Hideo Kojima: games are NOT art

CptStern

suckmonkey
Joined
May 5, 2004
Messages
10,303
Reaction score
62
last time I posted that Roger Ebert had made a statement that games are not art which I agreed to, I spent the remainder of the thread arguing that he is correct that games are not art, not in their current incarnation and not by a long shot. Now comes this interview in the Official Playstation magazine with Hideo Kojima, creator of MGS that says the same thing ....and you guys thought I was crazy:



Excerpt from the February issue of Official Playstation Magazine:


OPM: Have you heard of [film critic] Roger Ebert's assessment that videogames can never be viewed as art? How do you feel about that?

Hideo Kojima: I don't think they're art either, videogames. The thing is, art is something that radiates the artist, the person who creates that piece of art. If 100 people walk by and a single person is captivated by whatever that piece radiates, then it's art. But videogames aren't trying to capture one person. A videogame should make sure that all 100 people that play the game should enjoy the service provided by that videogame. It's something of service. It's not art. But I guess the way of providing service with that videogame is an artistic style, a form of art.

For example, look at a concept car. You don't have to be able to drive a car, but if it's called a car and it has artistic elements in the visuals, then it's art. But an actual car, like a videogame, is interactive, so it's something used by people, so it's like a car where you have to drive it. There are 100 people driving a car; they have 100 ways of driving it and using it. It could be families driving the car. It could be a couple driving a car. The owner of the car could be driving along the coastline, or they could go up into the mountains, so this car has to be able to be driven by all 100 of these people, so in that sense it's totally not art.

OPM: By that same token, if you had a Picasso on the wall, you may totally enjoy his work. I imagine you would if you had one hanging up. But I may hate Picasso; I may prefer the Bauhaus movement. So if we have different opinions, maybe we're not physically "using" it for anything specific; we're still using our minds to evaluate it, just like the performance of a car or a videogame. That's not going to stop art from being art, but videogames can still be artistic.

HK: Let me say this in a different way, so I can better explain the nuance in what I'm trying to say. That building there [points to one of the adjacent Roppongi Hills towers] has an art museum called Mori Museum, but any museum will do. Art is the stuff you find in the museum, whether it be a painting or statue. What I'm doing, what videogame creators are doing, is running the museum--how do we light up things, where do we place things, how do we sell tickets? It's basically running the museum for those who come to the museum to look at the art. For better or worse, what I do, Hideo Kojima, myself, is run the museum and also create the art that's displayed in the museum.

OPM: So do you think the user's involvement in affecting the outcome of a game affects a game's artistic credibility, because it's left to the user to "finish" the painting?

HK: Not necessarily. Online games maybe, because what you're doing is basically providing them the arena, the play tools, and leaving everything up to the player, so for online games, maybe yes. What I do with my videogames, and specifically Metal Gear Solid, is provide a canvas and paint and the paintbrushes to everyone who buys the game. Obviously, some people can draw well or paint well while some people cannot. I basically provide them with the tools and make sure these people are satisfied with their painting. They're like, "Man, I'm a marvelous artist. I can paint! I can draw!" I make sure they get the satisfaction when they play my games, that they're able to draw something that they're satisfied with at the end.

OPM: Games like Shadow of the Colossus and Ico are the game most often referred to as art in videogame form, due to their distinct visual quality. Many people point to those games as art. Do you think there are exceptions, such as these games, where you could look at them and say, "OK, those are art"? Or do you think all games fall under a blanket assessment?

HK: I think they're good games, but I think they're just another game. In [Shadow of the Colossus], you ride a horse. It's a horse; it looks like a horse. But in art, I can paint this cup [lifts up his coffee cup] and call the painting Horse. That's art. The music and the graphics used in a game--they have artistic elements, I agree. But everything else is very intuitive. It's easy to play in the sense that the horse looks like a horse and you obviously know that you have to ride the horse, so what I think it does is provide a service.

Maybe let's say there's a game out there where there's a boss that you cannot defeat. It's made that way. Normallly, when you beat the boss in a game, there's a sense of satisfaction and accomplishment, but if you can't beat the boss at all, if what you're left with is a sense of loss, then maybe that could be defined as art. You know Taro Okamoto--he's dead but a very famous Japanese artist. I don't know the official English translation of it, but one of his pieces is called The Refusing Chair. It's something that sort of looks like a chair, but it's got bumps on it, so you can't sit on it, but if you do, it's going to hurt your butt. With videogames you have to make sure you can sit on the chair. That's why you want to think about art and videogames. I think the lousiest videogames can be considered art. Because bad games with no fun aren't really games, by definition.

