Games Now Legally Considered an Art Form (in the USA)

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

WolfEdge:

CosmicCommander:
Oh, great! Now games can steal taxpayers money!

To be honest, this is what went through my mind as well. I've never really understood why the government feels the need to fund any sort of artistic endeavor, with money taken from someone who didn't necessarily want to give it in the first place, towards a cause that doesn't really effect said person.

I mean, I'm happy we're finally gaining some protection and legitimacy and all that, but still, it's always struck an odd nerve with me.

Very good point on how this will make it easier to defend games (in America) from being censored using the 1st amendment. But to address you concerns:

1. you aren't given this money without asking for it
2. you need to prove your project is more worthy than everyone else's ideas to get it
3. The project is then made available for free like a public work of art or a free game on XBLA

Seriously, the government might pay for people to make free games. Some people don't want to go the indie commerce route or just don't have the means to live without income for 2-3 years developing a game that may very well make very little to no money (and you weren't interested in profit anyway).

BreakfastMan:
The question now is, how will this effect the Supreme Court case. I mean, if the NEA thinks that games should be considered a valid art-form, what will that say if the Supreme Court decides to side with California? Even more worrisome, if the Supreme Court still does side with California in light of this, what will be the effect on other art forms, like literature and film? It could set a worrying precedent... This could be very good, or very bad.

I doubt it will matter. Various groups, even some government agencies I think, have tried to censor art forms that were considered art even before the US was a country. The only thing that matters to the censorship crowd is whether they like it or not. Whether other people like it, or whether it's nominally protected speech, has never mattered to them.

CosmicCommander:
Oh, great! Now games can steal taxpayers money!

Why is it that any form of government expenditure is either waste or theft?

PixelKing:
Now we just need this in the UK.

Yeah, we struggle with gaming being accepted into the mainstream, but as far as small gaming businesses go, we actually have quite a sweet deal since the current government recognise the nice little turnover our guys make - acting as a key case study of those 'darling small businesses' they're always 'encouraging'.

Though to be fair, Cameron is also personally keen for this field to florish. Since the death of his son Ivan (suffered from both cerebral palsy and epilepsy), he's been a real advocate for the 'games as therapy' side of the industry.

OT: Anyone heard anything from the gaming trade-bodies; what's their response? What do ECA make of all this?

Jonluw:
Are we going to see an interactive version of 'My bed'?

I'm hoping for interactive Piss Christ. This is the NEA, after all.

Sky's the limit now, gentlemen.

sir.rutthed:

CosmicCommander:
Oh, great! Now games can steal taxpayers money!

I'd much rather my taxes fund the arts than go towards laying waste to some third world nation.

But it gives something for the news to cover.

McMullen:

CosmicCommander:
Oh, great! Now games can steal taxpayers money!

Why is it that any form of government expenditure is either waste or theft?

Because it is.

Nalgas D. Lemur:

Jonluw:
Are we going to see an interactive version of 'My bed'?

I'm hoping for interactive Piss Christ. This is the NEA, after all.

WIth Kinect capability then, surely.

So long as games don't start selling for millions of dollars, I'm fine with it.

I would make the argument that they aren't art until everyone recognizes them as art since that's what characterizes all other forms of art but its definitely a big step. Whoo for games.

McMullen:

CosmicCommander:
Oh, great! Now games can steal taxpayers money!

Why is it that any form of government expenditure is either waste or theft?

Taxes may be necessary... but they are still "painful" to extract and that pain makes people bitter and cynical.

Empty allegations of waste and theft are hyperbole to cover the real reason that they only place they ever want to government to spend is directly helping themselves. Failing to realise that taxes aren't taken from the individual to then directly spend back on the same individual, but to allow the government to actually do the job of governing.

I suggest to all people who don't like this move to a country without personal taxes, like the United Arab Emirates (government funds itself entirely from Oil Royalties) and see if it's worth it.

sir.rutthed:

CosmicCommander:
Oh, great! Now games can steal taxpayers money!

I'd much rather my taxes fund the arts than go towards laying waste to some third world nation.

But it gives something for the news to cover.
[/quote]

That is a very poignant and relevant comment, as it is so true that the media only seem to care about violent conflicts when America is involved.

How thoughtful and insightful of you, such a benefit to these here forums with constructive comments like that.

Dango:
I still don't really get why everyone thinks games have to be art.

