Defiant Prodigy: September 2013

The following is a term paper I wrote for my technical writing class. I do not have a strong opinion about the subject, but I "took a side" in order to play advocate and encourage conversation on this confusing subject.

Hope you enjoy!

ART VIDEO GAMES

By Raymond Skinner

In the last few years, there has been much discussion and controversy on the growth of video games in our society. The recent trends in technology have changed video games in ways that people 10 years ago would have never conceived. This evolution in technology has allowed video games to implement complex artificial intelligence, immense three dimensional environments, and has given way to allow artists to express themselves in the game industry. However, one thing remains about games that will never change. Video games are not art. They can convey meaning, evoke emotions, and can even be a medium in which artists can express themselves, but the fact remains that games are systems with rules and goals. Artificial intelligence has no emotion, it is a precompiled list of responses to pre-determined instances.

The definition of art is, “The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated for their beauty or emotional power”. ¹ At first glance many video games seem to fit the definition of art very well. Video games seem imaginative, it is obviously in visual form, hence the use of the word video in describing the type of game, and many games are very much appreciated for their emotional power or beauty. What we are seeing is not video games as art. Instead, what we are seeing is art expressed using video games. A game is a system, a set of rules and well calculated outcomes. Our ever evolving technology simply allows artists to express themselves in this system, but the system itself is not art. Saying video games are art, would be like saying a pencil and paper are art. Sure, someone can pick up a pencil and express themselves in ways that can only be expressed by drawing on paper, but that doesn't make the pencil and paper art any more than a system of defined rules such as a game can be declared art.

For instance, a painting hanging on the wall may be art, but one wouldn't say the frame holding the painting is art. The maker of the frame may have taken great care to make the frame beautiful, but this is done in craft. The frame is a structure. Structure in itself is the opposite of art, structure takes careful planning, a desired outcome, and does not express emotion. Structure is logical. In the instance of the frame, its desired outcome was to hold the painting up and preserve its form so that the art can be viewed by others. In this same way video games are the structural support for the artists who operate in these games.

Roger Ebert said in his article Video Games Can Never Be Art, "One obvious difference between art and games is that you can win a game. It has rules, points, objectives, and an outcome."²Ebert was a film critic for the Chicago Sun-Times from 1967 until his death in 2013. His reviews were in over 200 newspapers across the world, most of them in the United States and he published over 20 books.³Ebert makes a great point that a game by definition has rules and objectives. Anything that may be referred to as a video game without rules and objectives, without an outcome, is inherently not a game. It may be a work of interactive art, it may even be fun, but without rules it cannot be declared a video game.

Brian Moriarty, a Professor of Interactive Media and Game Development at Worchester Polytechnic Institute, was quoted at the Game Developer’s Conference in 2011 stating this, "How can an activity motivated by decisions, striving, goals and competition, a deliberate concentration of the force of Will, be used to transcend Will itself? You might as well try to smother a flame with oxygen." He goes on to say, “In my Digital Game Design I class, I define "play" as a superfluous activity. I define a "toy" as something that elicits play, and a "game" as a toy with rules and a goal. Games are purposeful. They are defined as the exercises of choice and will towards a self-maximizing goal. But sublime art is like a toy. It elicits play in the soul. The pleasure we get from it lies precisely in the fact that it has no rules, no goal, no purpose."⁴Professor Moriarty’s definition of a “game” as a toy with rules and a goal, was a perfect example that games in nature are not art. A toy is meant to be fun, they can encourage our own imaginations and inspire us to create works of art. Toys can even involve a work of art, or perhaps an original idea to design that toy was based on an artist’s conception but it remains a toy.

A game is designed to respond to interaction and gives the player ownership over the outcome. Giving the player ownership over decisions and interactions, takes away any authorship the creator may have had. The experience that the player has is based on the decisions that he makes during the game. Some argue that linear style games are art because the author gives no option to the player to alter the story and have their own experience. The fact is, this is wrong. Yes, in these linear games, there is an obvious path and there is an author behind the story that wants the player to experience a certain outcome, but the game itself lends the player choice. Even if that choice is to run off a ledge and end the turn, or simply the option to retry the level or quit the game takes the authorship out of the hands of the author and puts it in the hands of the player. Therefore, even strongly linear games, because they are games by definition they cannot and will not ever be art. Once a developer crosses that line, once he makes the decision to completely remove any authorship and choice from player, the experience can then be truly determined if it is art or not. By doing this, however, the developer can no longer call this a video game. With no objectives or goals, no options, no competition, no control it is simply no longer a game. Without play, there is no game.

