PKMN.NET Forums
Misc => Debate => Topic started by: winterbane on February 24, 2015, 13:15
-
How much control should a game's creator have over their game, and does the opinion of the masses really matter? This only came to mind due to the recent activity in the "What is art" thread, but I think this is its own entire debate. Once a game enters the public domain and starts getting modded and updated and gains a community (such as this one), does that game still belong to its original creator? Are they right to add or remove or change whatever they see fit from future incarnations, to change the established universe? Or do gamers deserve some say in this, because of the interactive medium? Or should they be handled like books or TV shows, where the fans can not like it as much as they want, the creative direction is what it is?
I can think of one big example, the ending of Mass Effect 3 - which was total crap and felt extremely anticlimactic (given the game's supposed 'choices'). Games evoke emotional responses in people like fine art, perhaps moreso. We become attached to a plot or to characters. If we didn't, none of us would be on this forum, would we?
To what extent should 'fans' - or perhaps better, critics - opinions be regarded in the gaming industry? Do they really deserve the say they believe they do, or should we all just take it for what it is, even if we did pour 300 hours into a franchise only to have it end horribly in a way that could never be satisfactory?
-
I believe that it is an art form, for sure, but that doesn't mean that entertainment should be sacrificed. Changing the ending of Mass Effect was mostly a good business decision, because I'm sure a lot of people wouldn't care to play the game if the ending would be so unsatisfying.
I fully believe that game creators should be able to put out whatever they want, although the ratings system should still stay in place. For example, even though I think it's the stupidest game of the year thus far, I don't believe Hatred should be banned, but probably labeled as Adult Only and not be available in any brick and mortar stores.
I suppose I'm having a difficult time making a good point because art and entertainment aren't mutually exclusive. I think gamers creating add on content is awesome (even if it's weird and in some cases inappropriate), and the creators opinion doesn't matter so much once it's on the market. Keep in mind that even in literature and movies, fanfiction still very much exists.
So, yeah, I believe that once you share your product with the world, it's going to get ripped off, stolen, or adapted in different ways. That's the reality of both art and entertainment. Game devs can choose to not listen to their fans, but shouldn't be asking people to cease and desist when they mod the game to their own liking.
-
They're both, but whichever one they are is entirely down to the creator. Video Games can be created purely for entertainment and don't have to have any artistic value, but in the same way video games can also be art and have no social or entertaining responsibility at all.
Creators should have absolute control over their content and for the larger part, they do. It's down to publishers to dictate whether or not they want to publish a game and that should equally be their freedom of choice. As far as fan opinions go, once again, complete freedom there too I believe. I think video games are generally free and open to criticism, I don't see a Yelp-like scenario whereby player criticism is branded as slander and legal action taken against them.
Whether or not it 'should' or 'does' matter is fairly irrelevant and pretty much down to whoever reads them. I value the opinions of certain websites, magazines, reviewers, online communities etc. over others and I don't think that's a bad thing. The more reviews you read, the better understanding of them you build up and you begin to realize that a critic or website shares values you do and enjoys similar things about games, so you're more inclined to listen to them in future.
Stuff like Paid DLC and add-on content is an industry problem rather than a creative one. It's really a result of developers and publishers working so closely together that they become inseparable. Can you really imagine Game Freak not using Nintendo to publish the next Pokemon game? It seems unthinkable. But if Nintendo realize they are losing money and GameFreak don't wish to find another publisher, Nintendo may have certain requirements that need to be fulfilled.
I think the fact that publishers and developers work in such a close-knit way results in the development mentality subconsciously shifting to a publishers mentality, whereby the developers are instinctively thinking about DLC and monetizing their game before it's even being developed. Lots of people complain about video games not being the same as they used to be and they blame it on DLC, Consoles, Piracy, Difficulty levels...you name it. What they're really complaining about is that relationship between developer and publisher, as this is what manifests into the problems they experience. Games get easier because the market changes, DLC becomes apparent when the standard formula stops being profitable...so on and so forth.
-
This really depends on the view of the creator. Do they want to focus on combat systems or storyline? Do they really care about the glitch in the fourth dungeon? Are they sure they want to put enough effort on this cutscene, even if it may cost more?
Some creators try to blend the two. Good examples can be found in several Final Fantasy and Fire Emblem games, with fairly in-depth stories as well as in-depth combat systems and dungeons(FF)/battles(FE). A good more recent example that also has good art is the Kingdom Hearts series.
This topic is actually fairly important to me because I'm going to be a game designer/developer. I have several storylines planned, as well as items, combat systems, a map or two, ideas on some art pieces, character details, and various other aspects.
-
battles(FE)
FE hasn't had an in-depth story since 2007. FE13 was purely pandering, and developers trying to cater to an audience instead of create a game. Most developers balance the two. It's rare to find someone who liked FF13 as well, but that was the fault of the producers trying to do too much with it, many regime changes and many vision changes, and i think they took to heart the criticisms of FE12 too much. FF fans are nuts.
A creator should not betray his vision of gameplay for plot or vice-versa, and the best games are the ones that make the two symbiotic. They have to create things for entertainment but the most vocal fans are crazy and don't really care for games beyond the shallow details of the plot and aren't fond of differences.
Still gotta find a right balance but my favorite games were the ones created with no real audience in mind, or the ones that like to screw with their intended audience.
-
Oh, sorry. Meant to put in "older" here.
Good examples can be found in several Final Fantasy and Fire Emblem games
-
It definitely can be both, in the same way television or films can be too. Both have different layers and overlapping factors. I look at a game like Journey; extremely artistic and beautiful, but also entertaining due to how it all feels.
Plus games themselves have a number of things which can make it good, and each can be artistic and / or entertaining.
-
Games these days are almost like interactive films and can be works of art- Look at the latest Grand Theft Auto: Masterpiece.
-
That is not true.
Have you even played GTA V? You can skip cutscenes and go straight to the GTA style killing sprees and car jacking. There is nothing in GTAV that indicates its anything close to, say, Heavy Rain.
-
Have you even played GTA V? You can skip cutscenes and go straight to the GTA style killing sprees and car jacking. There is nothing in GTAV that indicates its anything close to, say, Heavy Rain.
I'd argue that you're comparing apples to oranges here: GTAV is an open-world sandbox game while Heavy Rain is a narrative driven "interactive drama". A better comparison would be GTAV and LA Noire or Heavy Rain and Telltale's The Walking Dead (comparison in terms of gameplay, not quality. I have played none of these games and cannot make a statement regarding the quality in good conscience).
