Video+Games+as+Art

In recent years, a debate has risen as to whether or not video games can be considered a form of art. As any gamer can tell you, the best of games can not only be aesthetically beautiful, but also engrossing through complex storylines and relatable characters. However, is this enough to be considered art like a novel or a well produced film?
 * Can Video Games be Art?**

For many contemporary critics, the answer is a stark "no." One of the most referenced critics holding this position is Roger Ebert, a famous film critic who strongly believes that games cannot be considered art. At least not within the lifetime of anyone living today. In an article simply entitled "[|Video games can never be art]," Ebert outlines the reasons why video games lack the essence of an art form. One point Ebert makes lies within the very definition of art itself. Ebert bases his definition of art on an explanation found on Wikipedia. According to his source, art tends to be more concerned with the expression of ideas, while games are based upon a more goal oriented format. It is for this reason that Ebert holds that games cannot be art because they fundamentally lack the components of art through it's very nature. However, Ebert also stresses the definition of a game as well. He holds that since games have rules and outcomes, they cannot be considered art. But, he also acknowledges that one could cite a more immersive, objective-less game to counter his point. However, it's Ebert's opinion that at that point the game would no longer be considered a game and would cross into the realm of representation of a novel, film or idea. It is at the point when the experience overrides the objectives that a game ceases to be a game. Ebert does later concede that games are in fact still in it's infancy as an industry and could have the potential to grow into something more. There are caveats to this point thought. For one, Ebert feels that when compared to other entertainment industries at their beginning, such as the film industry, video games lack the artistry that the other industries had in spite of their limited technology. He also adds that although games may be considered an art form sometime in the future, it will not be in the lifetime of anyone living today. However, despite Ebert's strong feelings on the subject, many of his contemporaries seem to disagree.
 * Video Games Cannot be Art**

One adamant defender of gaming as an art form is [|Kellee Santiago], a game developer and president of thatgamecompany. According to Kellee, these artistic games have existed for quite some time. During her presentation below, Kellee references a few games that she feels qualify as modern art.
 * Video Games as Artistic Expression**

media type="youtube" key="K9y6MYDSAww?fs=1" height="385" width="480" align="center"

The first game she references is called Waco Resurrection, in which players take control of David Karesh during the infamous standoff between SWAT teams and the Davidians lead by Karesh in Waco, Texas. According to Santiago, this game qualifies as art because it provided a different take on the events that unfolded at that time. This unique perspective qualifies this game as art because it is a personal expression of opinion of what took place during that controversial time. She then goes on to reference the game Braid, a game which upon initial inspection appears to be a game like any other. It's Super Mario Bros. style gameplay of running and jumping may seem ordinary, but there is one mechanic that sets it apart from other games. In Braid, you cannot die as every mistake can be corrected by going back in time and redoing the part you died at. According to Santiago, the implications that the time-travel mechanic has upon our own lives is where the artistic quality of the game lies, as she herself admits to reflecting on her own mistakes and what she would do differently after playing this game. Finally, she mentions the game Flower, a Playstation game in which players control the wind as it blows flowers through a beautiful natural landscape. Despite being aesthetically beautiful, Santiago argues that the true artistic value of this game lies within the balance that the player must create between the urban and the natural. However, Santiago is not alone in her assertion, many notable figures including film director [|Guillermo del Toro] feel that games can be considered art, not to mention a vast majority of the gaming population.

All in all, there are strong feelings on both sides of the debate. Some, such as Ebert strongly feel that games will probably never achieve the status of art due to some intrinsic values that hold it back, while others like Santiago feel that artistic games are in existence even now. In the end who's to say who's right and who's wrong. It seems as though as long as there are games this debate will live on because as we all know beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
 * Final Thoughts?**