Forums / Discussion / Serious Debate

I love to play video games, but to me there nothing more than a fun hobby, but i've never understood why they we're so important to people, some people try to liken them to famous books and important movies, but are video games really on that level. Books like Uncle Tom's cabin and Movies like Rebel Without a Cause have had major effects on American society as a whole. But when has a video done this?

I'm sorry but until video games have an impact other than "did this make some kid shoot up a school" I don't see why people put so much importance on them.

i don't even think video games made anyone shoot up schools, but catcher in the rye made a guy shoot john lennon. I don't think any video game made a widespread cultural impact since pac-man.

most video games are commercial products so i think we're a long way from where it becomes an influential art form

Someday there might be a game that changes the world, but definitely not yet. It's too new of an art form and also the society it grew up in isn't too plagued with major issues. Also, like Blubber said, most games are made for money and I can't really think of one that was made to create a political or social impact like your example of Uncle Tom's Cabin. Many games do try to make a statement like the MGS series, but of course that is always behind the goal of providing entertainment and gaining profit even though in my opinion games like MGS and others are good at getting their message across.

To answer your question, yes they are.

The problem is that games can't really make a widespread social message because 1.) the demographic is much smaller than books and (movies mostly young people) and the only ones that would play game with an in depth story with themes/messages would be hardcore gamers which narrows the demographic down even further. 2.) companies and investors see games as simple ways to make money so they might not go for it and take a risk with it, which is why we end up with the same stories and reboots over and over again, like call of duty and Mario, which of course sell great.

There may be one day when video games can be accepted as important, but I'm not sure if that will happen within a few decades or so. I myself personally do see some games as important, more as artistic pieces (I.E. Psychonauts), but not that many have made me actually think on a deeper level, with the BioShock series being an example of one that got to me, but I do know that a large majority of games that get made are 100% for a profit and nothing more. Which the last statement I had there also makes me question if most modern films can also be considered art as well, as films were also a subject that took many years to be accepted as both art and something that matters, but a huge amount of movies that get made, mostly forgettable summer blockbusters, just feel like something a studio just shoved out to make money. Also similar to what Starscream said about video game companies making reboots, the film industry also doesn't take any risks anymore with numerous films from the 70's, 80's, and soon to be 90's receiving some remake or reboot, mostly just to capitalize on the name of the franchise or film and nothing more, despite there being a handful of some good remakes. Sorry if I went off track with the film talk, but its the only thing I can really compare video games to, as I myself mostly only read comics/graphic novels/manga and scripts instead of actual books.

no

Should they be SRS BZNS? Well no….I certainly hope not.

Should they take priority over other goals in life? Of course not. It's just a hobby.

But I do think Vidya deserves some level of importance to be up there with other creative media.

I know that the debate over whether or not Vidya counts as an art form is still in the air. But personally I think it should be. If Art is creative work in visual and sound then Vidya has it. If art is expression of ideas then Vidya has that. If art is storytelling and characterization, Vidya has that too.

Back when Vidya was just green moving shapes used for simple amusement then no it wasn't important at all. Not any more than any other kids toy that got sucked up a vacuum. And certainly nobody thought of it that way.

But it's come a long way now, enough to be equally as creative as filmmaking. Surely it warrants some credit.

eeeh, the guy hated lennon for all the bad shit he did, the whole catcher in the rye made me do'it is the same story as the "doom made them do'it" story, and we all know how well that story held

Should they be SRS BZNS?

Video games revolutionized the entertainment industry, I guess that's sorta important. eSports is becoming more and more popular and is even getting their own TV channel of sorts, so gaming on a competitive level is important.

In the end you shoot the bad dudes, level up, and feel good about yourself. They aren't really that important outside of video game culture.

Games just aren't for everyone, like movies and music are. There's very few people who don't even watch movies or never listen to music. Maybe one day, but not now.

Games are also more made for fun than to move you or tell a story. Even the best stories in video games need gameplay to back it up.

And maybe you don't see video games as more than a fun hobby, but there's always people who do. I don't see sports as a big part of my life, others do.

People keep comparing video games to books, movies, music etc, but it's simply something else entirely.

Well, the main difference that separates video games from movies and literature is its interactivity (better known as gameplay).

Movies and literature have to rely on a story and a proper use of words/actions in order to captivate an audience, while video games have to rely on their gameplay in order to draw players.

Of course, that doesn't mean that video games can't be an art. Good visuals and decent writing can even enhance the player's experience. But video games are not a good medium to deliver a message because they focus on the fun factor.
People are more influenced by movies and literature because they often think and talk about the story, the moral behind it and the situations that happen within it. With video games the players are more focused on the gameplay, and will often think on how they will tackle the challenges within the game.

Not to entirely side-step the issue, but I think a more useful question is:

"Do video games have worth?"

While they may not be entirely 'important' per se, they have worth in terms of entertainment, as well as a certain critique or experience which cannot be delivered otherwise, and sometimes even as art.

They have purpose, they have worth, and are in some sense important.

In all mediums there are different scales, some pieces of media exist to be consumer material, some exist to be thought provoking analysis. Video games are no exception to this rule, while a lot of video games are obviously made with consumer in mind, there are also a number of video games that exist to be artistic. Journey is the example that gets thrown around in these arguments and for good reason, it takes advantage of the player aspect of video games in order to put forward ideas on cooperation between people. To put my point in a less snobby way, essentially all media is made for different reasons, some for arts sake, some for profits sake, video games are not an exception (Even if to a lesser scale).

