Fewer games next generation?

1. Toy Games
2. Amusement Rides
3. Competitive Sports
4. Movies

In that order, is how similar I view those activities to video games. Would anyone argue differantly?
 
Gee, I remember reading the exact same thing 4 years ago.

Doesn't look like much has changed since then has it?

Maybe if you're blind it doesn't. Publishers consolidating, smaller developers failing, increasing franchise-itis... yeah, this has been going on for a decade, but the past few years have seen more of it, and it will only continue to accelerate in the future.
 
toilet.jpg


Here I sit all Broken-Hearted
Came to quip but only Arted!
 
Gahiggidy said:
1. Toy Games
2. Amusement Rides
3. Competitive Sports
4. Movies

In that order, is how similar I view those activities to video games. Would anyone argue differantly?

Actually if you flip your list around it would be more accurate.


1. Movies(Most of your RPGs fit into this category. Final Fantasy, etc...)These games are played for the Story.
2. Competitive sports.(especially sports games, fighting games, and shooters.)
3. Amusement Rides(GTA and similar games would fit into this category.)
4. Toy Games(Most platformers and Nintendo's games would fall into this category)
 
Jiggle, Marcel Duchamp. 1917.

it's funny people arguing about whether drawings/paintings-textures, music-sound, models-sculpting, code, design, etc. should be called art when artists left this question behind almost 100 years ago and generally haven't looked back.
 
The question isn't controversial at all.

Art is beautiful.

What wouldn't want to be associated with something beautiful?

The issue is that it's often used to belittle games that thrive based on their control and gameplay design rather than the sheer breathtaking look of a game like ICO.

If a game contains both, great.

If a game contains one, just as well. Halo 2 is as worthy a piece of interactive art as Wanda and the Collossus is sure to be. And if it's not? No game is.
 
Video games can contain emotion
Video games themselves can contain artwork
Video games themselves are not only entertainment but an artform.

Anything else is just plain wrong.
 
jiggle said:
Not necessarily.


Without turning this into another philosophical debate about the nature of being something or other, I'll just say that good art is beautiful in what it's trying to be.

*runs away*
 
I agree with Leshita but this needs to be said:

Games like Pac-Man, Robotron, etc. deserve to be in the same realm as art. Those games are just beautiful. Until we return to that kind of simple gameplay, games will be JUST removed from art.
 
The Abominable Snowman said:
I agree with Leshita but this needs to be said:

Games like Pac-Man, Robotron, etc. deserve to be in the same realm as art. Those games are just beautiful. Until we return to that kind of simple gameplay, games will be JUST removed from art.

The argument could be made that the ability to tell/create more complex narratives or experiences enhances the the mediums art. There's no reason to believe that a simpler or purer form of expression is more artistic, and that road has been tread by other artists as well.

Doesn't making the simplicity of gameplay the focus make it seem more like a craft?

I don't know, I didn't mean to imply by asking for definitions earlier that there were any. Surprisingly, I tend to agree with Gahgiddy, games if they are art are only touching the edges of what I might consider such. But it's just a subjective circle.
 
Katamari Damacy = art, gotdamit.

One could argue that games are becoming more art-like because of the similarites they share when it comes to creating scandels in the public eye. We see this in the very loud reactions to the GTA's, Manhunts and (ugh) Girl Trap. Who knows? Maybe the next big game/genre will be something that creates uneasyness without violence being an integral part of the game.
 
Top Bottom