Video games as art
Okay, for a while now, ever since the possibility of me becoming a literature scholar entered my mind, I have always wondered if I could integrate video games into my research. I am a firm believer that video games bring their own unique attributes that can be exploited to make a wonderful artistic experience, and that they could even be considered literature if the designers attempt to make them so.
The reason I'm posting this is because I found an article by a literary scholar about Shadow of the Colossus.
This really excites me, because it means that there are already people out there who are considering video games a potential artistic medium. And not only are they considering, they are being published and working at Brown. Pretty cool.
I think the article gets cut short at the end.. I feel like it's just getting started when it ends, but whatevs. The convergence of storyline and interactivity discussed here is exactly what I've been theorizing in my head for a while now. A lot of games, like the Legacy of Kain series, present an amazing story, but do so wholly detached from the gameplay experience. They're relying on a purely narrative structure that has already been perfected over hundreds of years in books and then tweaked with visuals through a century of movies.
But this paper illuminates a pathway by which story and interactivity can work together to create a unique experience that can't be found anywhere, not in books, or movies, or music, or graphic novels, or anything.
I really hope that there are enough people out there who make games that aim for this experience, and I hope that, if I do become a scholar, I'll be able to write about it.
The reason I'm posting this is because I found an article by a literary scholar about Shadow of the Colossus.
This really excites me, because it means that there are already people out there who are considering video games a potential artistic medium. And not only are they considering, they are being published and working at Brown. Pretty cool.
I think the article gets cut short at the end.. I feel like it's just getting started when it ends, but whatevs. The convergence of storyline and interactivity discussed here is exactly what I've been theorizing in my head for a while now. A lot of games, like the Legacy of Kain series, present an amazing story, but do so wholly detached from the gameplay experience. They're relying on a purely narrative structure that has already been perfected over hundreds of years in books and then tweaked with visuals through a century of movies.
But this paper illuminates a pathway by which story and interactivity can work together to create a unique experience that can't be found anywhere, not in books, or movies, or music, or graphic novels, or anything.
I really hope that there are enough people out there who make games that aim for this experience, and I hope that, if I do become a scholar, I'll be able to write about it.
Comments
And kukopanki, why do you think video games cannot be art? I wonder if we're using art the same way. I also consider profound books, movies, paintings, sculpture, and graphic novels to be art, because each is capable of conveying a profound thought or message. And though it could be argued that no game has YET to achieved the level of art, I think it's definitely possible. Each medium has its own specific trait that should be utilized in order to make it medium-specific art. For video games, it's the interactivity. I think that a video game could become profoundly artistic if it combined a compelling storyline while using the interactivity of the medium to involve the player in creating or realizing the message. Something like that.
So it's probably just a language issue. I just don't have a better word for "books, movies, graphic novels, paintings, sculptures, and video games used in an artistic and compelling fashion."
Also, I think there have been some games that have made baby steps toward artistic merit... Shadow of the Colossus gets the player into the mindset of the wanderer, and even though it wasn't totally great in practice, Indigo Prophecy tried really hard, and I think it's a step in the right direction.
I liked how the world becomes more complex and difficult to navigate the further downward you travel, whereas you can simply run in a straight line and never touch an obstacle for the character's entire lifespan. It's a choice between the familiar and easy but boring, or the exciting and new but difficult and dangerous (lingering in the mazes can cost precious time without progressing, and therefore without gaining points).
By a definition of storyline, Legacy of Kain series is definitely up there, as that is definitely a game that revolves around the story with intermittent game play. Although, in Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver, I had to force myself through the mediocre and sometimes frustrating play just to advance the engaging story. The most extreme of these would be Xenosaga, especially Episode I, with its 45 minute or more cutscenes (although I made the most and typically managed to prepare meals just before finishing a dungeon and initiating another movie sequence).
Or if you want to go by means of interactivity, then look at the Elder Scrolls Morrowind and Oblivion. The characterization is made by you; you can be a holy avenger for the light of good, or you can systematically kill people for no better reason than being bored. The storyline is decent, but by far not the best. However, it has plenty of other aspects that can be considered art.
And, there is the Madden series. EA has marketing down to a fucking art to be able to convince people to drop $50 bucks every year on new installments of games of simple rules and minimal thought, especially considering that they are games that are meant to be *played for real*, and they are primarily marketed to the kids who teased kids like me in elementary school for playing games. As someone who works in marketing, I can only look in awe at someone who performs this profession so very well.
Discuss.
If you don't know what is, do not look it up. Trust me.
Hee hee.
Anyway, I think the only way to make Hamelin's statement true is if you define art as "anything that stimulates the pleasure center in our brain and is not directly related to survival." Most of the things we do outside of our need for survival all come back to making ourselves feel good in some way. Sometimes the means by which we do that is complex and indirect, like volunteering. You feel good through volunteering because your intellect feels that helping others makes your actions noble, and since it is laudable to do noble actions in our society (generally), it feels good. This stimulation can also be direct, such as World of Warcraft, which is similar to the experiment where rats had switches directly wired to the pleasure center of their brains, except the switch takes the form of endless quest rewards, leveling up, and uber lewt.
With that in mind, I think that art is something that stimulates the pleasure center very indirectly and very abstractly by using a large range of cognitive functions. So simple stuff, while still pleasurable, doesn't quite fit the mold.
I also think that acclimation plays a large part in what people call art. I am an English major, and it's safe to say that I've read and studied literature more deeply than a good portion of the population. Because I've been exposed to so much and have been instructed in how to see the strengths and flaws in a text, it takes more to impress me. I know what can be done, so my threshold for wonder is higher. I think that applies to a lot of things in life, and so what people consider profound will be different depending on what they have already experienced.
Woo, tangent. Maybe. I feel like I rambled. Oh well.
Oh, and Mario, very sneaky, and well done. XD
The best part is, that was on a cover of Time Magazine. The similarity to Goatse was just an awesome coincidence!
Oh Mario, you are just the living end.