If you believe video games are art than you believe video games are in any way comparable to this artistic masterpiece...

>dude so sad
Wow, man. That's really something. Video game artists build entire worlds, you know. To compare anguish man to Hyrule is just insulting.

Well quality varies ofc you fucking retard.
Its like saying movies arent an art medium because of the transformers movies.

Attached: 066.jpg (621x640, 69K)

There is a definition of 'art' that is just 'paintings of horses'. That definition does not apply to video games.

Checkmate atheists.

video games can't be art because they are games, it's as simple as that. No one would think a board game is art. A game is inherently good if its gameplay is good, not if it has some good artstyle or story, might as well be a movie in that case.

It looks more impressive but it is not. Technology on Pong is more impressive than technology used to make that statue

That has nothing to do with art.

>Technology on Pong is more impressive than technology used to make that statue

Yeah man, Avatar and Transformers movies are the pinnacle of art.

Technology =/= art

Well it's the artist of Rhodes faults for creating art in this reality.

Uh it's current year +4 sweaty literally anything can be art and sold for millions

You can't define "art" and restrict it only to painting

Technology utilised by drooling morons is in no ways more impressive than millennia old craftsmanship.

For me technology is art. Do you know how CPU's are made? It's like bunch of sand or something. How can you turn that into something so complex?

i just did nigger

modern art is already an insult to art though

Attached: 1555276695653.jpg (500x375, 24K)

Bigger snakes make for better art.

Attached: Marching toward masochism.jpg (1920x1080, 352K)

>tfw 200+ years ago
>no computers or todd's game to make hot qt3.14s with
>have to sensually molest marble blocks into waifus
>get real good
>still isn't real
>still doesn't cook or clean or wake up next to me in the mornings and lie there talking about life and our future for what seems like hours

Attached: 482817163f30244d10a34e1bf1558e0b.jpg (800x1604, 106K)

Dribbling retard.

Quick check if something is art
>is it manmade
>was it made deliberately
>can the artist use it to express him/herself
>is it pleasing to senses
>does it invoke any emotions
Only first two are mandatory

>art
>has to be made deliberately
music called

Attached: i disagree.jpg (1320x528, 39K)

It's not art definition then, if your definition does not encompass all means of expression you can shove it up your ass

The body is computer generated. Gantz has some really ugly use of 3D graphics.

Art is made out of passion, not out of contrivance. Literally anything could be interpreted as an artform so long as there is motive behind it. Fucking MURDER is considered an artform. So yes, I will consider Yoshi's Island art.

>you can shove it up your ass
already did, right before I posted it

>music made by accident
Doesn't exist

Made me think. You are a true artist then, user

>modern art isn't art
>video games aren't art

I'm glad we can all agree on these.

I believe games are art, but a lower form of art that does not compare to that statue, and thus you have nothing to be insulted about.

This
It's not supposed to be art and there's nothing wrong with that.

music can easily be made without any specific, deliberate approach to form, content or delivery.
>but then its still music, and they still deliberately set out to do it
according to your definition, so is kicking a snare drum down a spiral staircase.

>tfw your dick looks like it belongs on an ancient greek statue

Attached: 1559844471410.jpg (768x1024, 80K)

it's funny how there was nude art all over the place back then but nobody's that well endowed at all

i thought that was the dude's dick

If you're just randomly kicking your drum around then even if your "music" somehow ends up sounding good it's not art. Sorry son

But a human made it, and it was deliberate, the only two qualifications user said you needed to call something art.

Now you're just trying to be a faggot. Spraying piece of paper with paint doesn't make you Jackson Pollock

Yes and no. Art was originally created to record things and bribe the gods. Do video games record things? Yes. Are video games made to bribe the gods? No.

If you kicked the drum in specific pattern then it's art. If the "deliberate" in your post describes the act of kicking then not. It's not that hard

I'm a faggot for getting you to disagree with user's definition of art?

Kitsch art is also art dumbass.

but if they could have made video games back then for the gods, would they have?

Attached: dk01.png (500x551, 32K)

Why not? Kicking a snare drum down the stairs would surely sound like a very involved drum break. What does it matter if I play that break with sticks or with a boot?

Art was originally maths, rhetorics, poetry and music. Games usually are made using two of those so... kinda?

It doesn't matter. What matters is whether you set out to make music that way making sure the drum falls in a thought out way or just randomly kick it.

>Are video games made to bribe the gods?

They elicit offerings to Mammon.

But I have no idea what the stairs intend to play when I pass them the snare. My only intent was to punt the drum, but the resulting musical statement, while independent of my intent, is still unquestionably music.

It is not. Birds chirping is not art either even though it sounds good

Why is it not music? You could listen and then transcribe it to staff like any other drum part.

Games contain sculptures, some of them can even move and you can interact with. Games are an elevated art form that contains all other classical art forms. You have no argument OP.

If a parrot imitates music, does it stop being music?

