Are Video Games Art?

[BinniLee]

Baldur's gate the best RPG in the world (Which is über 1337 BTW) has a specific plot. In my humble opinion, Baldur's gate is the pinacle of video games and art in the highest sense.

About the game: (Wikipedia)

The story follows the player character as he grows up following the cataclysmic Time of Troubles, and it puts an emphasis on character development through dialogue and battle. The game rewards the player character according to his or her moral choices, in the spirit of the game's opening quotation, credited to Friedrich Nietzsche “ He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster... when you gaze long into the abyss the abyss also gazes into you...

The game was programmed within the licensed ruleset of the Forgotten Realms role-playing setting, using the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 2nd edition rules, though various elements from the ruleset were modified to allow the game to be executed in real-time. Each character is in constant action, while the game can be paused at any time, and with the use of various auto-pause options it is possible to simulate turn based gameplay. The game is separated into seven chapters intercut with interludes of spoken dialogue. Free exploration of the world map is allowed in every chapter, though some areas are not unlocked before the player character advances to a certain point in the game. The player begins as a weak character, poorly equipped and without allies. As they progress through the game, players will discover new and more powerful weapons, armor, and spells, and can form a party of up to six characters, including the player character. Experience points, gained through completing quests and killing monsters, improve the abilities of the main character and other party members.

The western shore of Faerûn along the Sea of Swords contains a multitude of ecologies and terrain including mountains, forests, swamps, marshes, plains, cities, and ruins. Collectively called the Sword Coast, it attracts adventurers for good and evil alike, and provides the backdrop for this epic adventure. The region encompassed by this game is roughly bordered to the South by the Cloud Peaks, the East by the Wood of Sharp Teeth, the West by the Sea of Swords, and the North by Baldur's Gate (the largest and most affluent city in the region). The characters travel the countryside, exploring the countless areas such as towns, dungeons, mines, forests, castle ruins, and the city of Baldur's Gate. The main story involves the characters investigating a conspiracy, confronting the clandestine plots of organizations like the Zhentarim, Red Wizards of Thay, The Iron Throne, Flaming Fist, The Chill, The Black Talons, and the Harpers, as well as finding out the main character's own ancestry and history.

The player character and his/her friend Imoen have grown up together since childhood under the tutelage of their guardian, the mage Gorion. As orphans, they were raised in Candlekeep, an ancient fortress-turned-library in the rural Sword Coast region, which lies south of the city of Baldur's Gate. However, strange things are afoot on the Sword Coast: iron production has virtually halted, metal already produced quickly crumbles, and bandits scour the countryside hunting iron over any other treasure. Strangest of all, even inside the secure walls of Candlekeep, there are mercenaries with designs on the main character's life. Gorion knows what is going on, but will not tell the player character, and instead decides to leave Candlekeep and journey with the player character to a hiding place. However, the night after leaving Candlekeep, they are ambushed by a group of bandits led by a mysterious "armored figure" who kills Gorion when he refuses to hand over the player character, who flees into the night. The player character soon runs into Imoen, who had been following in secret after reading a note about the journey on Gorion's desk. She too saw Gorion's murder, and now insists on accompanying the character.

The Baldur's Gate series relies heavily on storyline and dialogue.

The Baldur's Gate series relies heavily on storyline and dialogue.

The nearest cities are closed to the Player: Candlekeep demands a unique, valuable book as its admission fee; and the city of Baldur's Gate is closed off to outsiders for fear of the bandit hordes. Seeking safety, the player character teams up with other adventurers, and soon he/she sets out to find the cause of the iron shortage by travelling to the source of the iron, the mines of Nashkel, and in doing so begins to unearth a deeper conspiracy. Kobolds have been contaminating the iron in the mine, and documents at the Nashkel mine connect the mine operation with the iron-hunting bandits, and ultimately leads the main character to the secret campsite of the bandits, who appear to be mobilised mercenary companies employed by the Iron Throne, a mysterious organization, who is aggressively expanding its influence. The Iron Throne intends to gain control of the Sword Coast by diverting the iron supply to its own armies exclusively, and stockpiling all plundered iron at the only working iron mine in the region, deep in the Cloakwood forest. As the main character sabotages the mercenary installation in the Cloakwood mines, the pressure on Baldur's Gate is relieved enough for the city to be re-opened for outsiders, and the player character can confront the local Iron Throne's head quarters.

