No video game will ever achieve a status as a classic piece of art or fiction. There will never be a game that will reach the likes of Seventh Seal, Moby Dick, Pictures at an Exhibition, Persistence of Memory, and the likes. Just like there will never be a board game that will be elevated to the same status as the greats. Sure, chess is a timeless classic, beloved and appreciated by all, but nobody claims it to be a piece of art. Perhaps there is, or will be, a video game that will achieve the same status as chess, as a timeless classical game, but there will never be a video game that will be standing besides the great pieces of human expression.
tetris
>>721124980Not a piece of art, but definitely a great game and a timeless classic.
>>721124907I agree that videogames will never be artbut you, op, are a nigger and you should never be allowed to post again. Faggot.
>>721126505What did I say wrong? I thought I was being rather fair
>>721124907Hard disagree. Something you're forgetting about is time. There are more people now but less readers. More people watch popcorn flicks and cinematic dramas are tax write offs. In 50 years more people on this earth will have played Minecraft than have read Moby Dick. You really don't think it will be a respected entertainment medium? Times change, people change.
>>721126948Well, you do admittedly make a very good argument about a perspective I didn't consider before. I suppose only time will tell how peoples' views shift. While I don't think games won't become a respected entertainment form, I do not think they'll be considered as something akin to great pieces of timeless art. I do believe they'll be considered an important and popular form of entertainment, and some games might persist, like chess or monopoly, but entertainment is not the same as a timeless classic I'm talking about. Minecraft, for example, is not a piece of art, but a continuously evolving sandbox game. It is very popular now, might be more popular in the future, but it doesn't provide anything profound besides the ability to create stuff in a virtual world.
>>721124907Hello, time traveler! Can you tell me what the lotto numbers are?
>>72112780434, 7, 45, 22, 35, 15, 1, 17. You're welcome!
>>721124907For a game to be high art we would have to determine what makes a game artistically valuable. There are definitely lots of pretentious games that play at being art, but a game that's really art? I don't know if we have it yet. So much of the discourse around games as art takes its values from other mediums. Video games are not a strictly storytelling medium but we have tons of movie games and novel games that try to be deep. They aren't a strictly visual medium but there are lots of indie games with elaborate animation and evocative visual design trying to be art. But do these things make a game art?
>>721124907That’s fine.
>>721124907Is the Penguin Classic website still up? I couldn't find it last time I checked.
>>721128767Found it, it still works. https://penguin.jos.ht/
>>721124907And if Sumerian tablets weren't ever excavated, or Sumerian translated, you'd never read Gil's epic.You made two mistakes.You've incorrectly assumed that assumptions of some select civilizations about worth are universal, unchallengeable and cannot be malleable.And you cannot see the value of things you examine.Your abstract mass of people with all their preferences is exactly that and nothing more.
>>721124907Nah, Ninja Gaiden 2 (OG) is a lot better than all those.It's more intense, has a higher skill ceiling than "reading", more fun, less accessible.For the matter. A chess board can be a piece of art, and so can the act of playing it.In the same way. NG2 is above the pseud-bait you posted
>>721128926
>>721124907Qua videogameplay? Baba Is You
>>721131472Playing chess is not art. It can be an "art", as in, a learned skill, much like a martial art. But it's not art in the traditional sense of the word. Playing football is not art.While a fancy chess board can be art, that does not make the game of chess art. Just like a fancy football (ball) can be art, the game of football is not art.
>>721128454>But do these things make a game art?I would say no. For a game to be considered art in its own medium, it'd have to mainly rely on its own distinguishing feature, aka, gameplay. John Williams's movie score is art, but that alone does not make a movie into something considered to be art.>>721128958To be fair, Gilgamesh is considered a "classic" mostly because of its age as one of the first known stories. It's not really because of its artistic merit.
>>721132178>in the traditional sense of the wordokayunless it's a painting or sculpture it's not artliterature/photography/moviefags byfo
>>721124907Same goes for cinema. The greatest films in the world are pretty good books
Video games are supposed to be digital toys not works of art.
>>721124907And Roger Ebert is still dead, missing his jaw
