knowledge. passing down was and still is one of the most practiced forms of helping out generation to generation for the betterment of not repeating history.

don't doubt yourself smel; it'll only kill your confidence.

no it its very nice but since its sumer evry one its partiing like me :D

and heav litel time to stay on the pc...

you now...you shold go see the world take a brake go ghet drunk chent whait to play the demo

aaaaaa this post isnt very interesting, maybe I should delete it.