At Baldur's Gate, the player character is enrolled by the Flaming Fist city guard to investigate the Iron Throne, but as no damning evidence is to be found, the player character returns to Candlekeep to spy on a meeting of the Iron Throne leaders. Much has changed in Candlekeep since the player character left, and it is soon discovered that the fortress has at least partially been taken over by Dopplegangers. The player character also encounters a mysterious man named Koveras, soon after leaving Koveras, the player character is charged with the murder of the Iron Throne leaders (who, surprisingly, have been killed), the only route of escape is through the catacombs below the monastery. The player character manages escape the catacombs, and returns to Baldur's Gate. But things only get worse, as the player is framed for the murder of a Flaming Fist officer and must stay hidden as the player character works to uncover the truth and finally uncovers grand scheme masterminded by the "armored figure", Sarevok. Seeking to confront him, the characters find out that he is actually half-brother to the main character, both of whom are children of the dead god of murder, Bhaal. The main character's Bhaalspawn ancestry explains much about their past and raises questions about their future. Sarevok's plans turn out be much more sinister, as the Iron Throne is just a façade for his real intentions. Through manipulation of politics and resources, Sarevok plans to start a war of sacrifice between Baldur's Gate and the kingdom of Amn to the south, causing enough carnage to become the new Lord of Murder. In the end you defeat your brother Sarevok, and send his taint back to Bhaal.

Selectivity: Video games in general are very selective becouse they usually not feature common things like doing the laundery or washing your cat. Baldursgate if analyzed in the sense of a novel, it has a rigid plot and hundreds of subplots, which you can investigate if you care for them. Which means that a large portion of the characters and setting exist for the purpose of the plot. But all other settings have some sub plot importance. There is no setting of no importance, there are no characters of no importance (save townspeople, which constitute setting)

Integration: The fact that the game is open ended and leaves the player free to make either a good character (in the sterotypical sense), an evil character or hell even a Objectivist character named Ayn Rand that, but it also reflects the artists metaphysical value judgements, because they believe in free will. Hence the Nietzsche qoutation. Another example of an artwork with an open end in the same way, The night of January the 16th. Open endedness is a metaphysical value judgement, and that of the highest order.

Simpler games are perhaps more similar to mathmetical art?

Edited June 24, 2007 by BinniLee

[JMeganSnow]

I'm going to resurrect this thread and give my opinion that video games can be art, just like movies. Lord of the Rings and Band of Brothers are examples of artistic movies, whereas Rob Schneider's Male Giggolo movies are not.

Gah, don't start this again. The question is not: are one or two games extremely artistic. The question is: are video games an art form. That's all video games, video games as a totality, not the one or two that happen to approach closest to being an interactive movie. Movies are an art form. Even something as corny as Deuce Bigalow is still a work of art, albeit more along the lines of a Picasso rather than a Rembrandt. Something like 99% of video games are NOT CRPG's. Do you want to argue that Freecell is a work of art?

Even if you narrow the field exclusively to CRPG's, at the most fundamental level you are not talking about an entirely new art form, you are talking about existing art forms that have been merged with puzzles to create a consumer product. See my jigsaw puzzle analogy.

Now, there is a precedent for this if you look at the field of dance: you take music and merge it with a visual performance to produce a new art form. Dance without music (or sound) is essentially meaningless. Movies are also a combinatory art form in many ways. However, in both cases new artistic elements are brought in: visuals in the case of dance, music and visuals in the case of movies (taking a play to be the "fundamental" form of a movie).

With a CRPG, you have not added a new artistic element, you've added a bunch of puzzles. Even the good/evil choices element is a variety of puzzle because a *lot* of games (read: every one that I have ever played) penalize you if you don't play one or the other consistently. Either that, or the good/evil thing is *totally meaningless* apart from the fact that you can't wield the Sword of Ultimate Goodness/Evil when you find it. So the problem becomes "What do the game designers consider to be good/evil and what options do I use so I can maintain my character path" not "what do I want to do here?" Not to mention the fact that the meta-plot is the same regardless of what you do. In fact, many times this puts you in an extreme quandary because to get the best "good" gear you have to KILL or STEAL FROM the "good" NPC's . . . people have gear they can use, after all. If they don't do this, the good team is a bunch of putzes and all the "good" gear is lying around in some dungeon somewhere.