OPM: Speaking of Mori Museum, there's an exhibit going on there right now on Hiroshi Sugimoto. One of the placecards on a photograph of a mathematically inspired sculpture has a quote of Sugimoto's that says, "Art resides even in things with no artistic intentions." So it's reasonable to suggest that a game has just as much opportunity to be art as an apple on a plate.

HK: You know, with videogames becoming something that anyone can play at any time because they've become so popular and mainstream in our lives, I think contemporary artists out there could use videogames and create art--like The Refusing Chair, the unplayable videogame. It's there, it looks playable, but you just can't control it.



now DONT confuse technical proficiency with Art ..they are not the same thing
 
so what he is saying is that anything that has utility is not art
i suppose thats true to an extent - but what of archictecture (buildings are useful), books (more than just entertainment but sources of debate and stores of knowledge) and even vehicles (their design aesthetic may be rivalled by their function)
so i beg to disagree - games are art, just presently they are mediocre or fledgling voices finding their feet
 
It really depends on the game. For the most part you are correct. In some sense games can be an art. The amount of thought and planning that goes into games can make it a true form of art. Technology doesn't make good games, it makes them possible. I think more of the current games are less like art and more like regurgitated older games with a twist. Original types of games are what is closer to art as they are original creations and not the same old FPS.
 
I disagree with his definition of art I'm afraid - I do not, however, disagree with the concept that videogames are not art at this present point in time.

Heavily stylised does not constitute art.
 
While I agree, there's a lot of things called "art" that I wouldn;t consider art either - like a lot of the "modern art" crap
 
Icarusintel said:
While I agree, there's a lot of things called "art" that I wouldn;t consider art either - like a lot of the "modern art" crap
Which reminds me... Doesn't everyone agree that Goatse is art?
 
Icarusintel said:
While I agree, there's a lot of things called "art" that I wouldn;t consider art either - like a lot of the "modern art" crap
Grah. A lot of modern Art is very very good.

Don't lump it all in with Damien Hirst and the conceptual artists :|
 
A story, and the way a story evolves is the art. Videogames are an interactive style of evolving and telling the story. The videogame is the frame, but it's the painting inside the frame that's the art. It's not different from any other form of expression (for example a movie or a song). Why would it be?

It's impossible to describe what "art" is, because the question isn't "is this art". The question is "Why is this art?".
 
umm I know you guys were joking but goatse could be construed as art in that it's a commentary on the internet ..I cant think of any other image that exemplifies the internet better (with the caveat that the image is representative of the instant communication that the internet is (for better or worse) ...in a round about way; the content of image isnt art but rather the effect on internet culture or culture in general is)


when industry giant and pionner Kojima says it's not art you guys listen ..but when Stern says it's not art, his word isnt good enough ... hmpf!!!

/me cries, pours myself another cognac, and grumbles dejectedly about the state of mankind
 
I have a very loose deffiniton of art, anything that is man made and beautiful is art. But that's imo.
 
Honestly, whenever Kojima says things like this, I either think he's saying it in some kind of "sarcastic" or "ironic" tone seeing as how so many people consider his games to be works of art and how everyone thinks his games are sociopolitical commentaries on the state of the world and such. Point is, I honestly think Kojima is either bullshitting around or he's trying to get "artsty" off his resume or something. I remember reading a GameSpot interview where he tried to say "I just wanna make cool action games with lots of explosions." That is a complete and total lie. He knows 75% of the reason people even play the MGS games is because of their amazing stories and him downplaying that feature seems...ironic to me.

On the point of art in videogames once again, I believe there are a few games that do reach the point of being considered works of "art." MGS games, Max Payne series, Deus Ex, even Vice City.
 
Hideo is right, except on one count. Metal Gear Solid 2 is one of the finest examples of art we've ever seen. It's ridiculously pretentious, and its plot is messier than a soiled bed in the tate modern. That's true art right there.

I'm quietly thankfully that most games are not art. We'd all have to adopt twatish intellectual speech when discussing games on the forums. Just imagine the custom map sections of forums worldwide.

"This new unreal tournament deathmatch release is particulary profound. The bold stark lines of the three-dimensional shape we inhabit are positively eye-catching. I particularly love the minimalistic approach they have taken to texturing the walls... the single red stripe. The constant full-brightness. The placement of weapons within this structure indicate the desperation of the detainees. 90 Redeemers, nuclear warhead launchers. Though they can fire, they cannot escape, and death only leads to return. The simplicity of the cell... the incomprehensible cycle of life and death. and what do you call it?"
"Killbox 2k6."
"Yes indeed... a masterpiece of modern art" *sips wine*
 
kupoartist said:
Hideo is right, except on one count. Metal Gear Solid 2 is one of the finest examples of art we've ever seen. It's ridiculously pretentious, and its plot is messier than a soiled bed in the tate modern. That's true art right there.