As do I, good sir/madam. As do I.

It's about time, but you're right, this will only serve to raise the volume of the debate.

Treblaine:

I suggest to all people who don't like this move to a country without personal taxes, like the United Arab Emirates (government funds itself entirely from Oil Royalties) and see if it's worth it.

Wow, I had no idea there was such a thing as a tax-free nation. If anyone could do it, they could I suppose.

Wonder how ugly it gets when the oil runs out...

Yeah, I have a lot of problems with how taxes are spent, but I don't consider everything a theft or waste (I make an exception for the raises that Congress gives itself though, especially when it does so right after or before declining to raise the minimum wage. Fuck that. Fuck it with two fists and sandpaper gloves.)

SageRuffin:

Dango:
I still don't really get why everyone thinks games have to be art.

As do I, good sir/madam. As do I.

They don't HAVE to be art in the same way a drawing or doodle doesn't HAVE to be art. Just because some games don't want to be seen as art doesn't mean they should all only be considered at that level.

Aw justice, sweet, juicy justice.

McMullen:

Treblaine:

I suggest to all people who don't like this move to a country without personal taxes, like the United Arab Emirates (government funds itself entirely from Oil Royalties) and see if it's worth it.

Wow, I had no idea there was such a thing as a tax-free nation. If anyone could do it, they could I suppose.

Wonder how ugly it gets when the oil runs out...

Yeah, I have a lot of problems with how taxes are spent, but I don't consider everything a theft or waste (I make an exception for the raises that Congress gives itself though, especially when it does so right after or before declining to raise the minimum wage. Fuck that. Fuck it with two fists and sandpaper gloves.)

Not every tax can be considered theft, especially if the one being taxed is directly benefiting through the taxation, ie road upkeep and law enforcement. However, I would be very hesitant about using someone else's money to fund an artistic endeavor, especially if they don't want to support that endeavor in the first place.

WolfEdge:

SageRuffin:

Dango:
I still don't really get why everyone thinks games have to be art.

As do I, good sir/madam. As do I.

They don't HAVE to be art in the same way a drawing or doodle doesn't HAVE to be art. Just because some games don't want to be seen as art doesn't mean they should all only be considered at that level.

Of course, this begs the question "how does a game qualify as artistic?" If you ask me, Bulletstorm is just as much art as Limbo, CoD as much art of everyone's favorite artistic scapegoat, if you will, SotC, etc.

If we're just talking basics like graphics, story-telling, or even just fucking box art, then haven't games been art since their conception?

WolfEdge:

SageRuffin:

Dango:
I still don't really get why everyone thinks games have to be art.

As do I, good sir/madam. As do I.

They don't HAVE to be art in the same way a drawing or doodle doesn't HAVE to be art. Just because some games don't want to be seen as art doesn't mean they should all only be considered at that level.

Art is not a qualitative.

WolfEdge:

McMullen:

Treblaine:

I suggest to all people who don't like this move to a country without personal taxes, like the United Arab Emirates (government funds itself entirely from Oil Royalties) and see if it's worth it.

Wow, I had no idea there was such a thing as a tax-free nation. If anyone could do it, they could I suppose.

Wonder how ugly it gets when the oil runs out...

Yeah, I have a lot of problems with how taxes are spent, but I don't consider everything a theft or waste (I make an exception for the raises that Congress gives itself though, especially when it does so right after or before declining to raise the minimum wage. Fuck that. Fuck it with two fists and sandpaper gloves.)

Not every tax can be considered theft, especially if the one being taxed is directly benefiting through the taxation, ie road upkeep and law enforcement. However, I would be very hesitant about using someone else's money to fund an artistic endeavor, especially if they don't want to support that endeavor in the first place.

I... think we agree?

I guess I snipped all the context out of the quoted posts.

Treblaine:

WolfEdge:

CosmicCommander:
Oh, great! Now games can steal taxpayers money!

To be honest, this is what went through my mind as well. I've never really understood why the government feels the need to fund any sort of artistic endeavor, with money taken from someone who didn't necessarily want to give it in the first place, towards a cause that doesn't really effect said person.

I mean, I'm happy we're finally gaining some protection and legitimacy and all that, but still, it's always struck an odd nerve with me.

