What Games Design lessons can you teach me?

[GNVE]

Hi there, it is a shame that nobody has answered such an intelligent question.

To be honest it probably had to do with the title. I often just skip any thread that has a title like "How do I make a porn game?" I like helping people but I do expect you to do at least some research even if it was a minimal amount on your own and gloss over threads here. And rather than asking for help OP went for a style that sounds like "you can do this for me". And that sounds like a lot of threads that boil down to: I have this amazing idea and I am looking for someone else to make it while I still have full creative control. There are a lot of threads like that so its easy to overlook this one.

Most projects here have No Fucking Gameplay, and that includes the supposedly "Sandbox Games".

It depends on what you want to call gameplay. Though I agree most games are on the lower end of gameplay elements. But as long as there are (meaningful) choices in the game there is a gameplay element in a VN. I do think most sandbox games are pretty empty unfortunately though (i.e. they would have worked better as a regular VN).

The most ideas of "Game Design" here is to add a bunch of Grind, which is fine for the purpose of padding out the content and give it a sense of pacing and progression but does make for much of a "Game".

Yup agree with you that some VN's are grindy for grinding sake. But there are enough games that have non at all.

It's a bit of a shame since it's my belief that you can take any of those simple games that you find from those Starving Indie Steam Developers, and if you just added a bunch of Porn those games they would be far more marketable and successful.

I don't really agree with your sentiment. I have played several games where the game was very much diminished by slapping porn on top. It gets in the way of the gameplay. If you want to make a game that is also a porn game great but you will have to marry the two successfully to make a good game.
For regular games being more successful if they had porn/sex in it again I don't agree on two levels. Being a pornographic game limits your marketing potential massively if they are not outright banned. If you want to make a pornographic game that's a good trade-off but if you want to make Minecraft not so much. And for a lot of games adding porn to it will clash with the actual game and theming. I am pretty sure something like Subnautica wouldn't be improved by adding porn.
And not only that but there are many people in the adult industry who are unable to make a living (this is not just a thing for devs)


Now on to the actual advice:
I agree that you should start small.
Make a game you want to play yourself not what you think your audience wants to see. (sure don't forget about the audience but don't try to make something that only plays into perceived trends).
I am not against sandbox games but as stated above a lot of games have a sandbox because they have a sandbox. If you want a sandbox porn game you should justify putting it in. Is it really necessary? Can you make enough content for your sanbox to not feel like a barren wasteland? The only games I enjoyed a sandbox where games that also had a good management element. So the sandbox made sense, where do you want to spend your time to level up the business.
What VN's allow over porn is that you have agency (not in all cases but most). It is also low fidelity. You still need to use a little fantasy to fill in the blanks. a porn vid is like fast-food and VN's are ehm like a sandwich?

 

[DuniX]

It depends on what you want to call gameplay. Though I agree most games are on the lower end of gameplay elements. But as long as there are (meaningful) choices in the game there is a gameplay element in a VN.

Not it isn't, nobody here knows what gameplay is. Having a bit of a different Content and Structure does not make if Gameplay.
Having Choices also does not necessary make it Gameplay either.

I don't really agree with your sentiment. I have played several games where the game was very much diminished by slapping porn on top.

Have you drudge the Indie Steam Releases and played everything? What do you know about Unmarketable Steam Games that nobody knows about?

It gets in the way of the gameplay.

That's the Least of their Problems. Their problem is nobody fucking knows about them.

It's mutually beneficial, more simple, quirky, puzzly and experimental games that can't quite stand on their own can just add a few Porn Scenes to attract them while they stay for the gameplay.

Just look at Steam RPG Maker releases. Pretty much Dead on Arrival, they probably put much more effort then whatever RPG Maker you see here, and they only needed just a few Vanilla Scenes to change their fate.

I am pretty sure something like Subnautica wouldn't be improved by adding porn.

You cannot even comprehend the games I am talking about. That's how far you have Completely Ignored Them.
They do not even exist to you. The only thing that exists is what you have heard about that is already successful.