I'm quietly thankfully that most games are not art. We'd all have to adopt twatish intellectual speech when discussing games on the forums.

Um, wow, stereotype much?
 
CptStern said:
umm I know you guys were joking but goatse could be construed as art in that it's a commentary on the internet ..I cant think of any other image that exemplifies the internet better (with the caveat that the image is representative of the instant communication that the internet is (for better or worse) ...in a round about way; the content of image isnt art but rather the effect on internet culture or culture in general is)


Funny, I always though it was a guy with a saggy asshole.
 
CptStern said:
yes but you're a bit of a philistine :E

I guess I just never looked for a deeper meaning in that sort of thing....

*looks up tub girl*
 
DeusExMachinia said:
Um, wow, stereotype much?
nss.jpg

6casval
 
OvA said:
I guess I just never looked for a deeper meaning in that sort of thing....

*looks up tub girl*


finding a deeper meaning in things is second nature, it's not something you conciously look for ..but by all means look up ******* if you must, whatever floats your boat. To each his own I always say
 
CptStern said:
finding a deeper meaning in things is second nature, it's not something you conciously look for ..but by all means look up ******* if you must, whatever floats your boat. To each his own I always say


Actually, its not a second nature to all people. My anthro teacher was telling me there's 4 stages of growing up. Most people only go through 3. The 4th one is looking at things differently, looking for deeper meanings.
 
ok well it's natural to me so I cant relate to you .."normals" ;)


but yes good point :)
 
But seriously, I general find myself pulling deeper meanings out of things and becoming frustrated that my friends take everything a face value :|
 
OvA said:
But seriously, I general find myself pulling deeper meanings out of things and becoming frustrated that my friends take everything a face value :|

As do I. Me and some girl are the only ones raising our hands in English class because we know what the hell Dickinson or Emerson are talking about and everyone else is like "lol wtf?" It's quite...depressing.
 
Video games are art in progress.

They are really a culmination of other arts too. Writing (game storylines), painting (textures), sculpting (modelling), etc.
 
games are entertainment, not art.. but the concept design behind some games is art
 
So 'art' means something that not everybody can enjoy? I don't think that's true. You'd have to add 'on the same level, in the same way' on the end, and as such:

DeusExMachina said:
On the point of art in videogames once again, I believe there are a few games that do reach the point of being considered works of "art." MGS games, Max Payne series, Deus Ex, even Vice City.

QFE
 
I was thinking the other day after I watched the MGS4 trailer, why doesn't Kojima do a CGI movie instead of letting that Uwe Boll idiot screw it up?

If Kojima can direct a video game, surely a movie directed by him would entertain the audience of a movie, based on the game?
 
As a former game designing student, I for one can tell you that I put all that I have into my games. It is my art, and for anyone to say otherwise,in my opinion, is an insult.
 
CptStern said:
last time I posted that Roger Ebert had made a statement that games are not art which I agreed to, I spent the remainder of the thread arguing that he is correct that games are not art, not in their current incarnation and not by a long shot. Now comes this interview in the Official Playstation magazine with Hideo Kojima, creator of MGS that says the same thing ....and you guys thought I was crazy:



Excerpt from the February issue of Official Playstation Magazine:


OPM: Have you heard of [film critic] Roger Ebert's assessment that videogames can never be viewed as art? How do you feel about that?

Hideo Kojima: I don't think they're art either, videogames. The thing is, art is something that radiates the artist, the person who creates that piece of art. If 100 people walk by and a single person is captivated by whatever that piece radiates, then it's art. But videogames aren't trying to capture one person. A videogame should make sure that all 100 people that play the game should enjoy the service provided by that videogame. It's something of service. It's not art. But I guess the way of providing service with that videogame is an artistic style, a form of art.

For example, look at a concept car. You don't have to be able to drive a car, but if it's called a car and it has artistic elements in the visuals, then it's art. But an actual car, like a videogame, is interactive, so it's something used by people, so it's like a car where you have to drive it. There are 100 people driving a car; they have 100 ways of driving it and using it. It could be families driving the car. It could be a couple driving a car. The owner of the car could be driving along the coastline, or they could go up into the mountains, so this car has to be able to be driven by all 100 of these people, so in that sense it's totally not art.

OPM: By that same token, if you had a Picasso on the wall, you may totally enjoy his work. I imagine you would if you had one hanging up. But I may hate Picasso; I may prefer the Bauhaus movement. So if we have different opinions, maybe we're not physically "using" it for anything specific; we're still using our minds to evaluate it, just like the performance of a car or a videogame. That's not going to stop art from being art, but videogames can still be artistic.