Comparing the average video game to the average movie will garner you similar results. I mean, if we're comparing The Lego Movie and GTA V, neither are exactly art. But that's the point, they aren't meant to be. If people are comparing Watch Dogs to Citizen Kane, then yeah, they're being stupid, but it's only the same as if someone compared Journey to Alvin and the Chipmunks. All video games are not art, just as all movies are not art. It really depends on the aim of the thing in question, what's it being made for. Video games have the added bonus of player interaction, which allows for very unique ideas to be portrayed.

So to answer your question, video games are the same as any other medium, they can be thought provoking or disposable, it all depends on the aim it's going for. Not all video games should be taken seriously, but that's the same with anything else too. Sure artsy video games aren't seen as much, but I'd argue that video games as a medium is only really getting comfortable recently, so there are bound to be less examples. The potential is there though, and we have games that prove that. I think when Video Games maybe start to become more accepted, then they'll start having more of an impact, but it's not off to a bad start. Journey wasn't exactly ignored, was it?

As for why people are so attached to video games, that's a whole different idea, and I will spare you the essay on gamer identity and why it means a lot to people.

I'd just like to give out an event where a kid shot his parents because they took away his Halo 3. It's probably more of a mental issue, but there's no way we can separate the event itself from the object in question, much like the Dark Knight shooting a couple of years back.

As for my opinion on the importance of video games, it depends on how you ask it, much like how a lot of things are relative from one person to another. "Art is useless" Oscar Wilde himself said. Nowadays anything can be considered Art, and seeing how actual curators who have an educational background in art have set up exhibits for video games, I think it's pretty safe to call gaming art. For some people, Art is their lives. There are people who love being around art and make a living in making art. Art however, is useless in the big picture. Fields like Economics, Engineering, and Law are much more important for humanity to survive in this era. Culture and art are kinda like the side product of a prospering economy. The better the economy, the better the art individuals part of that economy produce.

That's an analysis on the importance of the art side of video games. There's also a business side. Video games are the products of an industry after all. From what I've read around is video games are a powerhouse in bringing home the bacon, for America at least. These American game companies with their exports all over the world bring the money from nearly every nation right at America's doorstep. As a major player in bringing home export money into the nation and cutting down on import leakages thus helping in keeping debt sustainable, video games as an industry is very important.

In short, video games are important to us gamers, since they're a part of our lives. They're less important to other people. As a piece of art, they're pretty useless since art in itself is useless. As an industry however, much like hollywood and those big music companies, they make a lot of money and help the economy significantly, which makes video games important in the big picture.

Well let me put it this way: the motion picture camera was invented in 1891, and the first time a true story was combined with true gameplay to form a complete work was some time in the 80s. So compare where video games are at now to where film was at in the 20s- you might be surprised how far it'd need to come before cementing its place as a universally respected art form. How many pieces had really "changed the world" by then? (Pretty ridiculously high standard.) Birth of a Nation, maybe, but not much else. And that's not even mentioning how they were only just figuring out how to integrate sound.
I think we'll be seeing the Casablancas and Citizen Kanes of vidya sooner rather than later.

I think of games as Interactive art and story telling, where a tale is told through interaction rather then reading or watching it, a story which grabs your attention more so then any book can provide, which is why it is so powerful.

Sure, they're a form of expression, but like comics I don't think most people will see them in that way. Games first and foremost are supposed to be fun, those that are not but are "artistic" are usually considered pretentious.

It's like you never read Watchmen or The Dark Knight Returns. In fact a comic book is made up of art and writing.

Do you believe that The Walking Dead game (based on a comic book) is the most pretentious thing ever?

Woah, calm down there. No need to be defensive.

Where were you getting that implication from? I was stating that the general public does not view video games or comics as "artistic media". I think the latter has made some changes in that direction in the last few decades but most people still believe that comics are not art.

The "pretentious" thing comes from the fact that some games are produced to be "artistic" without the gameplay taken into account. While they have some appeal to a very limited audience, most people find them pretentious because they fail to be a video game and linger on being an "interactive experience". Games CAN be artistic AND fun (Okami is a great example) but most "artistic" games focus far too much on being artistic than really being fun. I have no idea why you think I was talking about comics in regards to this statement. I am not into comics but I can see their appeal in adults and I have read comics that would definitely be considered a form of expression (The Crow for example).

I'm not really sure how you could interpret my post any other way.

My comment didn't sound hostile to me. No need to be defensive.

But that's the point I was trying to prove. Comics are considered art to a lot of non-comic readers. Watchmen being a great example because if you heard of it, you know it's considered art. Video games aren't at that point yet.

Anyway going back to vidya, that was the something very obvious. Everyone knows a game can be pretentious, but that's subjective. I consider Bastion and Journey pretentious but others would disagree. No need to patronize.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. However, gameplay is usually considered more important to the majority of the people playing video games. I almost wonder if the fact that a game can be pretentious means that it can also be considered a form of expression. They're both related anyways.

I mean, I think the reason why the public doesn't view video games as a form of expression is because the most popular ones cater to the gameplay aspect and don't really give two fucks about expression, outside of a few noteworthy titles. Mom's buying their kids Mario or Sonic don't know anything about games that could have deeper storylines and intense themes. Although frankly, I don't really think they care.

I still think that you're not really quite right with how the public considers comics though. Some people who don't read comics will recognize the fact that Watchmen is art, but many people will probably still figure that since it's a comic, that it isn't really anything special or some other biased crap. There are people who still do this and these people tend to be the majority, but I think comic book movies are helping people getting more interested in comics. I think things have improved for comics in the last 30 years in this case but it's definitely "not quite there" yet.

But that's always the case. A lot of people still don't think films are art because of stuff like Transformers. I think the true difference is in the fans and the community based around films and comics see them as art but with video games a lot of the people who are really big fans don't consider any games art.