Also yes you can add Porn to Subnautica, it just wouldn't be Subnautica which is a mainstream indie game, but a more niche porn variant.
Yes Adding Porn isn't for every Indie, just 90% of them.

Being a pornographic game limits your marketing potential massively if they are not outright banned.

You don't get it, a marketing potential of more than Zero is a fucking improvement.

And not only that but there are many people in the adult industry who are unable to make a living

That's precisely what I want changed! Less Garbage VNs, "Sandboxes" and "Stories" and more Actual Fucking Gameplay.
This not some New Concept. Japanese Games already mix all kinds of gameplay with porn.
In fact the Indie Game Scene and Porn Game Scene in Japan are synonymous.
And Western Adult Games that actually mix some gameplay, they aren't doing too bad either.

I agree that you should start small.

Like a small Indie Game? That I was just talking about?
Do people consider the "Story" games you see here with all those renders and branches that take years of updates to finish actually "small"?
Define fucking "small".

Make a game you want to play yourself not what you think your audience wants to see. (sure don't forget about the audience but don't try to make something that only plays into perceived trends).

By following the same VN/Sandbox trends and never experimenting with gameplay.

Can you make enough content for your sanbox to not feel like a barren wasteland?

Can you make Actual Gameplay instead of Content?

 

[GNVE]

Not it isn't, nobody here knows what gameplay is. Having a bit of a different Content and Structure does not make if Gameplay.
Having Choices also does not necessary make it Gameplay either.

Yesss... sure... Nobody on this forum has ever played a game... ever... Look VN's are on the edge between 'picturebook' and game. But there is no black and white line no matter how much you insist there is. It is a grey area where there is a transition from one to the other where depending on the VN in question they may be more picturebook or more game.
VN's fall into the line of FMV games and walking simulators. Again genres that fall on the border between game and non-game where the individual game determines where on the line they fall.

Have you drudge the Indie Steam Releases and played everything?

Nope and neither have you. It is literally impossible to play everything. It's like saying you watched the entirety of YouTube.

What do you know about Unmarketable Steam Games that nobody knows about?

Enough.

That's the Least of their Problems. Their problem is nobody fucking knows about them.

True but throwing sex at the problem won't necessarily change that. I think on this forum we may sometimes forget that you actually have to go out of your way to seek out pornographic games. Stores don't allow it or if they do they will limit access heavily for instance by explicitly having to turn on a search for adult content. And in many countries the sale of the game will be illegal so you won't show up on any store page in that country ever (e.g. China and Australia). Literally hundreds of millions of people will not be able to access your game without going really out of their way.

And even if it does work it won't mean the game will be successful. The historic example of this is BMXXX (though technically not a true porn game). The marketing for this game was quite successful leading to a lot of controversy and stores not stocking the game. The game itself was just so-so which didn't help.
I'm from Europe so no controversy here but I remember seeing the game on store shelves and just inwardly groaning. As a teen boy at the time I was definitely the target audience. But I was like really? It must be shit if they need to tag on sex to sell. And apparently I wasn't the only one who thought that as it absolutely bombed.

All that I am saying is that it is not a magic bullet. Sure some games might benefit but pretending that it's all unicorns and rainbows without downsides is just not how the world works.

Just look at Steam RPG Maker releases. Pretty much Dead on Arrival, they probably put much more effort then whatever RPG Maker you see here, and they only needed just a few Vanilla Scenes to change their fate.

Could be, I actively avoid RPGM games. I just hate the way the controls are laid out. Though I don't immediately see how they wouldn't drown in the deluge of pornographic RPGM games.

You cannot even comprehend the games I am talking about. That's how far you have Completely Ignored Them.
They do not even exist to you. The only thing that exists is what you have heard about that is already successful.

Yes I am sorry it is impossible for me to comprehend. You are the only one in the world who knows about these games. You are a leading expert in this field and we should all bask in your glory. Please get over yourself.

Also yes you can add Porn to Subnautica, it just wouldn't be Subnautica which is a mainstream indie game, but a more niche porn variant.