Attached: think01.png (225x225, 4K)

>If you believe video games are art than you believe video games are in any way comparable to this artistic masterpiece
Excellent chain of non-logic, moron. I bet you're the kind of drooling mongoloid who says he doesn't understand modern art yet hates it at the same time.

It's not manmade.

Does it stop being deliberately composed by a man? I don't think so user. If you play music on your music player it's still music.

OP is going to be so pissed when all of the fine art in the world gets "restorations" done by the tumblr generation artists and/or modernist architects.

Not kidding in the slightest. One day the Sistine Chapel is going to get the Calarts treatment.

Perhaps your concerns about what is art should be redirected...

Attached: 1240202153904.jpg (429x297, 100K)

That's a good point.

How is it not? Even if I designed a rube goldberg machine to kick the drum for me, the music it would make as it bounces and clangs down the stairs would still be certainly man-made.

Video games will never be art.

>mfw all the roman statues get the "chisel chop" because resetera insists romans were actually were pro gay/trans/dogkin/whatever

Attached: 1531306094666.gif (326x240, 842K)

>Anti-restorationfags

Enjoy your decaying rubble instead of a proper monument to the resilience of human civilization.

Attached: Zigs.jpg (1524x1064, 404K)

new thing bad

old thing good

be nazi

>art critics before video games were invented:
"This is awesome, would hate it if it was interactive in any way, though."

move zig

If you took a million chimpanzees, gave them million chisels and they somehow ended up carving something pretty that wouldn't make the item art because you in a way initiated its creation

>One day the Sistine Chapel is going to get the Calarts treatment.
Fuck, I unironically want this to actually happen just so I can laugh at it.

Nobody in 2000 years will play a video game that was released this year. Art is timeless, people are still fascinated by 5000 year old Egyptian art. 99% of the general population refuses to play games that are any older than one generation. Everyone's constantly asking for remasters.

Do you even understand your own argument anymore, let alone anyone else's?

Look how violent it is. It must have caused many school stabbings back in the day.

>which is just insulting.
This isn't even an argument. So what if it's insulting? It wouldn't make it untrue. This is as insubstantial as describing behavior as "toxic".

Yeah if there's any argument against games being art I guess it might be those online-only games that will have their servers shut down eventually. Like I do think games are art for the most part, but then I imagine if after an arbitrary amount of time the Sistine Chapel was unpainted or something. Doesn't that just piss you off?

Well basically:
Me
>it's art if you know what you're going for
You
>but if i start a random process its result can still be considered art because I started it

Nah I'll still be playing Heroes 3 after 2k years when I become immortal. Next shitty argument?

>school stabbing
Kek'd

There's nothing wrong with restoration but the one you're replying to seems to have a fear that the restoration will not fall in line with what it accurately would be, because of political views.

>Crutch Claw

Attached: Goemon.jpg (290x324, 23K)

The skill required to make marble look like supple flesh will always be above and beyond video game trash for kids.

They need to open their minds and get more in touch with their iconoclastic side.

I mean, if you feel that way, why are you on the video game board? We have plenty of good boards for this sort of thing.

You're comparing different branches of art. Coding is demanding in its own way

>Not kidding in the slightest. One day the Sistine Chapel is going to get the Calarts treatment.

...the more I try to put together why that won't happen, the more likely it becomes in my mind... holy fuck it's going to happen.

It'll be this, on a grander scale, and no one will be brave enough to call it out or stop it.

Attached: 7130038.jpg (600x400, 44K)

Because, sadly, this is my hobby. I played games expecting them to have improved drastically by the start of the 2010s. Instead, I'm getting sequels to once-dead franchises that are nearly just as good as the older games with little changes.

wrong thread niggerfaggot

well, I'm just content that you're walking the tightrope to defend a retarded, reductionist, generalist definition of art that apparently doesn't manage to be retarded, reductionist or generalist enough to get the job done. I don't think it would help my argument anymore to allow you to leave points unaddressed, or to take the conversation in circles, it'll just make both of us look bad, instead of just you user.

It's because of zoomers on this board that video games aren't taken seriously. They don't care about storylines and atmosphere anymore, they just want muh gameplay and muh kill enemies. The kind of sad sacks who skip silent hill cutscenes because they want to kill monsters, and stop playing the game because there's not enough monsters therefore it's a movie.

Games ARE art just like movies are. You need 2d concept artists, 3d artists, musicians, writers, it is a combination of every forms of art.

Oh, that's why. Yeah, a lot of new games are really shit. I guess I feel you.

Attached: dog01.jpg (408x439, 50K)

They are a craft including artistic content

whoag that rock is so pretty its much better than those stinky video games

The end result is the only thing that's truly important. The techniques, materials and time spent are only important to the one doing the art. The skill of the artist is evident regardless of the medium.

Attached: attachment[1].jpg (1056x1080, 198K)

Art is a human concept, it doesn't objectively exists (like love or freedom). Therefore it cannot be objectively defined and this kind of topic will always be trivial. If you fail to understand that, you are retarded.