Very good point on how this will make it easier to defend games (in America) from being censored using the 1st amendment. But to address you concerns:

1. you aren't given this money without asking for it
2. you need to prove your project is more worthy than everyone else's ideas to get it
3. The project is then made available for free like a public work of art or a free game on XBLA

Seriously, the government might pay for people to make free games. Some people don't want to go the indie commerce route or just don't have the means to live without income for 2-3 years developing a game that may very well make very little to no money (and you weren't interested in profit anyway).

But why extract those funds from someone who doesn't necessarily want to give it? If a person isn't interested in profiting from their own work, then why is it ok to force someone else to foot the bill for their own self-admitting monetarily worthless expenditure of effort? If it's something you don't want to make a living out of doing, then why worry about money at all? Why not just do it, without forcing the compliance of others?

Dango:

binvjoh:
Can I get a hell yes?

Dango:
I still don't really get why everyone thinks games have to be art.

I don't think it's as much about being considered art as it's about getting some sort of recognition of the value as a serious part of society.

You know that's the first convincing argument I've heard so far.

I just don't think we have to force ourselves into another medium in order to be accepted.

This is also due to USA laws mind you, where artistic expression must be written protection. Id love to see you define what ART is if a certain media portion got disputed in court.

Also, games dont HAVE TO be art. but they CAN BE. and given how you have to be recognized by law in the US as art to get artistic freedom....well, we have to put them under that recognition for safety.

SageRuffin:

WolfEdge:

SageRuffin:

As do I, good sir/madam. As do I.

They don't HAVE to be art in the same way a drawing or doodle doesn't HAVE to be art. Just because some games don't want to be seen as art doesn't mean they should all only be considered at that level.

Of course, this begs the question "how does a game qualify as artistic?" If you ask me, Bulletstorm is just as much art as Limbo, CoD as much art of everyone's favorite artistic scapegoat, if you will, SotC, etc.

If we're just talking basics like graphics, story-telling, or even just fucking box art, then haven't games been art since their conception?

It's all about individual context, in my opinion. The point is that the MEDIUM of gaming can produce artistic pieces, and is therefor worth protecting as an artform.

binvjoh:
Can I get a hell yes?

Dango:
I still don't really get why everyone thinks games have to be art.

I don't think it's as much about being considered art as it's about getting some sort of recognition of the value as a serious part of society.

HELL YES!

Jonluw:
That's good.
Are we going to get abstract games now? Dadaistic games?

Are we going to see an interactive version of 'My bed'?

Dadaism in games would be so awesome.

and its all thanks to portal 2 for including art in their game heheh

McMullen:

Treblaine:

I suggest to all people who don't like this move to a country without personal taxes, like the United Arab Emirates (government funds itself entirely from Oil Royalties) and see if it's worth it.

Wow, I had no idea there was such a thing as a tax-free nation. If anyone could do it, they could I suppose.

Wonder how ugly it gets when the oil runs out...

Yeah, I have a lot of problems with how taxes are spent, but I don't consider everything a theft or waste (I make an exception for the raises that Congress gives itself though, especially when it does so right after or before declining to raise the minimum wage. Fuck that. Fuck it with two fists and sandpaper gloves.)

Oh that'll be a shitstorm but get this: 85% of the population of the UAE are immigrants.

That's right, only 10-20% are actual naturalised citizens, all the rest are foreign labourers (pakistani), middle class clerks (egyptian, by my measure) with western/chinese/japanese executives.

So if worst comes to worst they can just deport most of the population.

Ether way, if they don't find alternate income they are going to crash HARD! Why else do you think Dubai is investing so much in these super building projects like that Half-Mile-High hotel? Oil money is cheap now... but did they invest it right?

PS: you don't want your elected officials too afraid to give themselves a raise or they'll end up like UK politicians. IMO, it's generated too many negative consequences as it just puts the wrong sorts of pressures on elected officials.

Remember politics is an uncertain career path, one term you have a job then the next you may be out in the cold for 4 YEARS. How is your bank going to like that when it comes to mortgage payments especially if you were on average income in past 4 years? What other career has such job insecurity? Well the ones that do and are as important you'll find are similarly highly paid.

It's about time. Now let's not make them regret their decision.

WolfEdge:
It's all about individual context, in my opinion. The point is that the MEDIUM of gaming can produce artistic pieces, and is therefor worth protecting as an artform.

