This topic became tiresome yesterday, and now it's becoming just pathetic.
everything i write is a ramble and should not be taken seriously.... seriously. ♥
it's an interesting and valid debate that provokes a lot of discussion in all sorts of places. i don't see how it has any less merit than any other form of discussion on the game. sure, it's abstract and conceptual but it makes a nice change from going "ooh!" at people's generic cityscapes.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
I find the concept of debating anything that has an incredible bias due to it's subjective nature to be ridiculous.
everything i write is a ramble and should not be taken seriously.... seriously. ♥
lol... oh boy. that solipsistic black hole. there's a reason all philosophers argue against the void of solipsism: it's a moronic dead end.
Last edited by Uzique (2011-05-20 06:16:39)
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
everything i write is a ramble and should not be taken seriously.... seriously. ♥
compelling. please do go on.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
That would be in defiance to my previous statement, for even this topic is subjective.
everything i write is a ramble and should not be taken seriously.... seriously. ♥
no, it's not.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
How tiring.
everything i write is a ramble and should not be taken seriously.... seriously. ♥
the problem with solipsism (and the logical fallacy of its argument) is that it creates a total void of values. philosophers and serious discussions about any form of common value have always acknowledged (and dismissed) the solipsistic argument. sure, art is subjective; everything is subjective. every single object and experience is perceived and received by the individual subject. that gets us almost absolutely nowhere. with the same logic you could apply the same sweeping denouncement of all values and judgements, including those of morals and social mores. all of a sudden your compelling argument ends up just being a nihilistic refutation of absolutely everything; a catch-all response that furthers nothing productive. the interesting and important part of philosophy (in this case, the theory of beauty and aesthetics) is how we negotiate and get beyond the subjective nature of our individual lives to establish some forms of shared, coherent structure. thus, yes art is 'subjective' (in the sense that we will all have different opinions on it), but there is also an objective (as objective as anything can be that is, with the implicit acknowledgement of our relative and subjective experiences) standard. this is where the aesthetics discussion is located. trying to lower any discussion on the topic back to down to "it's subjective" is just facile. there's a reason people don't rely on that 'argument' in any serious discourse: it goes absolutely nowhere. it's a pseudo-philosophy.
Last edited by Uzique (2011-05-20 06:35:22)
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
Might be good to take this to another thread, we are way off course here (I'm guilty as well)
dont bother .
It'll just become a trolling shitstorm.
It'll just become a trolling shitstorm.
holy fuck shut up
for a fatty you're a serious intellectual lightweight.
trust a scot
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
to what, tell you all to shut up and stop arguing about whether a game is art? it's boring, dull to read, and completely off-topic.Uzique wrote:
trust a scot
for a fatty you're a serious intellectual lightweight.
boring and dull for you, maybe.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
completely off topic.Uzique wrote:
boring and dull for you, maybe.
for a fatty you're a serious intellectual lightweight.
somebody called the video-game in discussion 'art'; we are discussing whether or not the video game in the topic is an example of 'art'.
i'm failing to see how it's off topic.
i'm failing to see how it's off topic.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
I would agree that stuff made in minecraft definitely isn't art, but to say an entire game (any for that matter) isn't?Uzique wrote:
i'm still of the opinion that no video-game is art, so a sandbox game isn't going to be the first to break through into the category...
-a lot- of work goes into creating one and I don't think it needs any less thought or skill than writing a book or making a painting.
inane little opines
in a thread about minecraft
the thing is, a book of artistic merit is conceived of by one mind-- it's a staggering work of talent by a genius.Shocking wrote:
I would agree that stuff made in minecraft definitely isn't art, but to say an entire game (any for that matter) isn't?Uzique wrote:
i'm still of the opinion that no video-game is art, so a sandbox game isn't going to be the first to break through into the category...
-a lot- of work goes into creating one and I don't think it needs any less thought or skill than writing a book or making a painting.
a game is a sum of its parts, worked on by lots of specialists each contributing their part. i wouldn't say it's art, on that basis. it's not an 'art' to do the physics coding for a game engine; nor is it an art to do the character voice-overs. you're doing work that involves talent and skill, but to an entertaining end, not an artistic one. it lacks high-vision and purpose. it's an interesting view, though, i agree, to view a game in-itself as an artistic artefact. as of yet, though, i don't think any computer game is approaching enough cohesion and unity to be considered as one singular 'idea'.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
amount of work, thought, and skill don't determine what is art, it's the end product that ultimately determines what is art or not.Shocking wrote:
I would agree that stuff made in minecraft definitely isn't art, but to say an entire game (any for that matter) isn't?Uzique wrote:
i'm still of the opinion that no video-game is art, so a sandbox game isn't going to be the first to break through into the category...
-a lot- of work goes into creating one and I don't think it needs any less thought or skill than writing a book or making a painting.
Going by that, would you consider a car art? Probably not, no?
Can you judge the individual parts of a game as being art? Such as the concepts of say the characters, story and the visuals?
Can you judge the individual parts of a game as being art? Such as the concepts of say the characters, story and the visuals?
inane little opines
nope. not by uzique's higher definition, no.Shocking wrote:
Going by that, would you consider a car art? Probably not, no?
Can you judge the individual parts of a game as being art? Such as the concepts of say the characters, story and the visuals?
What about games that incorporate music. An interactive video.
everything i write is a ramble and should not be taken seriously.... seriously. ♥