Look at Baldur's Gate. 85% of the game has nothing whatsoever to do with the plot: it consists of you wandering around to fill in your map, killing monsters so you can take their stuff, and having brief "conversations" with randomly scattered weird people. Granted, there are some plot-related characters you do have to talk to and/or kill. You can't finish the game until you fight Sarevok. (I haven't tried ALL the conversation options in that fight, so I'm not 100% certain that you can't get out of fighting him somehow, but from what I recall you pretty much have to kill him.)

Baldur's Gate 2 was a lot better in that they made one of the major game mechanics (acquiring lots of cash) an important part of the game, because you need the money to advance the plot. So, the vast numbers of side-quests are at least somewhat integrated into your main activity, which is: getting enough magic items so that you can tackle the big fights later in the game. I kind of wish they'd just come out and said, "you cannot go to the island until you are nasty enough to take Irenicus, come back when you are X level and you have X quantity of assets in the form of magic items and cash".

I don't think even CRPG's are a new art form. I think they are non-art (puzzles and games) merged with a lot of actual art (music, cut scenes, writing, etc.) This merging may be sophisticated or not, but in the end it's still the same thing and identifiable as such.

Edited June 24, 2007 by JMeganSnow

[BinniLee]

I resent that statement, if 85% of your game constituted of filling in your map, killing monsters so you can take their stuff, and having brief "conversations" with randomly scattered weird people; It is because your own fondness of it.

I have however finished the game with hardly any fertilizer killings, 90% to do with plot; perhaps that is only because of my own methodical nature. Then gamelay in general. Because the story is very good, I hated BG2 because you need to collect set amounts of money and it just isn't über leet cool.

Edited June 24, 2007 by BinniLee

[Alfa]

Baldur's gate the best RPG in the world (Which is über 1337 BTW) has a specific plot. In my humble opinion, Baldur's gate is the pinacle of video games and art in the highest sense.

I think Baldur's Gate is second to Planescape Torment. Which, by the way, is art...

For those of you who have missed this masterpiece... Planescape Torment starts with the main character waking up in a morgue, with no memory of who he is or how he got there. After breaking out you must begin to find out who, and what, he is. Obviously he is born, or reborn, "tabula rasa". The choices you make define him. This is coupled with a great story, with alternate endings, and a very strange world to explore.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planescape_Torment

[JMeganSnow]

Yeah, right. So you didn't do the endless reams of side-quests? I doubt anyone could actually finish BG1 by just doing the main plot: you'd get slaughtered by the time you got to the bandit encampment.

The plot is actually EXTREMELY short:

1. Gorion gets killed

2. You visit the Friendly Arm Inn

3. You visit Nashkell and kill Mulhaley

4. You get assigned to deal with the bandits

5. You go to the bandit camp

6. You visit the mine in Cloakwood

7. You go to Baldur's Gate and investigate the Iron Throne

8. You go back to Candlekeep

9. You go back to Baldur's Gate

10. You kill Sarevok

Given, there are about 10,000 side-quests, but most of them involve "go kill this for me" or "go talk to this person": they are totally unrelated to the plot. You don't even have to visit 2/3 of the areas in the game to finish the plot. The "random encounters" were also extremely tiresome. Neverwinter Nights 2 was very similar in style (surprise, it was designed by the same people), but they got rid of the random encounters of pointlessness, thank goodness.

[JMeganSnow]

I think Baldur's Gate is second to Planescape Torment. Which, by the way, is art...

Why? Because you say it is? This whole thread is nothing but people a.) defining art as "whatever the hell I feel like calling art" and b.) saying that "<insert name of their favorite computer game> is art". Whatever. Provide some basis for this assertion and I'll take it seriously.

[Alfa]

Why? Because you say it is? This whole thread is nothing but people a.) defining art as "whatever the hell I feel like calling art" and b.) saying that "<insert name of their favorite computer game> is art". Whatever. Provide some basis for this assertion and I'll take it seriously.

Yes, because I say so!