Yes I'm sorry I didn't reference Floor Tile Simulator 2019 (FTS19 for those in the know) but a main stream indie game so I at least have a good chance you are probably quite familiar with the game I am talking about so that we speak a common language so I can get my point across.
And no you can't just add porn to Subnautica. It would change the entire premise of the game. You wouldn't be alone anymore. Being alone is core to the Subnautica experience. There was a reason I choose this game specifically to make my point.

That's precisely what I want changed! Less Garbage VNs, "Sandboxes" and "Stories" and more Actual Fucking Gameplay.
This not some New Concept. Japanese Games already mix all kinds of gameplay with porn.
In fact the Indie Game Scene and Porn Game Scene in Japan are synonymous.
And Western Adult Games that actually mix some gameplay, they aren't doing too bad either.

I don't entirely disagree with you here. I don't think it would be a bad thing if there is more diversity in gameplay so more people can get their fix whatever that is.
For me personally though I have played more gamelike adult games. And usually it just doesn't work. Either I am clicking through the porn because I am playing a game and the porn gets in the way of me playing the game or the opposite happens and the game mechanics get in the way of me enjoying the lewd scenes. Neither is a good outcome for a game dev. It means you wasted your time on one or the other and that you did not incorporate the game mechanics with the porn.

Like a small Indie Game? That I was just talking about?
Do people consider the "Story" games you see here with all those renders and branches that take years of updates to finish actually "small"?
Define fucking "small".

Never said that I did. Small would be a one-acter. Under an hour of gameplay. Maybe just one set and a couple of characters. Just something that allows you to make a lot of mistakes you never want to repeat in a longer game.
And don't think most games are hammered out in a weekend. Sure you have game jams but there you produce a tech demo something to build and improve upon to get a finished product. No matter what type of game you are talking about (AAA indie porn or even board games) often take years from concept to finished product. there are just things you cannot rush.

By following the same VN/Sandbox trends and never experimenting with gameplay.

Can you make Actual Gameplay instead of Content?

Sometimes trends are trends for a reason. I and many people with me like playing (and creating) VN's. IF you don't than don't play them. I don't like FPS games so I generally avoid them. That does not mean I think those games are bad (they can be of course). They are just not my thing.

 

[anne O'nymous]

Yesss... sure... Nobody on this forum has ever played a game... ever...

I think he was more talking about the devs than about the players. What make it worse since, when he write:

Having a bit of a different Content and Structure does not make if Gameplay.
Having Choices also does not necessary make it Gameplay either.

He clearly show that he haven't played this many games. Saying that there's no gameplay in titles like Sakura Dungeon, Damsels and Dungeons, The Headmaster, High School Crush Simulator, or Heavy Five, to only name few with different level of quality, is plain stupid.
That he don't like their gameplay, or think that they looks too amateurish, this can be understood. But denying the fact that there's effective gameplay mechanisms in those games, no, just no. Those games have more than just a different structure and rely on more things than simple choices.

 

[GNVE]

I think he was more talking about the devs than about the players. What make it worse since, when he write:


He clearly show that he haven't played this many games. Saying that there's no gameplay in titles like Sakura Dungeon, Damsels and Dungeons, The Headmaster, High School Crush Simulator, or Heavy Five, to only name few with different level of quality, is plain stupid.
That he don't like their gameplay, or think that they looks too amateurish, this can be understood. But denying the fact that there's effective gameplay mechanisms in those games, no, just no. Those games have more than just a different structure and rely on more things than simple choices.

Yeah sometimes I forget not everybody here is developing their own game/VN since I interact with so many creative and talented people here.
Thanks for the recommendations hadn't come across some of those before. Also don't forget Love of Magic I really like how the gameplay is integrated in that game.

 

[DuniX]

But there is no black and white line no matter how much you insist there is.

There is just like Walking Sims are not games.
Sure VNs can do just fine with their Content and Choices.
But when we are talking about Gameplay Mechanics, we must judge them as Games.