So: are video games art? Should the creator have complete control? Well that is what the ESRB/VSC/etc. are for: they look at a game and say "okay, based on our guidelines we think this game is appropriate for audiences of X age and above". If a game designer wants to make a game where you and other characters are in death traps and you have to figure a way out then the respective groups would rate it appropriately and some people would complain it encourages violence or whatever (because computer code being tortured is worse than actors acting tortured apparently). Designers have (almost) free reign over the material, but members of the public may not like what they produce (the controversy over every GTA game for example). Video games are a new artform: a film or book where you directly control a character and move through the story.
Games these days are almost like interactive films and can be works of art-
I'd agree some games are. For example games like Lara Croft or some of the Resident Evil games, where there are action scenes (get past X monsters/enemies, open the door before the roof crushes you) and more calm scenes (platforming and puzzles) really make the game seem cinematic. Other games, like the Diablo series or Pokémon aren't as cinematic/film-like because their main attraction isn't in the story but in the gameplay: you're collecting better and better loot in Diablo and you're making balanced teams in Pokémon (mind you I love both series and have more hours than I care to admit in them). Then we have puzzle games and racing games and sports games, etc. that aren't too film like.
Thems my two cents. I have more to say, but I can't quite find the right place/way to say it.
-
I'd argue that you're comparing apples to oranges here: GTAV is an open-world sandbox game while Heavy Rain is a narrative driven "interactive drama". A better comparison would be GTAV and LA Noire or Heavy Rain and Telltale's The Walking Dead (comparison in terms of gameplay, not quality. I have played none of these games and cannot make a statement regarding the quality in good conscience).
Are you aware of the context in which I am saying this or is my lack of quote tags making it difficult for you to see it? I'm responding to this point:
Games these days are almost like interactive films and can be works of art- Look at the latest Grand Theft Auto: Masterpiece.
GTAV is nothing like an interactive film. Heavy Rain is an interactive drama and GTAV/Heavy Rain are nothing alike. Milsap is out-and-out wrong about GTAV's gameplay and it is very much the same as GTAIV and GTAIII/San Andreas/etc before it. Unless you want to consider those PS2 classics interactive films then there's no reason to consider GTAV one either.
-
the "are videogames art" argument is when nerds really dont want to admit that videogames are a literal waste of time and come up with lame things like "its art" and "it teaches u morals" when really its just a nerdfactory pasttime with little skills that come out of it
other than "knows too much about useless battling mechanics" or "can't derive or integrate or pass a test but could possibly beat you on like, ssb4 or whatever"
you know that feeling when u completed a game and you feel a bit disappointed and hollow and aimless? thats the regret from wastin ur time. art doesn't usually do that, usually u feel proud of art. ergo, videogames =/= art. videogames = toilet.
on the other hand modders gave us stuff like Black Mesa which valve was never gonna do on their own effort so i cant complain about modders too much.
Or should they be handled like books or TV shows, where the fans can not like it as much as they want, the creative direction is what it is?
have you been on tumblr lately cos boy howdy if you think people dont take creative (or uncreative as the case may be with the majority of them) discourse with films and books and tv etc
-
You could argue that a lot of things in life are a waste of time, it's all perception, what we as individuals want to achieve / gain in life.
-
Are you aware of the context in which I am saying this or is my lack of quote tags making it difficult for you to see it?…
Alright. Reread your post. I misunderstood due to tone rather than context. I would change my post, but then yours would look out of place.
-
xhanatos THIRSTS FOR BLOOD
-
I don't think I've ever felt 'hollow' after playing a videogame. Only disappointed if it was particularly bad (In which case it's rare I would go on to complete it) or sad that there isn't more because I was enjoying it so much.
Some games may just be fairly pointless wastes of time (To be honest, I get this vibe from a lot of indie games) but most, if not all videogames give me a great sense of satisfaction. Pokemon as just one example has changed so much in my life, from the people I know to my perspective on the world and life. I don't consider Pokemon to be an 'artistic' game in the same way that people would consider Journey to be artistic, but I think that the Game Boy was a vessel for sharing Satoshi Tajiri's imagination in the same way a good book or movie does for their respective writers.
There's definitely a line between understanding a videogame as having artistic value and 'playing videogames all day', they are not mutually exclusive. Of course I have other goals and dreams in life, but that doesn't mean that videogames are simply a distraction away from them. I play them because they are fun and I enjoy the act of playing videogames, there's no guilt or feeling of procrastination attached to them, you make time for them just as you do anything else. If you feel guilty for playing videogames then maybe it's time to find another hobby.
-
remind me did you go to uni for philosophy or did you drop out or w/e
idk about you (i mean on here people would probably disagree with me) but i'd like to think we've all got higher ideas of Personal Successes than "play the vibbeogabe all day"
you lot are worth more than that surely
Nah I didn't do philosophy, I did drop out in the third year though, but then again I'd argue the majority of my life so far has been wasted. I was just throwing that point out there, that's all.
-
old lady argues with cloud
-
I'm all for indie games, but I agree with YOG for the most part. A lot of indie games are either not-indie (IE; Bastion, which was funded by Warner Brothers and stamped INDIE on itself for some reason) or clones of other, more successful games in some form (OH LOOK! ANOTHER ZOMBIE SURVIVAL GAME! OH LOOK! ITS TETRIS WITH DIFFERENT COLORS! OH LOOK! ITS MINEBLOCKER! Oh wait, it's basically MINECRAFT with less features!) But occasionally indie developers come up with something entirely new and creative, which is what keeps me looking at them. For the most part though, they're shovelware I'd expect to find in a $5.99 CD rack in a convenience store in the early 2000s.
As an artistic medium, I think some games succeed on that level but fail as a game - as far as I'm concerned the purpose of a game is to provide a challenge to occupy the mind without being simply a puzzle, but having some other feature - a story, an objective, other than completing a puzzle with the given parameters. It's why I rarely play standalone puzzle games but enjoy a game like Legend of Zelda, that tells a story while also offering a challenge.
I think the best personal example I have of this 'clash' between artistic vision and the will of the gaming community is Mass Effect. I love the franchise, but I absolutely despised the ending of ME3 and even their "fixed ending" didn't appease me. But would anything have appeased me? Probably not. The end to my favorite game series ever was always going to be the end, and no matter what that end was, I'd still have been upset. I guess what I'm really asking is if you guys think game devs should bend to a fanbase in a situation like that, or if it's right to stand their ground and say "this is what we intended from the beginning, if you don't like it, tough." Where should that line in the sand be drawn?