Video game design has evolved. The process, technology, and depth of games have become more and more complex. Video games can do more now than they ever could and the fact that this evolution has incorporated art into these systems has changed the world of artificial intelligence and virtual reality in ways that could not have been conceived. The involvement of art in video games is the reason the discussion of games as art has arose. The confusion of the subject is mostly due to the lack of knowledge that people have about video games. Most people see what’s on their televisions, phones, computer screens and they see the art. They see the beauty that lies within these systems. What they don’t see on the surface is that behind these works of art are a set of rules and loops, also known as the game engine. Even though these have always existed in games, with the graphic intensity of most games developed during this era, many people do not understand that what they are really seeing is art work supported by an engine of complex code. In the same way a car has an engine, a chassis, and a body, video games have similar components. The body is not the car, rather just the outer shell that everyone can see. In a similar way, the art on the screen is not the game, it’s just the part that everyone can see. Behind this art is the engine that moves the game, gives the player control. The game is not art, even though art is obviously present in the game world. Without the game the art wouldn’t be brought to a screen and it may not even exist. Here is an example of the classic game Tetris:

http://tetrisconcept.net/forum/showthread.html?t=2130

Notice that the above game has very little graphical interface, and absolutely no art. Below I have included an image of the new Tetris game, Tetris Party. The game itself has very little difference in the rules or the game play and the main objective remains the same as it did in when the game was originally created. Notice that the game looks completely different. There is much art on the screen. From the blocks themselves to the background, art is very apparent in this game. Although the game seems to be more “artistic” it is still a game, with rules and a goal. This game is not art, but a vessel in which the artist can portray his art to an audience.

Another example of a game that has adapted art into its interface is Dungeons and Dragons. Below is a picture of a character sheet from the pen and paper, tabletop version of Dungeons and Dragons. The game has a plethora of rules and attributes, and lends much authorship to the player. There is no art in this pen and paper game, the player’s must use their own imaginations to truly engage in a role playing environment.

http://www.ddmsrealm.com/dungeons-and-dragons-next-aka-5th-edition/

The game developer Turbine inc, has designed a game based on these same attributes and rules. The game is called Dungeons and Dragons Online. Dungeons and Dragons Online (DDO), is a very rich graphical experience. There were many artists involved in the development of the game and lends itself as a great tool for artists and players alike to express themselves in this environment. However, the game still relies on the same rules and attributes as its pen and paper counterpart and even adds an entirely new set of complex rules for gameplay. DDO remains a game, and even though a great experience with fantastic art, it is not art. Below I have included a screenshot of the game.

http://www.ddo.com/en/news/ddo-screenshot-week-135

im Munroe interviewed with Nora Young in 2010 for the Canadian radio show Spark. During the interview Young revealed her opinion that video games are more closely comparable to the design of architecture where the designer creates a virtual environment.⁵Architecture isn’t art, it is engineering. Developing these three dimensional and two dimensional worlds takes a great deal of skill and engineering, similar to architecture. There is a term used to describe games with artistic style and meaningful plots, as “art games”. The term art games is contradictory, because a game can’t be art, and art isn’t a game. The meaning of the term seems to fluctuate between discussions on the internet. Some of these discussions being about games with great art in them. Others may be about games that give the player a meaningful experience. It’s a good thing when games can convey meaning because it shows that a game can be used for educational purposes, however calling a game that has purpose “art” is incorrect. The meaning may have come from an element in the plot that told a story, and that story may have been art. Telling the story was a game objective, the meaning that was conveyed was invoked by the game mechanics. This is in the same way that graphic art is conveyed in games, the player has to play the game to see the art but that doesn’t make it an art game.

Tale of Tales gave a presentation at the Art History of Games in 2010, during which they stated, “People have been playing games for as long as they have existed. Even animals play games. Lifeforms with brains seem to have a need for playful behaviour. The reasons for this might be medical, psychological or social.” And goes on to state, “Art, on the other hand is not born out of a physical need or an animal instinct. Art is born out of a desire to touch the untouchable. To explore the unknown… There are no rules in art that cannot be broken. There's no goal that does not evaporate as soon as it is discovered. Art enables us to see the mystery in the mundane and to recognize the unfamiliar. Art is a conscious act of an author who seeks to communicate with an audience in a language without grammar, in a structure that is undefined with no predetermined goal and no rewards but finding yourself.”⁶During the same presentation the company also revealed its opinion about the industry stating, “Despite a few noble attempts, overall, videogames are empty systems that only serve the purpose of wasting time. For a small subset of the population, this is more than enough. But the rest of us wants a bit more, or simply something different.” I have included two of the images given along with this presentation below:

http://tale-of-tales.com/tales/OverGames.html

Tale of Tales is a company who has made games that many have proclaimed as art games and yet the company itself denies that logic. Below is a screenshot from their game The Path. This game is one of the many games that are included in the category falsely defined as art games.

http://tale-of-tales.com/ThePath/gallery.html

Video Games involve many different kinds of art such as written stories, two dimensional and three dimensional graphic art, and music. Art would not be where it is today if it were not for video games. The evolution in games has not only opened the way for artists to express themselves, but has created an income stream for many creative types. Art in games is by far the most advanced, detailed, and photo-realistic creative work out there. Even the “art games” movement, although contradictory by definition, has stirred up a great deal of art in the field of game design. However, unless the definition of art or the definition of game changes, video games are not and will never be art.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Definition: Art, Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 2013.

2. Roger Ebert, "Video games can never be art", Chicago Sun-Times, Sept. 2010

3. http://www.rogerebert.com/memoriam, 2013.

4. Eric Caoli, http://www.gamesetwatch.com, March, 2011.

5. Nora Young & Dan Misener, “Games as Art”, Spark, October, 2011.

6. Auriea Harvey & Michaël Samyn, “Over Games”, Art History of Games in Atlanta, Georgia, February, 2010.

Defiant Prodigy

Sunday, September 29, 2013

GameMaker:Studio vs GameMaker 8 in relation to GameMaker's Apprentice

Saturday, September 21, 2013

The Game Maker's Apprentice

Friday, September 20, 2013

Term Paper, Technical Writing