He clearly show that he haven't played this many games. Saying that there's no gameplay in titles like Sakura Dungeon, Damsels and Dungeons, The Headmaster, High School Crush Simulator, or Heavy Five, to only name few with different level of quality, is plain stupid.

And I fucking Quote Myself:

And Western Adult Games that actually mix some gameplay, they aren't doing too bad either.

If there really was nothing I wouldn't be here.

But denying the fact that there's effective gameplay mechanisms in those games, no, just no. Those games have more than just a different structure and rely on more things than simple choices.

What are the Player Skills and what is the Challenge?
Without skills or challenge they are not fucking games.
This is not a Debate, this is not a Mystery.
It's the basic definition of games.

 

[anne O'nymous]

And I fucking Quote Myself:

And Western Adult Games that actually mix some gameplay, they aren't doing too bad either.

If there really was nothing I wouldn't be here.

I quote yourself:

Not it isn't, nobody here knows what gameplay is.

Be coherent with yourself. Either nobody knows, or not everybody. But switching from one to another, depending of what fit better with your argumentation at this time, just make you looks like a fool.

What are the Player Skills and what is the Challenge?
Without skills or challenge they are not fucking games.
This is not a Debate, this is not a Mystery.
It's the basic definition of games.

You should have tried the games I named before writing this, it would have shown that you effectively care about the subject. But you didn't, and it clearly show.

Anyway, you know, there's more behind a game than player skills and Challenge. Where are the player Skills in Mario Kart ? Where is the challenge in a card game ? Are you also denying them the right to be called "games", or are you just trying to ventilate some real life frustration ?
By the way, and for information, the "basic definition of games" is "entertainment", and nothing more.

 

[DuniX]

Be coherent with yourself. Either nobody knows, or not everybody.

That's because I am talking about what people think, what they call gameplay and what they understand of game design.
Not about specific game examples.
So the only fool is you.

Where are the player Skills in Mario Kart ?

Here is a secret, first place is last place, and second place is the true winner.

Where is the challenge in a card game ?

Probabilities? Risk Management? Bluffing?

By the way, and for information, the "basic definition of games" is "entertainment", and nothing more.

Then what Is or Isn't Content?

 

[GNVE]

There is just like Walking Sims are not games.
Sure VNs can do just fine with their Content and Choices.
But when we are talking about Gameplay Mechanics, we must judge them as Games.

Again it depends on the game Fire Watch is generally considered a walking simulator but it is definitely a game.

Probabilities? Risk Management? Bluffing?

What about Solitaire? Definitely a game. But it has no stakes and in certain begin states not even a winstate (It is literally impossible to win).
I'd say solitaire is like a VN but with cards. just a series of meaningful choices where you do not have the full information that hopefully leads to a winstate.

 

[CocoVC]

Visual novels can be games if it has a gameplay loop.
For example, the Danganronpa visual novels have a gameplay loop - Exploration -> Motive/Call to Action -> Free Time -> Murder -> Investigation -> Trial -> End(Execution). It repeats itself every time with different complications, but it is still the same gameplay loop. The gameplay loop also complements and advances the linear plot until the end.

In my personal opinion, I think some of us devs are too eager to get the 'action' that we forgo the gameplay loop; or we spend too much time on other aspects of the game that we forget what about the gameplay loop. And then there are some of us who just want to tell an interactive story with pictures.

 

[DuniX]

What about Solitaire? Definitely a game. But it has no stakes and in certain begin states not even a winstate (It is literally impossible to win).

Just because you can't win or lose doesn't mean you don't acquire player skills at that game that increase over time.

I'd say solitaire is like a VN but with cards.

And the Rules of a VN are?
How do you improve at a Visual Novel?
I will give you that in some you do some Investigative Work, or Affection Raising like in Dating Sims.
"Her Story" is a good example tests that kind of player's investigation skill, which is a shame when its put together with the same Walking Sim drivel.

Visual novels can be games if it has a gameplay loop.
For example, the Danganronpa visual novels have a gameplay loop - Exploration -> Motive/Call to Action -> Free Time -> Murder -> Investigation -> Trial -> End(Execution). It repeats itself every time with different complications, but it is still the same gameplay loop. The gameplay loop also complements and advances the linear plot until the end.