-
I'm not fond of indie games myself either (probably the one thing we agree on, because for instance Binding of Isaac is an annoying ass game that isn't even fun). I don't believe I've ever felt any bit hollow at all finishing the majority of video games I've beaten, though. I think your argument is based entirely upon personal experience and really doesn't say much about the medium except for the fact that you don't seem to like it as an art form, even though it is. I always thought the artistic element came from the creators' ability to create an experience, at any rate, and not from the players' ability to play it.
I guess what I'm really asking is if you guys think game devs should bend to a fanbase in a situation like that, or if it's right to stand their ground and say "this is what we intended from the beginning, if you don't like it, tough." Where should that line in the sand be drawn?
Something in between like I said earlier, while devs shouldn't give up on their vision, some of the bigger AAA games with a larger budget probably do need to make it more marketable just because of the amount of money put into it.
-
you used to be able to antagonise me way better than this. //shakes head sadly// r.i.p turner
I'm not trying to antagonise you, this is the Debate forum after all, I'd be thrown out pretty quickly if I was trolling.
But my point stands and I don't think I know anybody who feels that way either. If I started feeling guilty or negative after playing videogames, I'd stop doing it. It would be nonsensical and a waste of time.
With regards to indie games, I think a lot of it comes down to the fact that the internet and mass consumption of media has left people creatively parched. If you're the sort of person that has an endless library of unplayed games on Steam, the chances are that your perception of videogames quickly changes from something you cherish to something you consume.
The explosion of indie game developers should be a good thing, but I think what happens more realistically is that we get flooded with so many games that gamers become less discriminating in their tastes and will quickly spend some money on a cheap indie game that promises a fairly shallow gimmick. This in turn lowers the standards of gamers and indie developers alike (many of which were these mass-consumer gamers) as they know they don't have to work hard or do anything particularly amazing to get some fame/money, while at the same time they can pride themselves on being part of a movement generally seen as being cutting edge.
The same thing happens in music and there's always the misconception that the more videogames/music there is, the higher the chance of finding something good is. It works on a skewed 'signal to noise ratio' model that in fact, doesn't actually scale well at all and saturates the market, but people will always tell you you're not digging deep enough because it's just assumed that there must be something good in all the crap.
I think this is why early video games were so good and made such an impact on people. Back in the (S)NES days you had to hijack the TV for a very limited time to play the games you liked. On the one hand this meant that you were so much more focused on the game (rather than juggling it between other distractions) and it also meant that the games had to deliver on providing a memorable experience. I think this is also why Pokemon was so great too (and why I go on about this in Pokemon main series threads), the local multiplayer experience is amazing because just like the games, it has you traveling around meeting like minded people who love and have their own Pokemon.
Getting back to the point, as Raven says - I think this is where the real artistic merit comes from in videogames. I'm sure any indie developer with a talented artist can make a visually stunning 'narrative adventure' game with landscapes worthy of wallpapers, but the videogames that I would personally consider to be 'art' are equal part experience. I can go anywhere and have a vision of the Pokemon world superimposed over where I am, not just in a comparative sense, but in the sense that it makes me see landscape and nature from a completely different perspective, it gives me a sense of exploration and adventure and appreciation for the world.
I think that's the real art, providing such an interactive experience with a simulated game that it changes your outlook in the real world and the subjectivity of which games make people experience this is something that all other art forms have - That's why I think videogames are art.
-
it took beth 20-30 times to complete final rush in SA2
-
Before I say anything else, since sometimes I find your style of posting hard to follow (not meant to be a knock against you), are you saying the quality of the medium has decreased over time or you just don't see it as art?
-
beths first games console was the amiga 500 and her dad threw it out cos her dad is an arse
-
I'd like to clarify, I'm not saying you're crazy or something, I just have a hard time reading what you (and for that matter) sylar type sometimes. It's not incoherent, just a bunch of long sentences with some quirks here and there. It's just not too similar to anything else I've really read, it's not a slight against you or anything, I think it's just late and I'm too tired/focused on other things to really put 100% of my focus into things.
I'm not sure if I should be making this assumption but you just don't like Indie games and that's okay.
There's a lot of AAA titles that could be considered more on the artistic spectrum, depending on how you define art. The Drakengard series (well just Drakengard 1 and Nier) isn't too pleasing to look at, but Drakengard conveys a very surreal, bleak, and actually somewhat nuanced atmosphere that does elicit and emotional response from people. Nier has the most beautiful music, great atmosphere, and even though the graphics are a step below the norm for the console it was released on it is truly a beautiful game.
Spec Ops: The Line is edgy, but not like "teen on the internet that just discovered tumblr and reddit" edgy. It's different from the norm.
Things like that. I see what you mean with rehashes, but even in the 90s there were a bunch of duds in gaming (I would venture it's about the same ratio as right now, probably even more), and it was even worse in the 80s when there was a market crash for games.
It's also stuff like that which makes me appreciate the FF series, because each FF game is very different in terms of core mechanics and atmosphere.
-
re: quality - its more a kind of way that i feel a lot of the games these days just try and Emulate Previous Successes but not going into why previous successes worked? they just copy the game itself w/o lookin into what made the game good in the first place
i mean i get there's the odd AAA success lately like Bayonetta and Saints Row (imo) but even action games these days are either "look! its like GTA but not!" or "hmm yes another quicktime event, this was Good when it was in Shenmue when it was New and Not Done To Death like a decade ago".
Reasonable arguments to me: you want a game that doesn't feel like you're playing a mod of another game. Something with a more unique gameplay that isn't "run and shoot those things" or "run and jump over those things and mash X". Are there certain games you enjoy a lot or gameplay mechanics you want to see? Maybe we can recommend you some games that offer new experiences and aren't another "One Person Army" or "Press X to Not Die" game.
re: the art thing i'm loathe to call videogames art in any serious sense cos its just such a "competitive League of Legends should be an olympic sport" levels of weird nerd crap which i can't brook, its like calling tumblr a "safe space" or wearing a pokemon shirt irl 100% unironically
Among all groups you will find those who shout loudest. I'd think a majority of those who play League of Legends don't care either way if it should be "olympic" level or not.
As for the Pokémon shirt part, I'll generalize this to video game related shirts and argue that lots of people who wear the shirts do so because they're fans of the game. You're show your appreciation/love for the series or the shirt was sold at a good price.
