Even then there are strong signs that the Smithsonian, while its heart is in the right place, is doinitrong. Having per-game genre categories (and only one vote within each category) when judging artistic merit is wrongheaded. This leaves a lot of artistically bold games out in the cold, like Katamari Damacy, and inflates the artistic signifigance of other genres that don't really break a lot of artistic barriers, like FPS games.
Vanillaware games (Odin Sphere, GG, Mura) would agree. RPGs make the best art.
Art critics might be a better choice for choosing graphical art. If they included anything about the experience, then gamers would probably be worth talking to.
That being said, I think that video games should be viewed as an art based on the experience, the sum of the graphics, music, plot, and gameplay, but that's almost entirely subjective. If they're dissected into graphical art, music, or a method of sharing a storyline, of course it's going to suck in each of those specific fields.
Last time I checked at least Hollywood movies didn't come with tomes full of background info you had to read to know what the fuck was going on.
I voted for Chrono Trigger, MGS, FF and Tales of Symphonia when possible as an art form. I dare anyone to contest that. If Xenogears was there I would've voted for that too.
Unfortunately I don't remember seeing Wind Waker for Gamecube which is an incredibly beautiful game.![]()
Games don't have to, either.
http://i54.tinypic.com/2ymhovs.jpg
Many do but that's what you get with a medium still in its infancy relative to others.
Anti's clearly trollan
Two mods bagged so far.
Anti's clearly anti.
Chrono Trigger's score is some of the best music composed in the video game world as far as I'm concerned and that is art in and of itself.
While I do agree this is a young medium I still think it should be treated as art and not a pissing contest for best game means it has the best art.
museum won't work unless you can play games other wise its like going to a picture art gallery and instead of paintings you just read descriptions of them.
So which is it? Games are art, or games have art?
Saying that voting for your favorite game is necessarily incorrect is moronic. You may think that what makes a game the most artistic is the elements of it that fit the classic definition of "art" like its story, its visuals, or its music. And that's like, you know, your opinion, man. You can't make objective statements about things like that. If someone wants to say FF7 was a better piece of art than Chrono Trigger because they enjoyed playing it more, who's to say that's wrong? It makes more sense to me than saying one was better than the other because of its soundtrack. It's not an exhibit on video game music. It's an exhibit on video games, and what makes a video game a video game is that it's interactive. Why not judge their artistic worth based on how much you enjoyed interacting with them?
How is interactivity a "base instinct"?
That doesn't even make sense.
In order for a judgment to be valid it needs to explain itself better than 'I enjoyed it.'