Fantastic Blognanza!

I forgot to include part of Greg’s response to Video Games as Art when I originally posted it! Well, it’s there now, so you can either go read the whole thing or just the part that I left out below:

Shadow of the Colossus is probably even a better candidate for “arthood” than Myst, IMHO. Like Myst, Shadow inexorably guides the player down a pre-set path, while still giving him/her the opportunity to explore a truly vast world. There are strong themes of sadness, loss, nobility, and heroism. It was my impression while playing the game (and afterwards) that the creators had a strong, consistent artistic vision that they were trying to express through the form. Shadow was also eminently reviewable in that every cutscene could be re-watched (this feature is extremely common in games nowadays, actually, and so could be seen as a major step towards reviewability, considering how plot is usually advanced mainly through such cutscenes), and that every boss battle could easily be replayed; other than these two elements, the only other real aspect of the game to be reviewed is in exploring the huge realm where the action takes place, and this whole area is fully accessible from hour one.

In a sense, I suppose that I am claiming that video games (at least, some video games) are really just glorified films, and so if film can be considered art, then so can games. This isn’t so bad, though. At the very least, video games allow for something that films do not — they are able to get the audience’s attention for a much longer period of time. Thus, a game can tap into all the visual and aural opportunities afforded by cinema, but demand the same time-intensity as, say, a novel. It is the very interactive nature of video games that allows them such length: an audience that is actively engaged with the work is more likely to pay attention for a longer period time — over the span of days if necessary, in the case of games. The real problem with all this, of course, is that I don’t know of any games that really take advantage of this unique artistic opportunity.

I also believe that interactivity in games can be used to an artistic end more significant that merely entertaining and preoccupying the player to keep his or her attention invested in the game. For example, I could imagine a game in which the gamer initially has a great degree of control over the action, but then gradually takes degrees of freedom away from the user. Perhaps the climax of the game could occur in the revelation that even from the very beginning, the player’s illusion of control has been been only that — an illusion — and that he has in reality been subject to hidden orchestrations and machinations, revealed only at the end. The power of such a game would derive primarily from how the user’s ability to interact with the game changes as time goes on. (A game that deserves special credit here, I think, is Eternal Darkness, and how it utilizes the video game form to create a uniquely eerie experience for the gamer. In the case of Eternal Darkness, whether this is merely a gimmick or a legitimate technique in artistry is up to debate.)

Essentially, I can sum up my whole stance with the statement that games can be “Art” (in my own personal vague conception of what that capitalized word means), but currently very few (if any) are. Furthermore, I don’t see any sort of influx of truly artistic games coming anytime soon.