In video games, as with all media, there are those who take it too far. I know some people who will vehemently argue that "The Great Gatsby" is the greatest novel of all time and will call you every name under the sun (primitive, an imbicile, etc.) for disagreeing. I know some people who think "Stairway to Heaven" is the pinnicle of all music and that every other song can't compare in the slightest. These are all extreme views though: most fans of Fitzgerald will say they love other novels and most Led Zeppelin fans will say they like other songs more. Just ignore the crazies.
-
beth flew into the sun
-
you took my "dont u ever feel disappointed after playin a game and completing it" and concluded on "if u feel guilty after playin a game u need a new hobby" and its just a little Sass flavoured, idk. we had a couple antagonistic clashes in the past and given how spiky and humourless people on here are i didn't know whether u took that as "puk user xhanatos, u slagged off videogames!!!!!! prepare to DIE //unsheathes sword//"
No it's nothing like that. I've clashed with nearly everyone here at somepoint, I'd be holding grudges left right and centre if I was unable to move on from them. But I am challenging the guilt thing, it just seems logical to me that you should probably move on from videogames if they only make you feel guilty. You don't have to, obviously, but it would seem you're missing some inherent enjoyment from it that most people experience.
im what gamers call A Filthy Casual and tbf im glad cos ive never seen good results when people decide to increase the amount of videogames in their life
I think it's possible to be both. I know people who play videogames constantly, it's their main hobby and they're still absolutely nice people, they don't feel they've ruined their life or anything like that.
see idk about you but the stuff that made old videogames good was that it was A New Niche. (this was a lot of rambling about pokemon game mechanics which i typed here but i got Ashamed about my huge carepost. however i am in awe into the clever programming tricks that went into that game ngl, and the sentiment i wrote about NES games being written in Assembly of all goddamn languages still stands too. its stuff i wish current games would do more of)
Yeah I'm familiar with assembly language, back then in Japan developers would have had to have been experienced with embedded chips to be programming SNES/NES games and IIRC 6502 and 65816 were much easier to use than 8086 ASM (Early form of intel x86 architecture used in the NEC PC-9801, a popular home computer in Japan). Thankfully the Game Boy's assembly language was a cross between intel's 8080 ASM and Zilog Z80 chip, both of which had been established for over 10 years prior and was familiar to videogame developers. The Zilog Z80 was used in the NEC PC-8801 which had a host of games from various well-established developers. There were quite a few Nintendo games on the 8801 were ported over to the SNES by Hudson Soft (Of Bomberman fame etc).
I don't think using strictly assembly language will make games any better though. Some of the best game designers are not the best developers and vice versa. Game design is an art all of itself, Satoshi Tajiri wrote a book on it not too long ago and mentioned how Pacman influenced him and Game Freak along with why Pacman was so well designed, it's pretty interesting and gives you a new perspective on how games are designed and what constitutes good design, most is completely outside of the realm of the actual coding. Assembly is still used today with C in Game development, but for performance reasons. It wouldn't necessarily make games any better, it would just squeeze more out of the hardware (which in many consoles, isn't actually completely utilized anyway).
i only reckon games are """""""""""""""""art""""""""""""""""" if they challenge preconceived notions of the field and do something that makes you go "whoa" a bit, much as "good art" and "good artists" do. or if it treads the same ground as others it does it a LOT better than everyone else. but not in dreadful bored white rich dude YBA way, like proper "uh is the person who painted this ok???? its good but i am Concerned" way
I don't think you have to necessarily break the mold to make a game worthy of art. TWEWY is a game which really doesn't massively break the mold. It's an RPG with its own unique elements and gimmicks (though this isn't unique to RPGs in of itself) and I would consider it art. The vision and artistic direction was really executed. It did urban fantasy in a unique way. I would say this is art even though it didn't break the mold in a way that is unusual for RPGs as even some of the worst RPGs are required to have a unique art style and gameplay elements, it's practically a USP for the RPG market.
re: the art thing i'm loathe to call videogames art in any serious sense cos its just such a "competitive League of Legends should be an olympic sport" levels of weird nerd crap which i can't brook, its like calling tumblr a "safe space" or wearing a pokemon shirt irl 100% unironically
This is something that seems a bit childish to me. I think perhaps you're more against the idea of calling videogames art because you don't want to be associated with certain people you don't like who do the same. I don't think today you can really call much in the videogame world to be 'weird nerd crap' anyway as it's such a huge market. Even E-Sports is pretty huge and in my experience, the types of people who play games like Counter Strike or League of Legends at tournament level are often not the same people who enjoyed videogames when they weren't accepted by the mainstream.
Without trying to sound like an armchair psychologist (as I'll be the first to admit I have zero experience in the field) it sounds to me like you're choosing not to call videogames art as an attempt to avoid appearing as a 'nerd' because you don't like the connotations that those people carry. Maybe this will offend you - and I don't mean to, but by posting on a Pokemon forum and playing Yume Nikki you're probably much more of a 'nerd' than the typical LoL competitor.
As for the Pokemon shirt thing, I think it's a similar issue. I wouldn't wear a Pokemon shirt unless it was a design I particularly liked and fitted with the rest of my clothes, but I don't think there's anything wrong in doing so unironically, it just a way of showing that you're a fan, even if you don't want to be associated with fans you don't like. I'm certain this isn't specific to you, as I think many Sonic fans feel similarly, but once again, this seems like an issue of being perhaps too self-conscious. Maybe fine in small doses, but not to the extent where it's causing a knee-jerk reaction of personal beliefs.
-
what are birds? we jsut dont know
-
I can see where Turner's coming from, because there's a certain stigma attached to gamers that people like me just really want to avoid (cause I rarely bring up that I play a bunch of video games for fun to people unless I know for certain they do the same), and it sounds like you want to avoid that. It just sounds like you're bringing a lot of personal stuff into this argument is I think what John is getting at, and using that to argue against games as art, rather than listing a bunch of reasons why games are or are not art.
I don't really understand what you're getting at with this quote:
re: the art thing i'm loathe to call videogames art in any serious sense cos its just such a "competitive League of Legends should be an olympic sport" levels of weird nerd crap which i can't brook, its like calling tumblr a "safe space" or wearing a pokemon shirt irl 100% unironically
I kind of took it as you assuming that we believe esports are what we consider art. I don't quite understand what the rest of that point is quite getting at; again, I'm not saying you're crazy or anything, but sometimes you just lose me. It also doesn't help I'm not really big with debates anymore like I used to be.
I don't consider two people playing video games competitively artistic so much as I believe the actual experience of immersion itself is the art.
xhanatos, what do you define as art?