Then why couldn't people just leave it at that? The way I see it (speaking clearly for myself and myself alone), the game as a whole is not art in the same sense I wouldn't call a movie/film art. We're not gonna agree on this most likely, but I view games are more of an amalgamation of various art forms: music, drawing (concept images and such), writing, assuming any of that applies of course.

It's just like the one guy who won a... Grammy? for one of his pieces (I forget the name). And it just so happened that this same composer did a lot of work in video games. And what happened? A lot of people were were nothing short of friggin' themselves over that, claiming that "games are starting to be considered art". Balls to that, I say; suppose the song was that from an actual game? The fact would remain that the game itself wasn't considered "artistic", whatever the fuck that even means at this point, but the song featured in the game was what won the award. Correct me if I'm wrong, but most soundtracks do very well at standing on their own (save ME2; try to listen to those character themes by themselves and they just sound schizophrenic and disjointed).

I know I sound angry and inflammatory, but the whole "games as art" discussion bothers me to no end. I'd rather stop talking about it if that's all right with you.

WolfEdge:

Treblaine:

Very good point on how this will make it easier to defend games (in America) from being censored using the 1st amendment. But to address you concerns:

1. you aren't given this money without asking for it
2. you need to prove your project is more worthy than everyone else's ideas to get it
3. The project is then made available for free like a public work of art or a free game on XBLA

Seriously, the government might pay for people to make free games. Some people don't want to go the indie commerce route or just don't have the means to live without income for 2-3 years developing a game that may very well make very little to no money (and you weren't interested in profit anyway).

But why extract those funds from someone who doesn't necessarily want to give it? If a person isn't interested in profiting from their own work, then why is it ok to force someone else to foot the bill for their own self-admitting monetarily worthless expenditure of effort? If it's something you don't want to make a living out of doing, then why worry about money at all? Why not just do it, without forcing the compliance of others?

"someone who doesn't necessarily want to give it?"

What, the taxpayers? Tough titty. The taxpayers elected the government that decides what the public needs and that includes public art which can also extend to video games if distributed correctly.

People don't "necessarily want to" pay for the US Navy, but it has done a heck of a lot to serve the United States in its long history at the taxpayers expense.

And yes, artists have expenditures even if they are not in this for profit nor a living. They still have to eat, even a sculptor needs a stone and tools to carve it with.

Think about it, if they make something for the public, as in freely available for all; no ads, no charity bin, no nothing, then they will go bankrupt as while they work on this project - for the public - as they try to pay for gas, electricity, food, rent, etc.

Remember, for the public. Free. They can't make promises to the bank or take out a loan as after all this effort they'd get nothing for this as it'd go in a public space or distributed for free.

Not everyone has a rich benefactor. Actually that's what the government is doing her, being a rich benefactor.

Heheheheh art....Lejla, approaches him with an offer to star in an "art film" being directed by Vukmir.

SageRuffin:

WolfEdge:
It's all about individual context, in my opinion. The point is that the MEDIUM of gaming can produce artistic pieces, and is therefor worth protecting as an artform.

Then why couldn't people just leave it at that? The way I see it (speaking clearly for myself and myself alone), the game as a whole is not art in the same sense I wouldn't call a movie/film art. We're not gonna agree on this most likely, but I view games are more of an amalgamation of various art forms: music, drawing (concept images and such), writing, assuming any of that applies of course.

It's just like the one guy who won a... Grammy? for one of his pieces (I forget the name). And it just so happened that this same composer did a lot of work in video games. And what happened? A lot of people were were nothing short of friggin' themselves over that, claiming that "games are starting to be considered art". Balls to that, I say; suppose the song was that from an actual game? The fact would remain that the game itself wasn't considered "artistic", whatever the fuck that even means at this point, but the song featured in the game was what won the award. Correct me if I'm wrong, but most soundtracks do very well at standing on their own (save ME2; try to listen to those character themes by themselves and they just sound schizophrenic and disjointed).

I know I sound angry and inflammatory, but the whole "games as art" discussion bothers me to no end. I'd rather stop talking about it if that's all right with you.

In this particular case, it's not about validation so much as it is PROTECTION. This ruling sets a powerful precedent for games that DO want to take that leap to artistry, while still allowing the freedoms of those that don't to remain intact.

Excellent.

Step 2: Tarn Adams gets grants for DF.

Please?

Victory! Victory in the name of . . . I really don't know, but still VICTORY!

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here