That's just structure.
You can read a novel with the exact same structure, that doesn't make it a game.
Danganronpa is a game because you are doing Investigations, finding clues and doing puzzles, basically the same as Ace Attorney.

 

[Deleted member 1121028]

Why even bother?

You must be registered to see the links

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

 

[GNVE]

Why even bother?

You must be registered to see the links

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

Let me preface all this that I know how you intend the post I just can't help myself from giving a serious reaction I am not reacting to your post but to the article linked.

I do not trust a critic that dismisses the art he discusses out of hand without having experienced it.

The three games she chooses as examples do not raise my hopes for a video game that will deserve my attention long enough to play it.

No matter what else his article states that one line means he his opinion is worthless. Written from the top of the ivory tower calling down to the masses on how they should feel. I get he was a respected critic in his field but it seems to be the mason telling the baker he is doing his job wrong.

It fits with the superiority complex of older generations over the younger ones. It is documented throughout history that "today's youth" (fill in any generation right upto the beginning of written history) is a blight on society and all will go to hell. Jazz, the hight of musical art today, used to be derided as a scourge that will bring us all down. Critics wailed at how TV would turn the youth into mindless zombies. This is a cycle as old as time. Youth does something and the older generations are horrified over IT and when the youth are the older generation it is finally valued at its true value.

Now she shows stills from early silent films such as George Melies' "A Voyage to the Moon" (1902), which were "equally simplistic." Obviously, I'm hopelessly handicapped because of my love of cinema, but Melies seems to me vastly more advanced than her three modern video games. He has limited technical resources, but superior artistry and imagination.

This part in the article shows his ignorance on the topic. What about the games from years ago where developers had to work with less memory than the memory needed to hold a book. Or talking about technical genius. What about roller coaster tycoon that runs on modern systems without any issues. (It would be like one of his beloved movies from the black and white era being displayed on a modern movie projector without having to do anything other than load the reel.) That one still bogles my mind.

All games are art even if only some reach the level of high brow art (just like only a few movies/paintings/music/dance/architecture/etc manage to do that).

I really hate people stating how "thing youth is into" is horrible and how their thing from the past is way better. If that had been true we'd never have left the caves.

 

[DuniX]

Not only Games are Art.
Modern Art is not Art, it is Money Laundering.

 

[Deleted member 1121028]

Let me preface all this that I know how you intend the post I just can't help myself from giving a serious reaction I am not reacting to your post but to the article linked.

I do not trust a critic that dismisses the art he discusses out of hand without having experienced it.

No matter what else his article states that one line means he his opinion is worthless. Written from the top of the ivory tower calling down to the masses on how they should feel. I get he was a respected critic in his field but it seems to be the mason telling the baker he is doing his job wrong.

It fits with the superiority complex of older generations over the younger ones. It is documented throughout history that "today's youth" (fill in any generation right upto the beginning of written history) is a blight on society and all will go to hell. Jazz, the hight of musical art today, used to be derided as a scourge that will bring us all down. Critics wailed at how TV would turn the youth into mindless zombies. This is a cycle as old as time. Youth does something and the older generations are horrified over IT and when the youth are the older generation it is finally valued at its true value.


This part in the article shows his ignorance on the topic. What about the games from years ago where developers had to work with less memory than the memory needed to hold a book. Or talking about technical genius. What about roller coaster tycoon that runs on modern systems without any issues. (It would be like one of his beloved movies from the black and white era being displayed on a modern movie projector without having to do anything other than load the reel.) That one still bogles my mind.

All games are art even if only some reach the level of high brow art (just like only a few movies/paintings/music/dance/architecture/etc manage to do that).

I really hate people stating how "thing youth is into" is horrible and how their thing from the past is way better. If that had been true we'd never have left the caves.

He's 100% right tho.
You discard his correct opinion for the most dubious reasons tho - youth fallacy, percieved superiority complex, 'I dont like that argument' - but kinda fall flat making your own (Jazz as pinnacle of music lol). It's mostly non sequitur and easily discarded as such. Not sure where the ignorance live tho.