-
beth shakes her cane and yells
-
honest opinion: i dont think videogames are really enough of a developed/established medium of sorts to be called Art in a traditional sense yet. they're only 30-40something years old? like atm maybe in the postmodernist "look at this as an establishment of people" way or the "look at the relics of the time" way but when you ask what people mean about Art and how it compares to people like Mucha and Picasso it turns into a bit of a mess.
So where is the cut-off age for something to become art? And why is that not arbitrary? I mean, movies are a product of the 20th Century, as is various forms of computer aided art including many forms of music.
but gaming is still developing as a Thing, i mean its still a bit in the Dark Ages re: women (gamergate)
From the facts that I've looked at, whilst Gamergate has been co-opted by your typical right wing misogynistic 4chan user (who still clings to some 2008 era 'Anonymous is legion' idea of the site) they have raised many good points and the criticism from sites like tumblr and the Gawker network has basically failed embarrassingly at refuting many of these points. Once again, I think you're judging without thinking, you're saying "X is associated with a certain type of person I don't like, therefore I musn't agree with X under any circumstances". I don't like a lot of the people who consider themselves 'Gamergaters' but that doesn't mean I can throw their points under the bus, I have to look at them partially and judge them on what they actually are rather than the people who believe them.
i just aint had a good experience with these people at all. anyone who knows anything about how awful the furry community can be once ur in it (the drama and the he-said she-said crap and the Actual Sociopaths) knows what im on about. hilariously i was never even a furry but this is a story for another day
Maybe so, but that's not actually a relevant retort - it doesn't hold any water. If you want to believe that videogames aren't art because you don't like gamers, then fine - it's your life. But coming to the Debate forum and trying to use that as a justification is just going to get torn down because it's completely illogical.
long story short i am not good at expressing myself (plz stop worrying about insinuating i am crazy i have made quite successful peace with that concept during the last few months, its totes ok.)
puk is kind of a Social Refuge from people who dont entirely get on well with Normals for one reason or another (its why i dont try to go TOO hard on ragging on people here anymore, some people here still have gross problems and the lgbt drama in the past was Really Disgusting in how it was handled, but as far as the userbase goes id caution some of you are on here cos they dont really get why society does a thing the way it does or dont quite "fit in", and this is a place where said nerds can congregate, if you get what i am delicately trying to allude to here.)
I don't know, pretty much all of my friends on this site and all of the moderation team get on with 'normals' just fine. Many have jobs, are in university and enjoy social occasions. If you want to give some examples of members here who you believe don't integrate into society well then feel free but I can't think of any off the top of my head.
like idk if you asked me for an example i'd point to sonic music as an Art Of The Time but thats just such a stupid and dorky thing to admit, i cannot say "i think scrap brain zone is a timeless classic of the ages" without laughing at how ridic i sound, if you get me.
I know I'm repeating myself, but once again - the attitude here is self-conscious before everything else. There's nothing wrong with believing what you've just written up there. If that's what you believe then that's what you believe, statements that might seem controversial or laughable become less so when the people who believe them have no shame in admitting so and are willing to make the case as to why they think so. It'll never stop being 'stupid and dorky' so long as you keep telling yourself that.
and i do tend to agree with Roger Ebert on the point that people try and attach the Art label onto videogames to somehow legitimise what is a hobby/pasttime in response to people going "lmao videogames are for children????"
I think this sort of argument comes from a very sweeping generalization. First of all, videogames aren't all for children as the demographic of many games is 18+, which is adult territory and I don't believe that all 18+ games are part of some kind of marketing conspiracy either. Secondly, this makes the assumption that everyone who plays games or considers videogames as art are unable to admit enjoying something for children without feeling self-conscious - not so. Take for example Cartoons, are cartoons for children or are they art? The answer is that they can be both. I enjoy some cartoons which are widely considered to be art, I also enjoy cartoons which are nothing more than entertainment for children and I don't have any reservations in doing so.
If you apply this to videogames - is Fireman Sam the videogame for the Nintendo DS art? No, it's children's entertainment. In this scenario, I don't think there is even a mutual exclusivity between the two. Is Pokemon Red art, or is it entertainment for children? It's both. The story is for children, the demographic is for children, but the gameplay is nothing short of artful. The music is art. The Pokemon designs are art, the application of the concept and vision is art.
its like calling hobbies like knitting or lego Art if you get what i mean exactly, in a loose way it can be, but if people drive the "yes! they are art" end of the argument too hard it just kind of smells ever so slightly of a sort of pretentiousness???? im communicating myself badly here but i hope you understand what im getting at.
No, and you probably know what I'm going to say about this too if you've read the rest of the post. I'd argue that the act of knitting and building things from lego are crafts, the outcome is (or could be) art. I have no care for lego, I've just never been interested in it, but it's still a sculpture.
-
beth throws her emergency underwear at a crowd of people
-
would you consider Game Design a craft?
Yes, why would it not be?
You're bringing up either unsubstantiated claims or saying stuff like this:
if i was asked at gunpoint i'd jabber something about "something which leaves a long lasting impression on you through a creative media that doesnt tend to degrade or become tacky with time" as some sort of non-committed answer
but then that opens up the stage to ideas such as "maybe people personally define Videogames As Art on their own platforms"
like idk if you asked me for an example i'd point to sonic music as an Art Of The Time but thats just such a stupid and dorky thing to admit, i cannot say "i think scrap brain zone is a timeless classic of the ages" without laughing at how ridic i sound, if you get me.
Which either inherently contradicts your argument or it's just getting to the point of personal opinion. There are people who think Scrap Brain Zone is artistic, and I don't know why that makes you snicker.
Scrap Brain Zone might be cool for some to look at, designed incredibly well, or have good music to add onto it, but the medium itself has many very compelling games that make you think. Some are rather shallow and some, like for instance Spec Ops: The Line and even the Metal Gear Solid series have the ability to make you think. And MGS1/2/3 are still played by a lot of people to this day.
If anything, the medium has evolved as a form of art, and as it stands there's bad examples of art and good examples of art in video games.
It sounds like all you're really doing is saying "this is my personal opinion and I don't want the idea of art to be associated with these nerds who I freaking hate." Yeah, some of my favorite games have absolute assholes playing them, just look at the Fire Emblem community. Fandoms in general are terrible. That is not something that influences what is or isn't art, because a lot of musicians and pen&paper artists can be elitist douchebags in the same way gamers are.
And again, not to be a dick and I don't know if I was just being super subtle or not, but your writing style is just very hard to follow. I'm not sure of the exact circumstances, because I can also be incoherent at times even when I triple or quadruple check a post, but you need to be able to word things in a way in which people can follow.
