Less Cpoint more mailbags
-
-
OBVIOUSo: some games are made to impress ppl with its graphics and stuff.
SOME games are made to just impress ppl with its gameplay and not its beauty. the GAMEPLAY I SAY! hear meComment
-
Edited by [user="55377"] @ [time="1058037059"]
Damnit, I used the word "suck" twice in one sentence...
Oh yeah, um... I know this is a big change from my first comment (the long-ass one), but... what does IMHO mean?
Thank you, asspennies.Comment
-
IMHO means In My Humble Opinion.
A great place to learn about these stupid internet acronyms (and almost everything else) is the fantastic http://everything2.org. If only it wasn't so slow.Comment
-
Whats amusing and somewhat ironic about all this is that in New Zealand (where I live) you can actually get a benefit (govt. hands out $$$) if you register as an artist. I wonder what kind of response you'd recieve if you said that you play CS 24/7, consider it an artform, and want some cash to fund your gaming?
This forum would be a good reference if they declined your application I believe.
Good discussion people.Comment
-
"An artist is someone who produces things that people don't need to have but that he - for some reason - thinks it would be a good idea to give them." - AW
does that make ted kaczynski an artist?
and these comments have knocked over everything i believed regarding this topic, great comments put very elegantly at timesComment
-
FatboyTim wrote..
I would have to disagree with that. Much of music nowadays will not be cherished in the future like Bach or Mozart have throughout the centuries, but does that mean they are not art?
One of the other criteria that defines true 'art', is its ability to stand the test of time.
Perhaps disposable pop music written solely for the profit of giant corporations isn't art. But bands who put forth emotion into their songs and also master their instruments should surely be considered artists, even if tastes will change in the future.
As for computer games as an art-form... well, if movies with storyline, cinematography, set design, acting, etc. can be considered art, then why not games with plot, level design, animation, mood lighting, soundtrack. If these elements work well together to render emotion and immersiveness, then by all means it should be called art (eg: Halo). If the game leaves you indifferent and you feel it is disposable, then it is a failed attempt at art.
Is it then bad art, or not art at all?Comment
-
[GH]-Paladin wrote..
woot your gay, so is cs-nation
woot probably your first csnation ban tooComment
-
"woot" is gay...also i find it hard to believe that two people could actually sit down and wonder whether or not counter-strike is art. if counter-strike is art, then day of defeat and natural selection are the statue of david and the mona lisa. counter-strike would probably be the campbell's soup picture. video games arent art. theyre a form of media that developers create in order to make money. now if they made one copy of a game i *might* consider that art. but when there are 10 million copies of vice city out there, its hard NOT to get your hands on it. thus lowering its value and not making it in any way....art.Comment
-
Edited by [user="122802"] @ [time="1059828452"]
Depends if you class art as a viable to be shown through the medium of interactivity. Many people still believe art can still only be truely shown through paints, pencil ect...
For me I believe games can be some of the most powerfull examples of art, I'v never been moved by art in its still form, but games like Final Fantasy have moved me.
And by the way ross johnson, just cause there are many of something, doesn't make it less of an example of art, thousands of copys of the mona lisa have been made and all can be admired the same as the origional.
As for games only being made to be sold to the masses, thats true, but you forget that to do that, it must appeal to the audiance, an example of this is making it "artistic"Comment
-
Cool! The sound, the animations, Perfect!Comment
Comment