The gameboard in candyland is the art. It is designed with the purpose of getting the kids who are playing the game excited to reach goal. It is art designed to evoke an emotion. Just like the expression in Metal Gear Solid is Kojima's narrative. (despite Kojima claiming his games are not art...he is wrong) By contrast, the gameboard in the game Axis and Allies is not expression. Although there is some artwork on the board, it is mainly used as a functional map and a navigational tool for the positioning of one's armies. On a simple checkers board, the checkers and board are simply functional and are not created with aesthetics in mind or that thought is secondary and trivial. With many chess boards, the board and pieces themselves are each individual pieces of art. The chess pieces are each carved or shaped with specific aesthetic and artistic appeal and an expensive chessboard can itself be carved and shaped from aesthetically pleasing materials chosen express beauty. (not that checkers couldn't be designed that way, but most companies don't bother) and to go even further, the rules in chess are designed to take advantage of the players imagination. There are many different styles of play and a good player will develop his own imaginative style and this could be considered a form of expression (in how they play)
Yep. That's why I mention team sports separately and state that they are probably not art. I wouldn't really consider race car driving or horse racing or Track and Field art either.Quote:
By the way, the sports you mentioned are more similar to dance competitions than sports. It's all based on judged scores.
You may not follow the mindset and that's fine, but the art community does not agree. Any medium that can express creativity, philosophy, belief, thought, etc can be considered art. Considered. Time changes, just like art. Art often times expresses the world we live in today, and how to express that message changes depending on the era. So who know 100 years from now how they might express art. Paintings and sculptures will probably still be around, but there will probably be new avenues and new methods.
i acknowledged other 'views' first and foremost in my post, even yours. im well aware that others have differing views, especially when considering "ART".
but, yes, my view was more factual than yours....as i said, your facts were erroneous.
Art, in its "original" (this is your choice of words) form was considered anything from science to craftsmanship.
it, however, is a fruitless endeavour perusing any sort of debate on the matter. you don't seem to care much for art, yet insist on pushing an invalid argument....yes, i have read all of your posts. even the ones with NuSoardGraphite.
Sheesh! We're arguing over the concept of 'ART' now?! Really!!
All I have to say is, NO FRIGGIN SHIT! Yeah it's an art form. The creative minds who come up with these thing (except a certain fps among others nowadays) took a huge load of creative prowess, power, imagination (which a shitton of people severely lack these days) Despite certain mindsets and opinions it IS art, just like sculptor to movies to painting, architecture................
i thought it was a art... sosad ;_;
art is a pinnacle of the utmost human experience. it should be injected into everything commercial.
Damn, every time I read Sir_Scuds posts, I picture Lester Freamon saying it like he would in The Wire.
Stupid two-choice poll. This is not a yes-or-no question!
You cant make a modern game without art, a game is made from three basic elements consisting of design, coding and art. takeaway one of them and you cant make a modern game. are games art? yes, is playing a game art? no.
you picked one thing of mine that I went a bit overboard on and you get so worked up over it, it's rather funny. Hey, I guess your right after all, In fact, I will from now on agree with everything you say in the future, okay? consider me your "yes man" because after all your opinions are obviously fact. What is so lame about your post towards mine is that it was nothing more then hypocritical, period.:icon_thumleft:
also, I didn't miss the point, I made your point very clear and you also made your point very clear. usually people say they missed the point when in a debate when they clearly didn't, it's just a "flip" in arguments people use to TRY to put the debate/argument into their favor. LOL @ "I missed the point". oh shit man, i definitely didn't.
fine, if you want this then i will indulge...
first off, care to elaborate on how im being hypocritical?
on a debate of the arts.
your points, quotes from your posts:
by the way, when I go to art museums, I don't see people doing flips, making video games, etc
When I sit and record music all day, I see music, not art
if im being hypocritical, then your being contradictory.Quote:
paintings and sculptures are pure 100% expression and creation.
you cannot limit expression to paintings and sculptures, how you can say otherwise when dancers use their body to express themselves, or a pianist writes a piece to convey his feelings for an object close to him? are they not expressing themselves? what does the Scream or the Starry night express to you? these are two incredibly famous pieces ..are they any more comprehensible to you as they are to me?
also, i think its time you go to a art museum. rather then making the assumption that all you'll find in there is paintings and sculptures. i've been to many, many art museums and i can tell you first hand that is not all you will find.
as a point for future, i will always refer to how you so emphatically stipulated in your first post that you knew what art was, and art was only "Paintings and Sculptures" as was the "original" meaning, implying that any view other than this was purely ridiculous. the point which you missed several times now is that this is wrong...
btw, before you continue to make assumptions about the weight this places on me. take note, i couldn't care less. i have some free time so why not?
Ever created a level in LittleBigPlanet that other people enjoyed? Then congratulations, you are an artist in the medium of videogames.
I contradicted nothing in my posts. but whatever floats your boat. lol I just look at paintings and sculptures to be art, that's all. if you don't, then it's fine, but I do. see how easy that is? if you want video games to be art, fine, you can believe it's art. me on the other hand I don't work that way. plus I am not one to say "that's his art" either.
these are my opinions. again grow up and deal with the fact that other people have a different take on certain things. it's honestly not that hard and yes you are getting bent out of shape from this discussion and it's rather silly but quite funny at the same time.
also, I do go to art museums and I don't see video games there. whatever you keep on commenting to me about and how I post you should do the same. Also, I will put you on ignore because I can see where your posting is going. my posts were clear and I made them more clear with other posts yet you seem to have a hard time grasping people's opinions and come off very rude. not only that but you just can't settle. /ignored
your very first post is by and large a contradiction of the notion you are currently clinging to....
if anything, i should be the one adding you to an ignore list, at every opportunity you've gone out of your way to slant me in some way, yet it upsets you when i offer a rebuttal? :lol:
getting sour with age are we? :snicker
you've done little to add to any sort of discussion and have clearly struggled to maneuver your way out of a situation you go your self into.
i've even asked you for a debate on the very singular idea you call art? yet you ignored it :roll:
but as i said earlier, it was you who accused everyone else of being wrong in their definition of art... you are the instigator here buddy...
IMO I wouldn't call games art, I would class it is a form of entertainment