-
so you do honestly believe its "about ethics in videogame journalism"?.
and ur saying that the "other side" to gamergate is tumblr and Gawker which are horrendous and Wrong places as far as feminist discourse goes. i dont wanna sound snippy here but you maybe have to look at what proper feminists are doing (something tumblr and gawker do not do) cos gawker and tumblr are both garbage resorts and you've p much bought straight into the gamers narrative of ad homineming and cherrypicking the counterpoints to gamergate to make their point more "valid" somehow
Actually yes it is about ethics in videogame journalism regardless of how many people claiming to be a part of it do horrible things. I'm not cherrypicking the Gawker network because the very thing that caused it in the first place was a scandal on the Gawker network. The whole thing started because of Kotaku, which is part of the Gawkwer Network.
Secondly, I don't think it has anything to do with 'feminism' nor do I think tumblr is necessarily a bad place for feminism. I have many feminist friends on tumblr who I happen to think are very balanced and sensible. However, it's true to say that the anti-gamergate rhetoric on tumblr is embarassing, the gawker response to gamergate is embarassing and 3 of the most vocal 'feminist' mouthpieces against Gamergate have all embarrassed themselves beyond belief.
im a bit disappointed that there's no mention here of how gamers were sending death threats to any female journalist who dared to point out that gamers are spoilt children at times, but when a male journalist does it - nothing happens.
Once again, I'm not going to deny that there are plenty of misogynists who coopted Gamergate, but it's certainly not the 'greater narrative'.
you're putting words into my mouth here, this was me spinning off about why i dont like Nerds or Nerd Fandoms. admittedly ive gone a bit schizo in this topic but you've been reading my other posts, right? why do you still think that my sole point about "videogames? art" is "no, cos most nerds suck" ive developed past that a bit
unless you're trying to trap me in some sort of Generalisations Logic trick im having trouble understand what you're doing here
I'm not putting words into your mouth, the only argument you've given against videogames being considered art is because you think that it's associated with a certain type of gamer you don't like. That's a generalisation. It's not a 'logic trick', it's exactly what you've put across in your posts.
stop being oblique, you know exactly what im getting at.
well, im not sure if you do exactly cos the response to what i said probably shouldn't be "xhanatos! name and shame!" cos come on dude. thats rude. you know exactly what i mean when i say we all have pokemon as a bit of a Social Haven. i literally said im trying to be delicate with this concept.
No I don't know what you're getting at and I think it's rude in the first place that you would literally come out and say:
this is an awkward topic to bring up cos puk is kind of a Social Refuge from people who dont entirely get on well with Normals for one reason or another
This is the debate forum, if you're going to make a claim like that then back it up with some evidence or examples. I can give you plenty of examples that suggest the opposite. This forum is one of the most socially adjusted Pokemon communities on the internet, certainly nothing like what you seem to be suggesting.
i like your gusto in the "dont feel stupid and self conscious doing anything!!!" but the Shame thing happens for a kind of Social Skills reason. like can you honestly say you would stand up in front of your class and say "i love pokemon!" and do a show and tell about ur EV trained pokemon? unironically?
Plenty of people if not everybody at work knows I like Pokemon, knows that I'm obsessed with it and knows that I got Alpha Sapphire at a midnight release. All of them are too old for Pokemon and have kids of their own but they all have their own quirks and hobbies - sci-fi B movies, World of Warcraft etc. It's just about being an adult, people have got better things to do than to point the 'nerd' finger around.
ok how's this: im very proud/secure of the stuff i do in my own private time and at home (one thing im very adamant on) but there is some of it i wouldn't be caught dead doing in public/in front of others at uni/in my workplace. is this an acceptable way for you to view how i do these things? "me" at home with close friends who accept me for who i am, and the public "me", and how i kind of want a bit of a divide between the two.
That's a bit different from your beliefs though. I'm not expecting you to rock up at work in a Pikachu costume, but when you're literally changing your beliefs because of these social barriers then the only victim is yourself. You don't have to go around parading that videogames are art to believe it, you don't even have to bring it up.
in that strawmanny way that ends up happening in these arguments im going to play devils advocate a little here and ask why you Defended videogames as not for kids, instead of going "eh, so what if its a kids game." like you did later on in this paragraph. especially since you bring up pokemon later on which is literally a franchise for kids.
What I'm saying is that 'videogames' as a generalised medium are not specifically 'for kids'. They're not in the same ballpark as Barbie or Action Man. However, they can have different demographics. I'm not saying at all that kids videogames are not artistic, I'm saying that ANYTHING can be artistic and anything can be made purely for entertainment purposes, no matter which audience it is aimed at.
Anyone who tries to use the 'Videogames aren't art because gamers don't want to admit they have a child's hobby' is completely wrong. There is plenty of art/demographic overlap and most gamers have no problems admitting they play children's games.
thats why i groan loudly when this argument pops up.
Once again, this is the debate forum. You don't have to reply if you don't like the subject matter.
would you consider Game Design a craft?
It depends which aspect of it. Game design is not game development. Game design from an ideological aspect is an art, physically storyboarding is a craft. Conceptualising difficulty curves or gameplay mechanics is an art, implementing them in pseudocode and putting in the mathematical formulas to meet these mechanics before they reach the development stage (for example, damage calculating etc.) is a craft.
Game Development is largely a craft, writing elegant code can be artful. There are so many shades of grey.
-
eh, im throwing the towel in.
can i ask whether this is a "talk about and discuss Issues and have a nice chat" debate forum or one of those weird "Debate Class" type of debate forums where we all do it literally and by the book. you know, with all the Rules and Opening Statements and Contrapositive of the Implicit Notion stuff and No Derails Allowed.
because if its the latter then ugh ive made a huge mistake getting involved in the first place lmao cos i honestly dont know whats going on here, i thought we were seeing eye to eye a little re: Art but those replies just made me wonder if either a) im in a worse state than i thought or b) you're not understanding what im typing or c) we're playing towards completely different things here
sorry if this looks a little flouncey but i need to bow out here for my own good.
