More simply, monetary value varies greatly by the individual, and will never stand up to time.
On the "art" side, games aren't art--elements of games are art. Character design, writing, storytelling, etc. The part that makes it a game are the rules, the logic. If you wish to make an argument that a set of rules is artistic, well at least then the correct argument would be made.
---
Tell me to get back to rewriting this site so it's not horrible on mobile
but much like the moment "art" is put on a shelf and given a price tag people will compare that to how many cans of soup, or how many pints of beer they can get for that amount of money. having said that i don't see how reviewers should/can be the judges of that for everyone so i agree that it's hypocrisy on their part.
___
Listen to Wu-Tang and watch Kung-Fu
Cant reviews cover both? I think games are entertainment and entertainment varies in its level of artistic aspiration.
robio said:If the reviewer is allowed to say if he thinks it's good or bad, he's just as entitled to say if he think it's worth the full retail price or not.
I disagree, the reviewer can make a value judgement on a game's quality but not it's price -- that's up to the guy or gal with the wallet, in the store. To extend that a little, in this particular review of Wanted, they could have just left off the last sentence and left at "this is a game that is incredible, however it is only 5 hours long". "Okay," I say to myself, "I'm up for incredible, I don't mind short games" and I'm off to the store. Now if I get to the store and find that it is $60 then I get to make the value call for myself. Maybe $60 is a days pay to me, maybe I make that much in 2 minutes, but either way I get to make the call -- not the reviewer. Another instance of this is the dreaded "...good for a rental..." line in a review that can absolutely kill a game.
gamingeek said:Cant reviews cover both? I think games are entertainment and entertainment varies in its level of artistic aspiration.
I agree. Movie reviewer always pull this stunt. "Not worth forking over your ten bucks."
gamingeek said:What games you guys have played actually would be classified as Art? I can only think of maybe a couple.
Superman 64, you will get zero joy out of it, just like all the other "art"!
Let it be said: Fuck art, it does not exist!
LOL, I almost forgot your stance on games as art Iga.
I might, just might put up Hotel Dusk as it is superbly written, the best writing I have ever seen in a videogame. There was a news story that an editor at Harper Collins was papping his pants as he said that he thought this was the future of novels.
gamingeek said:LOL, I almost forgot your stance on art Iga.
I fixed that for you, my stance is all inclusive.
For example Mona Lisa = painting of a girl with a weird smile and no eyebrows.
Iga_Bobovic said:gamingeek said:LOL, I almost forgot your stance on art Iga.
I fixed that for you, my stance is all inclusive.
For example Mona Lisa = painting of a girl with a weird smile and no eyebrows.
You mean a man with long hair and no eyebrows.
gamingeek said:Iga_Bobovic said:gamingeek said:LOL, I almost forgot your stance on art Iga.
I fixed that for you, my stance is all inclusive.
For example Mona Lisa = painting of a girl with a weird smile and no eyebrows.
You mean a man with long hair and no eyebrows.
what did you say?
___
Listen to Wu-Tang and watch Kung-Fu
bugsonglass said:gamingeek said:Iga_Bobovic said:gamingeek said:LOL, I almost forgot your stance on art Iga.
I fixed that for you, my stance is all inclusive.
For example Mona Lisa = painting of a girl with a weird smile and no eyebrows.
You mean a man with long hair and no eyebrows.
what did you say?
Only men can wield heavy artillery. Case closed.
bugsonglass said:gamingeek said:Iga_Bobovic said:gamingeek said:LOL, I almost forgot your stance on art Iga.
I fixed that for you, my stance is all inclusive.
For example Mona Lisa = painting of a girl with a weird smile and no eyebrows.
You mean a man with long hair and no eyebrows.
what did you say?
Man with long air and no eyebrows
See?
SteelAttack said:I bet the Mona lisa is clean shaven down there.
Are you serious? In the 70s women were hairy, back in the Mona Lisa's time? Pfft. A virtual ape woman.
gamingeek said:SteelAttack said:I bet the Mona lisa is clean shaven down there.Are you serious? In the 70s women were hairy, back in the Mona Lisa's time? Pfft. A virtual ape woman.
With pilous abundance in her armpits to match. I often wonder how did mankind lasted until now. One could think hairy, awful smelling people who never bathed would keep getting close to each other or handling their genitals at the bottom of their priorities.
Not wanting to turn this into a "what is a game review" type topic at all (you can google Shawn Elliot's site for that), but EDGE magazine recently outed themselves as being a Consumer Guide-style operation with their recent review of Wanted.
The Consumer Guides style of review is what Gamespot happily admits to providing, which is where they review the game as a product, something that is or is not worth the MSRP on the box. Not as an artform, or anything resembling it, just basically, is this form of entertainment worth the money?
EDGE's review basically ended up saying, "great game, but not worth $60." The Maw and De Blob got the same treatment from the gaming media.
Which brings to mind the hypocrisy of writers who on the one hand argue for games to be included in the Pantheon of Art, but on the other hand treat games in their reviews as if they are the latest golf club or bike pump.