Art is literally just expression and application of human experience, skill, technique, and/or creativity.
I want the retarded children to leave this place. Once you hit adulthood, you realize these lofty terms like "art" are just descriptive. It's not some high-grade unattainable status.

What a shit thread. How many fucking times do we need "are games art" as a thread?

You lost an internet argument and are throwing a fit which is rather sad, you could use whatever it is between your ears to improve.

who's throwing a fit?

This.
Video games are so pathetically easy to make that an obese tranny zoomer can do it.

Codemonkeys are a joke.

Making a good video game is just as difficult as making a marble statue. The statue doesn't even come up with it's own idea. It's copying an event from the Aeneid. It's also a copy/remaster
of a bronze statue copying that event.

Programming a computer to generate interactive photoreal images is far more impressive than chipping away at a rock to make a prettier rock.

Attached: death-stranding-screen-us-11jun18-27.jpg (3840x2160, 1.68M)

To bad bro, they were always art unless you have a shitty and narrow understanding of the concept of art.

but if no one ever chipped away at the rocks would we ever have photoreal images?

>they were always art

Attached: 1551134350676.png (324x313, 235K)

It was because the Greeks preferred small penises, because they thought a large penis was a sign of stupidity

Starting with Spacewar!

You know fuck all about anything dude.

>blacks have huge dicks
Huh, maybe they were on to something.

Oy vey not so loud goyim some anons might see this

They are art. They are not comparable to the sculpture. The end.

Why do you imply viewing games as art means automatic, direct comparison to other works of art? Retarded axiom

Literal boomer tier cringe rhetoric

>They are not comparable to the sculpture
You can compare anything to anything else user. Do you even know why comparisons are made?

>this puts the /pol/tard into incomprehensible rage by its mere existence alone
youtube.com/watch?v=U-pVz2LTakM

>Schoenberg
>More like Schoenoff
why not link someone who did it better, like Rimsky-Korsakov?

Generally to help us understand the similarities or differences between like objects/concepts/whatever. Instead of building an opinion from scratch in a vaccuum, we compare it to things we have an opinion of already to make it much simpler to judge for less expended time and brainpower

because Shoenberg pisses people off, which I find pretty based

Attached: Ivan the Terrible.png (320x241, 65K)

Why do you suppose he pisses people off, user?

Go to any youtube comment section of his music, and you see plebs complaining about it

but what do you think of it, user?

Modern day games are filled to the brim with sculptures that move and breathe
They are sculpted so frequently that you have been desensitized to how good they are

>HURR DURR I MAED IT OUTTA ROK IS BETTR

Attached: 58d0a337ba21f_thumb900.jpg (900x527, 95K)

Of course not.. they're better. They involve visual art, music, story writings. They're all the arts combined, like an art megazord. You could 3d model this same shit in a game and have great music play AND involve it in a cool puzzle or fight.

are you retarded

if you are talking about his atonal pieces then the are terrible during the first listen, but when you adjust your mind to the idea then it becomes a new way of comprehending music. Schoenberg isn't that hard to listen to, you don't even need to know much about music, you just need to throw everything you expect from music and start appreciating the structure and patterns.

As with the one I linked it's different, it's more conventional and only slightly atonal, I loved it, its atmosphere and its experimental subtlety from the first listen.

This is obviously coming from someone who doesn't know much about music theory.

what's stopping you from learning more?

>Demolition for demolition's sake is good!

>Red Dead Redemption 1
>Took a army of highly skilled software engineers, Digital illustrators and artists, Writers and experienced project managers
>Directing all of their efforts into making a gigantic compilation of characters, Scenery, Interactivity and cinematic moments into moments that will not only be for obeservation
>but for actual interaction to manipulate the creators work, Which allows the observer to make them selves feel more attached to the work it's self, than just being a standard external viewing process.
>All of that work designed to be hiding behind a curtain of computer code and masked by high quality and extremely small detailed eye candy.

How the fuck is any of that not art.

Attached: rd1.jpg (640x360, 31K)

nothing right now, but before I did not have the time. I would like to learn more, but there are a lot of things I would like to learn about.

Any good courses/websites/books?

The distinction between high art and low art hasn't been relevant for at least two centuries.

Only Sony exclusives, such as the Last of Us, are art they've ascended past the juvenile status of most games

If you can tolerate old prose and have a decent working knowledge, I always liked "Practical Manual of Harmony" and "Principles of Orchestration" by Rimsky-Korsakov (who I mentioned earlier)
If you're just getting into it all together I'd suggest finding something that casts a pretty wide net, I liked Berklee Music's stuff for that, but a friend sent me the files so I wouldn't be too sure how youd get your hands on it. There's a buttload of youtube channels of varying quality, but 8-bit music theory is Yea Forums-relevant and does a good job at presenting ideas succinctly without talking too far over your head.

Thanks, I will check this stuff out

Why does he have a tiny Stanley Kubrick head inside of his face

But they are comparable to it lmao. You wouldn't know the difference between the two if you couldn't compare them you brainlet.

Cope. Video games are not art.