And again, not to be a dick and I don't know if I was just being super subtle or not, but your writing style is just very hard to follow. I'm not sure of the exact circumstances, because I can also be incoherent at times even when I triple or quadruple check a post, but you need to be able to word things in a way in which people can follow.
sorry but you are actually being a bit of dick here. i'll lay it out for you because you're not getting the Delicate Hints but on top of being a literal spacko/dyslexic (i have posted about this before) like im gonna quote choice bits of myself here and hope you Get It
i just admitted i was Actually Crazy a bit and im just sorry it makes my typing and prose incomprehensible and an Effort to read at the moment while they take 4 billion years to Assess me and get me recovering
im a bit Mental rn and totally aware of it but in that 'i dunno what to do about it other than wait for treatment' way
unfortunetly for me that means makin terrible disjointed schizo posts on the internet when i can only sleep for a handful of hours at a time
i apologise for Last Night Me's raucous and loquacious opinions
-
can i ask whether this is a "talk about and discuss Issues and have a nice chat" debate forum or one of those weird "Debate Class" type of debate forums where we all do it literally and by the book. you know, with all the Rules and Opening Statements and Contrapositive of the Implicit Notion stuff and No Derails Allowed.
I'm not sure, because I definitely thought it was the former. I don't think Turner was making anything formal.
It doesn't have to be a formal debate to point out logical fallacies, because I'm really not seeing much of an explanation behind why you don't think it's art. You keep saying it's laughable how it can be considered art, you keep saying things like "do you honestly think this" or "do you honestly think that" and trying to word it in a way that makes the notion sound stupid, or just complaining about how poisonous some gaming communities are. These really aren't anything to do with the subject at hand; you're entitled to the idea that it's not a form of art, but if you're going to get into some sort of discourse about it, you better be ready to use some facts to back than up rather than some wishy-washy "I don't really think the idea works."
Then stuff like this:
i like your gusto in the "dont feel stupid and self conscious doing anything!!!" but the Shame thing happens for a kind of Social Skills reason. like can you honestly say you would stand up in front of your class and say "i love pokemon!" and do a show and tell about ur EV trained pokemon? unironically?
I don't see where the situation would come up, and I'll bite a bit by saying that the majority of people I know, IRL and online, are well aware that I'm a Pokemon fan. As for the rest, that's some sort of exaggeration, I'm not gonna rave about Pokemon to people who don't care.
Finally, can you summarize why you just don't view video games as art or at least what your view is? I think this is getting lost in the off-topic-ness, because there are sincerely times where your point is just lost when you talk about poisonous communities and something about "stupid nerd crap."
sorry but you are actually being a bit of dick here. i'll lay it out for you because you're not getting the Delicate Hints but on top of being a literal spacko/dyslexic (i have posted about this before) like im gonna quote choice bits of myself here and hope you Get It
my b, I understand the dyslexia but I didn't know it affected your posts that much. I just know that sylar and some others I've seen on the internet had a similar way of writing and it made me wonder if it had something to do just style or what. They're not incomprehensible, it just requires some digging sometimes.
-
t doesn't have to be a formal debate to point out logical fallacies, because I'm really not seeing much of an explanation behind why you don't think it's art. You keep saying it's laughable how it can be considered art, you keep saying things like "do you honestly think this" or "do you honestly think that" and trying to word it in a way that makes the notion sound stupid, or just complaining about how poisonous some gaming communities are. These really aren't anything to do with the subject at hand; you're entitled to the idea that it's not a form of art, but if you're going to get into some sort of discourse about it, you better be ready to use some facts to back than up rather than some wishy-washy "I don't really think the idea works."
if you want to know my honest and slightly less manic Opinion then i think we have to concretely nail down an agreed objective standard of Art before we can go "are videogames art", which is the fundamental problem. there is no centrally agreed idea of Art we can even base this on, imo.
i tend to see art as a Sustained Effort on a craft of some sort producing a nice piece of something whether its a jumper with a Custom Design or a painting or a sculpture etc. an effort of labour and love in a medium of some kind. which counts stuff like Good n Neat Indie Games and well done Kids Games but too many indie people are way too pretentious and try way too hard when making their "arty videogames" and it shows.
i honestly dont know why i wrote a ton of garbage about sonic and Assembly and all that crap, and im loathe to commit to an opinion any harder than the above cos i will admit i dont even know what i consider art myself these days.
weird nerd grudges for people who are militant about videogames aside i honestly think the question is fundamentally flawed from the get-go. no-one can agree on what art is, so asking "are videogames art" is a shaky premise before its even started, if you get me. ive just done this argument with nerds before and it didn't end well hence why i was falling down the stairs blathering to myself in this topic.
this is about as simple as i can write it without going off on a really long ramble again so i hope this makes sense.
my b, I understand the dyslexia but I didn't know it affected your posts that much. I just know that sylar and some others I've seen on the internet had a similar way of writing and it made me wonder if it had something to do just style or what. They're not incomprehensible, it just requires some digging sometimes.
the dyslexia doesn't help a lot but nah i ought to come clean and tell you things have taken a twist towards the bipolar/prodromal schizophrenic over the last few months hence why i am not making a lot of sense AND typing 100000000 words. i suspect its schizoaffective (bipolar and schizophrenia's awkward lovechild) but we'll see when i get Seen by the consultant. schizo stuff is a pain cos it will usually Get Worse in your 20s and with little warning and very quickly, as it kind of has done with me, haha
its a long boring story which i dont want to go into here but its been a bit of a weird few months and i dont wax lyrical about all this cos it doesn't make for funny posting on puk dot net. i was hinting around it cos everyone got their own ideas about ~##~#~#~crazy people~#~#~##~, hence my ramblings about "dont you keep certain things sequestered away from the public eye tho?" cos i kind of have to.
whats annoying is NHS stuff moves awfully slow but i REALLY wish they would hurry up and get me Seen and get me on some sort of Proper Meds or whatever cos i just wanna get my life back
anyway worlds tiniest violin solo over, thats p much why i am just sort of going a bit Mad here in this topic a little and malfunctioning, haha.
getting into a big discussion about videogames and art was a really bad idea especially when i am Manic and Neurotic as hell and have had Bad Experiences in the past with this sort of thing
so i p much do apologise for my weirdness here, im still learning how to deal with this whole thing lmao
-
It's fine, I was just trying to get a feel for what you were thinking, because debates have this awful tendency to just completely diverge into a bunch of unrelated tangents when we're really ultimately trying to argue one general sentiment.
It sounds like the indie games that you don't like, from your perspective, are just not good art. There are a bunch of AAA games that fall flat too. The same thing with all other forms of art, you'll like a few things out of the myriad of things available. I can't stand like 90% of all music but it's still art, I just don't see it as good art whereas someone else might. something something eye of the beholder. I wonder if your arguments with them were about specific games and, in particular, attacking indies (because many people out there - especially the "pretentious nerd" types - out there are heavily in favor of anything indie and don't like mainstream AAA titles).
its a long boring story which i dont want to go into here but its been a bit of a weird few months and i dont wax lyrical about all this cos it doesn't make for funny posting on puk dot net. i was hinting around it cos everyone got their own ideas about ~##~#~#~crazy people~#~#~##~, hence my ramblings about "dont you keep certain things sequestered away from the public eye tho?" cos i kind of have to.