Not only Games are Art.
Modern Art is not Art, it is Money Laundering.

- Oh man, It's just like my Danganronpa game
\


Games are not art indeed (just consumable), so don't bother much o/

 

[Deleted member 1121028]

Mister glassware facepalm, there is no escape

 

[anne O'nymous]

This part in the article shows his ignorance on the topic. What about the games from years ago where developers had to work with less memory than the memory needed to hold a book. Or talking about technical genius. What about roller coaster tycoon that runs on modern systems without any issues. (It would be like one of his beloved movies from the black and white era being displayed on a modern movie projector without having to do anything other than load the reel.) That one still bogles my mind.

Exactly the thought I had when reading his part regarding cave painting.

He's 100% right tho.
You discard his correct opinion for the most dubious reasons tho - youth fallacy, percieved superiority complex, 'I dont like that argument' - but kinda fall flat making your own (Jazz as pinnacle of music lol). It's mostly non sequitur and easily discarded as such. Not sure where the ignorance live tho.

Sorry, but GNVE (if I read him correctly) and me are discarding his incorrect opinion for the exact same reason that make him consider cave painting as art:

They were great artists at that time, geniuses with nothing to build on, and were not in the process of becoming Michelangelo or anyone else. Any gifted artist will tell you how much he admires the "line" of those prehistoric drawers in the dark, and with what economy and wit they evoked the animals they lived among.

The fact is that the same strictly apply to many of the 70's and 80's games, and for the exact same reason.

Art can be found everywhere, it's not without reason that "art is in the eye of the beholder, and everyone will have their own interpretation" (E.A. Bucchianeri). It's precisely for this reason that many physicists and mathematicians see equations as a form of art. Asimov, who was both in addition to be a book author, said once (quoted from memory) that "if an equation is beautiful, then it's surely true". And the same apply to mechanics, engineers, coders, and so on, each one on their own field/discipline.
When something reach such level of beauty, then it's art, dot. We all implicitly and unconsciously agree to this. We all see a really beautiful car and think that it's a piece of art. We all see a really beautiful house, boat, natural scenery, woman, whatever, and say that it's a piece of art.

As someone who started to code in the mid 80's, and so know from first hand the constraints and capacities of this time, there's some games pre-90's that I consider like being piece of art. The way their authors, sometime a single person, achieved to reuse their/his content for multiple purpose, the way they/he achieved to perform so many actions in the few CPU time he had at their/his disposition, the way they/he used few pixels to trigger our imagination, this is art.
I'll go further, this ability to use the possibilities at your hands to achieve something bigger than believed possible, and the ability to make us see things that are in fact not present, is one of the definition of art. There's no difference between cave painting and some of the 70's/80's video games authors :
They were great artists at that time, geniuses with nothing to build on, and were not in the process of becoming Michelangelo or anyone else. Any gifted [coder] will tell you how much he admires the [processing] of those [games on limited CPU], and with what economy and wit they evoked the [reality] they [sent us in].

Therefore, why should cave painting be art, and some video games not be art, this simply because the person who talk know nothing about the subject ? Because yes, you need to know about the field/discipline before you can take the responsibility to define by yourself something as being art ; especially when you use some big words like "they'll never be". Else it's not the realization that you define, but the beauty. Then you aren't saying that "this is art", just that "this is beautiful" ; and those are two different statements.
It's exactly what happened to Impressionism at its early age ; having to improvise their own exposition because they are constantly kicked out of every art exposition, by some snobs who confused "I personally don't find this beautiful" with "it's not art". And, while it's far to be the only artistic movement that encountered this fate, it's the most relevant one, because there's really few differences between the 70's/80's video games and Impressionism. Both don't attempt to present you the reality, they offer you an impression of it, letting your brain recompose it the way it want.