Seriously though, in essence the game is an interactive graphical story - different types of art combined into one piece. Sure, you could argue that the "core" is just different sets of "puzzles" and "rules", and sort of reduce it to something "mechanical", but the gameplay is heavily story driven and the point is to tell a story which the player can take part in, and effect the outcome of.

That is why I call it art.

[hunterrose]

With a CRPG, you have not added a new artistic element, you've added a bunch of puzzles.

What is an "artistic element", and why does interactivity (puzzles??) have to be an artistic element in order for video games be art?

This whole thread is nothing but people a.) defining art as "whatever the hell I feel like calling art" and b.) saying that "<insert name of their favorite computer game> is art".

So video games aren't and can't be a selective re-creation of reality in accordance with the artist's metaphysical value judgments?

[Inertiatic]

I think video games, as an industry, have yet to realize their full potential to be art, save for a few I'll mention later.

Art as re-creation of reality according to the artist's value judgments is applicable to movies (I defer you to Romantic Manifesto for that argument)- and, all things considered, there's little that separates video games (ignoring online games which are more likely driven by consumer appeal than the "artist's" own judgments) from movies. They are there to tell a story- and you, the player, subject yourself to this story and become its driving factor. Without you, there is no story. So video games, in relation to man, do two things: are art and provide something that man can be proud of himself for seeing through to completion as a player.

Anyone who's dabbled in video gaming has had that one certain boss they just couldn't beat. For days victory eluded them. Then, finally, they beat it. What is it but pride that fills the gamer at this moment?

So I give video games that, which is not applicable to, say, books, or movies, or music.

As for video games that could be considered art, there are very few. Shadow of the Colossus is, I think, is the closest video games have come to producing art. The story (or plot-theme) is: man seeks to restore life to his dead lover- and to do so he must battle gigantic and powerful beasts of titanic proportion. And he succeeds in doing this with his hands, a bow and arrow, and a sword.

The graphics and the world presented in the game are beautiful and vast, respectively. This is a world as it ought to be, to the artist.

And the sounds, and the music- simply great.

Now, am I attempting to justify my favorite game as "art"? No. Shadow of the Colossus is not my favorite game- in fact, it's not even on my Top Ten Favorites List. Why? It's just not my kind of game.

But still I love it, and if it isn't considered art, or the closest video games have come to it, then what is?

Now, as for games like the Madden series- as for art: it's possible. It's nonfiction.

It would be easier to call, say Call of Duty games art, however.

[the jerk]

Video games are absolutely a medium of art. Whether you consider a particular game as reflecting any of your values or not is a different issue.

Is it a selective re-creation of reality according to metaphysical value-judgments? Yes. It is a recreation of some interactive conscious experience. The mechanisms through which you interact are supposed to represent what the creators found enjoyable. Based on whatever value judgments they have. What is an enjoyable action? What is a purposeful action? These are the questions being answered in the GAMEPLAY component of the piece. The music, sound, images, everything else in themselves are a selective recreation as well, though they are not on trial here. I see no more justification required.

Indeed, in this poster's opinion, the defining part of life is that it is interactive. That a new art form emerged which includes actions as a primary interface with the world, should be a testament to the ingenuity of mankind, as a new and powerful medium towards expressing the enjoyment and value of life.

Does swinging from ledges relate to anything important? Absolutely. Grace and motion towards a specific purpose and a glorification of living. I'm sorry that you cannot see this. (Of course, a particular game may have implemented it horribly, or with little purpose, but that is not an excuse to criticize the medium.) Recall in Atlas Shrugged (no plot spoilers), how many times does Dagny talk about how she must push herself onward, to DO. A game glorifies action.

Whether a particular game allows you to choose between being the good guy or the bad guy does not disqualify anything. If anything, it is a statement of the artist's judgment about how different those two lives would be. If they make no difference, well that's a statement whether you agree with it or not, whether it was a well-thought-out statement or not. (I disagree with that statement, but that's besides the point.)

This is not a gray area. This is an absolute and definite answer, that a game has as much a claim to being art as does a painting or a movie. If you dismiss video games, it is only a potential benefit (and a great one besides) that you miss out on.

[Grames]

Joining this thread late because I joined late.