Not the thread for it, but this reminds me of the story of the NFL player Brandon Marshall (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Marshall), who was considered a cancer to any team he joined until some point not long before he was traded to the Chicago Bears. He "came out" as having borderline personality disorder, and it's pretty crazy to see fans take a dump on him for using that to "justify" his actions or whatnot without realizing that he isn't "justifying" his actions so much as explaining them (because there's no way you can justify them - you can only understand why they happened). It's crazy how much people actually trivialize things.
I thought your typing was a quirk for a while but now I have a much better understanding. I won't bother you about this again and I hope everything turns out well.
-
It's fine, I was just trying to get a feel for what you were thinking, because debates have this awful tendency to just completely diverge into a bunch of unrelated tangents when we're really ultimately trying to argue one general sentiment.
It sounds like the indie games that you don't like, from your perspective, are just not good art. There are a bunch of AAA games that fall flat too. The same thing with all other forms of art, you'll like a few things out of the myriad of things available. I can't stand like 90% of all music but it's still art, I just don't see it as good art whereas someone else might. something something eye of the beholder. I wonder if your arguments with them were about specific games and, in particular, attacking indies (because many people out there - especially the "pretentious nerd" types - out there are heavily in favor of anything indie and don't like mainstream AAA titles).
yeah, no worries, ive got a weird and tempermental taste in games which is half the reason im such a dick about it i reckon and why when i find a good game its like "oh." when ive completed it
like hilariously i said it somewhere in one of my replies but im attempting to piece together a few games myself so ive been trying to keep an eye out for Good Game Mechanics etc. and i just get really critical whenever im playing and can't just enjoy a platformer for a platformer's sake "the pacing of incentives in this level is not keeping me sustained at all" "this tutorial level is trying to give me plot at the same time as im trying to do a complicated command, this is poor planning" "this is a nice control system but i wish the game author would stop pointing out how clever he is, you present it to the player and let them interpret it" and so on
if i were coherent i'd probably love to be a playtester but dont get me started on how i feel about playing videogames for a career lmao ive already gone off on one about Nerds
Not the thread for it, but this reminds me of the story of the NFL player Brandon Marshall (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Marshall), who was considered a cancer to any team he joined until some point not long before he was traded to the Chicago Bears. He "came out" as having borderline personality disorder, and it's pretty crazy to see fans take a dump on him for using that to "justify" his actions or whatnot without realizing that he isn't "justifying" his actions so much as explaining them (because there's no way you can justify them - you can only understand why they happened). It's crazy how much people actually trivialize things.
I thought your typing was a quirk for a while but now I have a much better understanding. I won't bother you about this again and I hope everything turns out well.
thank u, and also thank u for understanding
i am just sorry it came out here and in this way haha. ive edited my posts cos im just kind of embarassed about letting Mad Me out the cage and gettin into this mess in the first place
i also agree re: the NFL dude, mental illness stigma is the absolute worst though and it makes me so upset when people make fun or go "URGHHHHHHHH WEIRDO!" "CRAZY" etc. when its obviously not their fault, and it just makes me want to wave a wand and make these people have a night where they're like, convinced everyone is spying on them and watching them and have planted bugs in their house and crap, just so that they see what its like.
ngl tho the way things have gone the last few years i think when im better im gonna have to go into mental health and try to do my bit to reverse the Stigma of mental illness
i think its why i try to backseat Tough Love bully people on here cos i see them doing things that got me laughed at by people and made fun of and dragged thru the mud and im like "NOOOOOOOOOOO save urself! u still have a chance!" but i keep forgetting that a pokemon forum probably aint the place for unasked Xhanatos Life Guidance, and also some people just gotta learn the Nerd Lessons for themselves???
but yeah im just waiting on appointments and with luck i'll be seen by people soon and get new meds so here's hoping! either that or i just go "sod it" and have my brain cut out and thrown in a lake but yes, thank u again for being decent about it.
-
It doesn't have to be a formal debate to point out logical fallacies, because I'm really not seeing much of an explanation behind why you don't think it's art. You keep saying it's laughable how it can be considered art, you keep saying things like "do you honestly think this" or "do you honestly think that" and trying to word it in a way that makes the notion sound stupid, or just complaining about how poisonous some gaming communities are. These really aren't anything to do with the subject at hand; you're entitled to the idea that it's not a form of art, but if you're going to get into some sort of discourse about it, you better be ready to use some facts to back than up rather than some wishy-washy "I don't really think the idea works."
Yes, basically this. The Debate forum isn't intended to be robotic or like a court trial, but the reason this place was created with stricter rules on debate was because Debates originally on RR were trainwrecks that would split the community and perhaps worse, spread the notion that the popular opinion was the true one, be it strawmanning or "I'm right because I'm offended".
if you want to know my honest and slightly less manic Opinion then i think we have to concretely nail down an agreed objective standard of Art before we can go "are videogames art", which is the fundamental problem. there is no centrally agreed idea of Art we can even base this on, imo.
weird nerd grudges for people who are militant about videogames aside i honestly think the question is fundamentally flawed from the get-go. no-one can agree on what art is, so asking "are videogames art" is a shaky premise before its even started
This is fine. I don't think many people here would disagree with that, in fact I think almost everyone here has basically echoed this sentiment in their own ways. As much as we can't quantify art, we all feel that we know it when we see it.
i think its why i try to backseat Tough Love bully people on here cos i see them doing things that got me laughed at by people and made fun of and dragged thru the mud and im like "NOOOOOOOOOOO save urself! u still have a chance!" but i keep forgetting that a pokemon forum probably aint the place for unasked Xhanatos Life Guidance, and also some people just gotta learn the Nerd Lessons for themselves???
I think the problem with this is that it assumes that everyone who is either proud of their hobby or doesn't have any problems in making it public has lived a sheltered life and has never faced severe bullying for doing so. Not everyone who has been bullied, assaulted, dragged through the mud and made fun of is automatically scared into secrecy or trauma, many people here have already had the 'Nerd lessons' beaten into them many times over and still don't let it dictate their lives - some of the older members had already had it before Pokemon was popular. It's not really tough love, it's just preaching to the converted by assuming the identity of the sort of person they've had more than enough experience with and do not like. It frankly comes across as trollish.