You know, since that whole news item thing was posted (and my comments on it) I've still been thinking about it. I remember mentioning to you not that long ago that this whole games-as-art discussion was fairly new to me (at least, the content of it was). Digging far deeper into it, I find it's quite an interesting discussion, even though it often gets simplified too much. That said, I like how some lines of thought and argument seem to be exploring other issues that really need to be addressed, like how games can actually engage the participant into and with the medium.

I'd like to write some more about this issue, so when I come across first-person experiences like this, it really helps my own thoughts. Keep it up!

@Miss Anonymous:

Agreed, and I'd extend that to basically every medium. If I get Deep Meaning out of something, then for me, it's a bonus (albeit a hell of a bonus).

Wow, you tryin' to take away SomeGuy's wordy bastard title? :V

I don't really have much to say on the topic (that hasn't already been said), except to emphasize that a good game's first goal should be entertainment. It needs to be fun. Whether or not it can be considered art can come after that. This is why simple games such as Tetris are still played today because it's just plain fun.

Also, another factor I'm sure is that making a truly artful game may not sell very well. Video games are still a business, after all.

@bellpickle:

Exactly. It kind of bugs me when people recoil once the word "entertainment" is brought up. Like it's beneath art to be entertaining in some way. (And, personally, I have a broad view of entertainment; there are so many ways to be interesting and entertaining that it's basically unacceptable to me when a story eschews that in a misguided attempt to be socially important, or whatever.)

I still need to play Undead Nightmare. I'll probably download it one of these days ...

@Katana:

Yeah, exactly -- the player involvement is what really makes it tough to be 100 percent art, because video games can't be as passive in how it's absorbed by the audience, whereas nearly every other medium can be engaged however thoughtfully the audience chooses. People get pissed (and rightfully so) if a game turns into a Metal Gear Solid 2 type experience where the player is sitting around for an hour or whatever watching cutscenes instead of doing shit.

My brother brought this up to me once: He likes the BioShock/Half-Life/whatever system where storytelling and gameplay are essentially one and the same. I think that's definitely a model to be followed; cutscenes had their place (and still have their place in light doses), but there are better ways of storytelling. (As a side note, I think this is part of the reason why there's such a backlash against JRPGs now -- the storytelling is so antiquated, or in the case of, say, FFXIII, downright awful.)

And, yeah, defense is an inevitable part of the process. Novels, movies, music and TV were all slammed once upon a time (and in some cases are still slammed today). I guess where games have it tougher is that many games are meant simply to be games and nothing else -- would anyone call DDR art? Metroid Pinball? Guitar Hero? But those might be involved in the discussion, simply by virtue of being games.

I'm not entirely sure where I fall in the argument. I am not entirely interested in defending games to the death as an art form, but I would defend the very best. Though, as you say, you can't focus solely on the bad or good -- it all exists no matter how someone frames the argument. But eh. Just something interesting to think about.

As for shooting crap, it gets easier with practice. Believe me, I sucked at the beginning too. (And, honestly, I never quite got used to shooting stuff while on horseback.) A nice tip that helped me a ton: Auto targeting aims for people's chests. If you nudge the right stick up just a bit after the initial targeting, you set yourself up for an easy headshot. I became like the friggin' Terminator once I mastered that trick.

Aiming solely for entertainment is good enough for me most of the time.

^Pretty much how I feel about the issue. People forget how hard it is to create something solidly entertaining. Just because most of it isn't 'art' doesn't mean video games are inferior to other mediums. It's just used differently, appeals to a different audience, etc. However, I DO think it's silly when conservative oldtimers people in the art community argue that video games don't even have the potential to be art. (An argument that I've been subjected to before, it was so ridiculous.)

As for Red Dead Redemption, I only ever played that game in Zombie Mode... so yeah.

The danger of the "is it art" argument, which I heavily brought up in the "are video games art" argument, is that if you decide to call the who medium "art", you have to defend it. Video games, having not been included in the medium of art, are stigmatized heavily. So while you can say there are more bad movies than good movies, it doesn't really matter, as the motion picture has been considered an art form for a looooong time.

And of course, you have the disputes within the community of what is good and what is bad. Something may look gorgeous but have a bad story; likewise, something may have mediocre graphics but a very good story. Video games have it tough, having to blend art, music, and story, which a movie does, but also that tricky fourth part, a game. Minimal player involvement does not a happy gamer make.

...So yeah, I dunno where I'm going with this. I still need to figure out how to shoot my gun in RDR without aiming, because I really suck at it so far.

@:

I think something can be an art form without everything under its umbrella being considered Art. It's Sturgeon's Law at work -- just because the vast majority of video game narratives are of low or suspect quality doesn't degrade the potential of video games to produce something artful.

I love movies, but a lot of them are crap. Same for TV, books, music, etc. People get too serious and defensive when people attack what they love, so they pump up stuff that doesn't really deserve it. Nothing wrong with being a good potboiler, I think. If it's not Art, but it's at least entertaining, then it's worth something, right?