This comment strikes close to the heart of the matter:

However to only judge a game based on it's plot, theme, or character seems like a very narrow way of judging video games. You're trying to define the artistry of the game based on a standard that's used to judge mediums such as a novel or a movie, while completely ignoring the gameplay and the interactivity element of video games. A multi-player strategy game for example can, through gameplay, teach and emphasize values like resource management, efficiency, long term and short term planning, and for people that are really trying to be good at it -- competitiveness, mental calmness, problem solving on the fly, reading the mind of your opponent, the importance of diligence, practice, and hard work, etc. All of these things can be funneled back into reality and teach you real life values that can be applied to virtually any task you want to do.

Some of the the value-judgements implemented by the game designer qua game are: the scarcity/abundance of resources, importance of speed vs. efficiency, importance of long term vs. short term planning. Designing a game such that certain strategies are effective and others are less so or ineffective is a value-judgement, but the question is really "Are these metaphysical value-judgements?" Are they comments about reality as such that the player is meant to carry away from the game? Some are, some are not. I think any game that uses a strongly representational art style with an emphasis on realism is making a claim about the relevance of its strategies to reality.

I think the relative inaccessibility of these judgements makes them hard to perceive. It takes many tens of hours to explore a game's options and the artist/game-designer is radically dependent on the player being active for that amount of time. If the artfulness in a game cannot be perceived by those who do not play it then naturally a game won't be thought of as art by those people.

[Shinji Shiranui]

I haven't read all of th posts yet, but I will give my opinion on the matter.

I agree when you say that vidoegames have the potential to be art but their media is still immature. Many videogames that are considered art borrow a lot form cinematoghrapic language, like Metal Gear Solid, which has great cinema sequences.

However, I think that the true potential of videogames to become art resides in the next:

According to Rand's definition of art, this has to be a recreation of reality that reflects the values of the author. Videogames don't create an imitation of reality (with exceptions like war games) but a reinterpretation of it. Like someone above said, is more a creation of the basics aspects of reality, than an imitation of it.

Videogames, like some fantasy or sci fi novels, can create great an complex worlds that are offered to the player, and, in most cases, he's free to explore them at will. This could be call the "physical" aspect of the vidoegame, a world which contains basic elements of reality, like people, society or history. The second aspect of the videogame would be its "metaphysical" aspect. A player can explore the world, but his own morality and values can be reflected into it. Is like having some sort of a canvas. We have a world, we have other people, now the player will decide what to do within it that game. However, his choices need guidance, and here's where the plot of the game comes in by telling a story the player can modify through his actions.

But the videogame, to be a form of art, still lacks certain unity. A common RPG game, like Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion, gives this enormous freedom to the player, tells an interesting story, and yet cannot be considered a work of art. Why? Games do not only reflect the values of the people involded in its creation, but should also reflect the values of the player. A recent videogame, Mass Effect 2, besides telling an epic tale full of action and heroism, present the player with a series of choices that affect the outcome of the game, including which characters live or die. The valuable aspect of ME2, is that some of this decisions, if not most of them, present the player with ethics choices (like deciding which of two characters will die, knowing they are both innocent) There are not right or wrong answers, but the player will still have to face the consequences of his (her) choice.

Here comes the resource videogames should exploit in the future to become true forms of art: interaction. The player not only becomes inmersed in a vast world, but he also becomes involved wiht moral choices within that world, and these have an impact on the sub-universe that is created.

However, these choices, as well as the worlds presented, are still very limited to reflect the true identity of the player, an, in order to be a unified work of art, it still requires elements like a plot and a story.

Some videogames I consider within this definiton:

Silent Hill: Shattered Memories (Nintendo Wii)

Bioshock (PS3 and XBOX 360)

Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic (X BOX)

Mass Effect 1 & 2 (X BOX 360, PC)

Edited February 17, 2010 by Shinji Shiranui

[Daniel Casper]

Video games are themselves not art, but sometimes may contain a piece of art. Thus the "game" aspect of it is not art, it is recreation, but it would be stupid to say the "story" of a video game is somehow not literature. When one puts a mural on the side of a building, the mural doesn't cease to be a painting, nor does the building cease to be a building. Rather, the painting becomes subsumed by the building, remains a work of art, and can be isolated for the purpose of enjoyment/study. So it is with video games.