lordofduct
Established Member
I just picked up the periodical "Playstation Magazine" off of a neighbors desk. I don't ever read this magazine, but the cover caught my eye. It has an interview with Hideo Kojima (creator of 'Metal Gear' and one of my favorite games 'Snatcher') and underneath his name read the quote, "A videogame is not art!". I skimmed through the article to find the section commenting on this matter and read every part dealing with videogames as an art.
abridged section of article relating to matter taken from Official Playstation Magazine.
[sic] - to many in it for me to fill it up with lil' sic' comments. I am amazed at what slips through editors hands at a worldwide publication firm. This may be an interview, but still the editor listened to the interview and typed it himself; the ponctuation should be placed properly.
Aside from that though...
I am very upset to hear Kojima say such things! A certainly believe videogames are art. I was happy to see the editor bring up Picasso; not because it was Picasso, but because an artist just as famous named Da Vinci was considered an artist. Da Vinci is widely remembered and considered an artist for the inventions he created and the studies he mastered, not just his paintings. This work he did is considered art. By Kojima's standards he is saying that the concepts Da Vinci dreamt up are art, but the stuff he built isn't.
Now I don't want to go on forever about this. I want to keep it a bit simple and simple it will be. I take the 1st definition of the word 'art'.
Art - Human effort to imitate, supplement, alter, or counteract the work of nature. (dictionary.com)
If videogames aren't any of that... then what the hell is it?
That definition is kind of vague in the sense it could be tacked onto anything... and many people tack on the evocative side of art. That it must also include some type of inspiration, meaning, or non-conventional intent (to influence intellectual movement, religious affliction, emotional attatchment as opposed to be the purpose of doing a job like driving or something).
Still with the evocative side tacked on I see the coralation with videogames. An immitation of nature that causes obsessions in people, tells stories, and sometimes has deep meaning.
What do you all think? Are videogames art? Is the immense skill in weaving together several different mediums like sprites, polygons, code, user interactivity, music, etc... an art or is it just a service?
Maybe even if at times it is bad art.
abridged section of article relating to matter taken from Official Playstation Magazine.
Originally posted by OPM editor: James Mielke
OPM: Have you heard of Roger Ebert's assessment that videogames can never be viewed as art? How do you feel about that?
HK: I don't think they're art either, videogames. The thing is, art is something that radiates the artist, the person who creates that piece of art. If 100 people walk by and a single person is captivated by whatever that piece radiates, then it's art. But videogames aren't trying to capture one person. A videogame should make sure that all 100 people that play that game should enjoy the service provided by that videogame. It's something of service. It's not art. But I guess the way of providing service with that videogame is an artistic style, a form of art.
HK: For example, look at a concept car. You don't have to be able to drive a car, but if it's called a car and it has artistic elements in the visuals, then it's art. But an actual car, like a videogame, is interactive, so it's something used by people, so it's like a car where you have to drive it and using it. It could be families driving [abridged due to redundancy in examples]... so this car has to be able to be driven by all 100 of these people, so in that sense it's totally not art.
OPM: By that same token, if you had a Picasso on the wall, you may totally enjoy his work. I imagine you would if you had one hanging up. But I may hate Picasso; I may prefer the Bauhaus movement. So if we have different opinions, maybe we're not physically 'using' it for anything specific; we're still using our minds to evaluate it, just like the performance of a car or a videogame. That's not going to stop art from being art, but videogames can still be artistic.
HK: Let me say this in a different way, so I can better explain the nuance in what I'm trying to say. That building there [points to one of the adjacent Roppongi Hills Towers] has an art museum called Mori Museum, but any museum will do. Art is the stuff you find in the museum, wether it be a painting or statue. What I'm doing, what videogame creators are doing, is running the museum-how do we light up things, where do we place things, how do we sell tickets? It's basically running the museumfor those who come to the museum to look at the art. For better or worse, what I do, Hideo Kojima, myself, is run the museum and also create the art that's displayed in the museum.
[sic] - to many in it for me to fill it up with lil' sic' comments. I am amazed at what slips through editors hands at a worldwide publication firm. This may be an interview, but still the editor listened to the interview and typed it himself; the ponctuation should be placed properly.
Aside from that though...
I am very upset to hear Kojima say such things! A certainly believe videogames are art. I was happy to see the editor bring up Picasso; not because it was Picasso, but because an artist just as famous named Da Vinci was considered an artist. Da Vinci is widely remembered and considered an artist for the inventions he created and the studies he mastered, not just his paintings. This work he did is considered art. By Kojima's standards he is saying that the concepts Da Vinci dreamt up are art, but the stuff he built isn't.
Now I don't want to go on forever about this. I want to keep it a bit simple and simple it will be. I take the 1st definition of the word 'art'.
Art - Human effort to imitate, supplement, alter, or counteract the work of nature. (dictionary.com)
If videogames aren't any of that... then what the hell is it?
That definition is kind of vague in the sense it could be tacked onto anything... and many people tack on the evocative side of art. That it must also include some type of inspiration, meaning, or non-conventional intent (to influence intellectual movement, religious affliction, emotional attatchment as opposed to be the purpose of doing a job like driving or something).
Still with the evocative side tacked on I see the coralation with videogames. An immitation of nature that causes obsessions in people, tells stories, and sometimes has deep meaning.
What do you all think? Are videogames art? Is the immense skill in weaving together several different mediums like sprites, polygons, code, user interactivity, music, etc... an art or is it just a service?
Maybe even if at times it is bad art.