But art in video games don't stopped at the 80's. The way Wolfenstein 3D's team achieved to do a 3D game, starting with a totally basic idea, "pixels now have a third dimension".
Of course, when you look at the nowadays games, it's ridiculous and hideous, relying solely on few basic tricks. The 3D is just a bunch of cubes that all have the same dimension, and for which each side look exactly the same. And what about Doom, the original ? The game gave us the notion of height by using a simple trick ; "like we only know how to represent things at ground level, we'll use a unfixed ground level and move it anytime we need it".
But the exact same can be said for Méliès' movies. His The coronation of king Edward VII is a masterpiece, but also a piece of shit relying on few basic tricks ; at least if you take it out of context, trying to compare it to what movies, even the worse ones, now are, and how they are made.
But when you look at them, both Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, and The coronation of king Edward VII, in their context, then they become art. This in the exact same way that, when putting them in their context, Roger Ebert consider that cave paintings are art.

In the end, the truth is that Ebert opinion is clearly based on a bias where actually recognized arts represent some kind of peak of the artistic difficulty and artistic beauty. He recognize cave painting as art, because he achieve to conceive and understand the difficulty of their realization. And like he isn't able to do the same with the video games making process, it deny to video games the right for some of them to be pieces of art.
At best, it's just a confusion between "beauty" and "art", at worse it's nothing more than plain bullshit. But in both case, it come from nothing less than a superiority complex, since he consider that, despite understanding nothing about the subject, and not being able to conceive its difficulty, he is still fully qualified to decide if it is art or not. Worse, he even consider that he's more qualified that someone who understand the subject and conceive its difficulty, the woman he talk about.

 

[GNVE]

Exactly the thought I had when reading his part regarding cave painting.
Sorry, but GNVE (if I read him correctly) and me are discarding his incorrect opinion for the exact same reason that make him consider cave painting as art:

Yes you read it correctly I just couldn't put it into words as eloquently as you did. Great post.

 

[Deleted member 1121028]

[...]

Ayyy, I mostly posted in jest and nobody was supposed to take the bait ><'
Anyway then, can't really answer point by point, so I will just develop a bit.

I guess I'm in a somewhat polar opposite direction. And never been a fan of complete relativism toward art or toward everything in general.

Problem with broader definition of art is that is make everything out of it, therefore nothing really is. One could argue a swiss swatch or the empire state buildiing is art, as the result of pure craftsmanship and engeninnring. It's all fine and dandy but doesn't help to see further.

If I had my own definition, I would say art is substance that is kept over time, like watching a perspective, or something among the line. The most substance the better art. Of course it depends how you interpret it and where you set the bar. It also make it a bit exclusive, certainly leave a lot a the door (that popular manga ain't gonna sit with Dostoevsky anytime soon).

In that aspect, video games are rather poor. May it be by their narration, mostly a boring serie Z cinematographic experience/writting that no one would dare to watch/read if it was not video game, or their designs, a more or less complex set of rules. They aren't particulary shine and express a deeper substance, which is totally fine.

"Press X to feel" - circa 2011


In its simpliest from, they are just toy representative of their period and that's basically about it. I'm sure some academics can scratch the bottom of the barrel, but that doesn't make it any less meangless. You can view that at extremely bigoted, but I think it's the contrary somewhat, games as a medium don't need deeper substance to subsiste. In a way I think games could win to let them breath and not over-conceptualizing them.

Remind me reading papers that talk about Ico and Shadow of the Colossus as some kind of transcendental experience. Really make you think lmao. I would add, in the past, people have no shy to categorize minor and major art or art at all, without putting people into existential crisis. It's a sad society when everything carry the same weight.

Obviously 'games are not art' is a bit provocative, but not really that far from reality imo.

 

[DuniX]

The Real Question is Not if Games are Art, that's child's play conundrums.

The Burning Question is if Art is Creativity, Inspiration, Skill and Investment, then is Playing Games Art?
Is the Empire/Civilization I have constructed a piece of Artwork?
Is a Let's Play Art? Is Speedrunning an Art?
Does Beautifully Pwning a noob Art? Is a battle between two expert players True Beauty?

Was I an Artist every day without knowing it?
That is the kind of question that keeps me at night.