HK: Let me say this in a different way, so I can better explain the nuance in what I'm trying to say. That building there [points to one of the adjacent Roppongi Hills towers] has an art museum called Mori Museum, but any museum will do. Art is the stuff you find in the museum, whether it be a painting or statue. What I'm doing, what videogame creators are doing, is running the museum--how do we light up things, where do we place things, how do we sell tickets? It's basically running the museum for those who come to the museum to look at the art. For better or worse, what I do, Hideo Kojima, myself, is run the museum and also create the art that's displayed in the museum.

OPM: So do you think the user's involvement in affecting the outcome of a game affects a game's artistic credibility, because it's left to the user to "finish" the painting?

HK: Not necessarily. Online games maybe, because what you're doing is basically providing them the arena, the play tools, and leaving everything up to the player, so for online games, maybe yes. What I do with my videogames, and specifically Metal Gear Solid, is provide a canvas and paint and the paintbrushes to everyone who buys the game. Obviously, some people can draw well or paint well while some people cannot. I basically provide them with the tools and make sure these people are satisfied with their painting. They're like, "Man, I'm a marvelous artist. I can paint! I can draw!" I make sure they get the satisfaction when they play my games, that they're able to draw something that they're satisfied with at the end.

OPM: Games like Shadow of the Colossus and Ico are the game most often referred to as art in videogame form, due to their distinct visual quality. Many people point to those games as art. Do you think there are exceptions, such as these games, where you could look at them and say, "OK, those are art"? Or do you think all games fall under a blanket assessment?

HK: I think they're good games, but I think they're just another game. In [Shadow of the Colossus], you ride a horse. It's a horse; it looks like a horse. But in art, I can paint this cup [lifts up his coffee cup] and call the painting Horse. That's art. The music and the graphics used in a game--they have artistic elements, I agree. But everything else is very intuitive. It's easy to play in the sense that the horse looks like a horse and you obviously know that you have to ride the horse, so what I think it does is provide a service.

Maybe let's say there's a game out there where there's a boss that you cannot defeat. It's made that way. Normallly, when you beat the boss in a game, there's a sense of satisfaction and accomplishment, but if you can't beat the boss at all, if what you're left with is a sense of loss, then maybe that could be defined as art. You know Taro Okamoto--he's dead but a very famous Japanese artist. I don't know the official English translation of it, but one of his pieces is called The Refusing Chair. It's something that sort of looks like a chair, but it's got bumps on it, so you can't sit on it, but if you do, it's going to hurt your butt. With videogames you have to make sure you can sit on the chair. That's why you want to think about art and videogames. I think the lousiest videogames can be considered art. Because bad games with no fun aren't really games, by definition.

OPM: Speaking of Mori Museum, there's an exhibit going on there right now on Hiroshi Sugimoto. One of the placecards on a photograph of a mathematically inspired sculpture has a quote of Sugimoto's that says, "Art resides even in things with no artistic intentions." So it's reasonable to suggest that a game has just as much opportunity to be art as an apple on a plate.

HK: You know, with videogames becoming something that anyone can play at any time because they've become so popular and mainstream in our lives, I think contemporary artists out there could use videogames and create art--like The Refusing Chair, the unplayable videogame. It's there, it looks playable, but you just can't control it.



now DONT confuse technical proficiency with Art ..they are not the same thing

Individual games are not art in the same sense that a random container is not art. However, there are pieces of art within the game (upon which HK seems to aggree). Arguing that there is not art in games defines art so strictly that all museums can deliver 90-100% their works to the nearest recycling center.

.bog.
 
Artistic flair has been put into certain games however - At the end of LoZ: Majora's Mask...you go up into it for the last major battle. I imagined some dreary dungeon ala Ganon's castle. However it was one lone tree in the middle of a field, with children (wearing masks) dancing around it. To me that was just awe inspiring.
 
I define art as the communication of emotion. Games can be art by that definition, but then again, that makes a lot of things art.
 
CptStern said:
umm I know you guys were joking but goatse could be construed as art in that it's a commentary on the internet ..I cant think of any other image that exemplifies the internet better (with the caveat that the image is representative of the instant communication that the internet is (for better or worse) ...in a round about way; the content of image isnt art but rather the effect on internet culture or culture in general is)

:D

CptStern said:
when industry giant and pionner Kojima says it's not art you guys listen ..but when Stern says it's not art, his word isnt good enough ... hmpf!!!

I'll have a good ol' arguement about art anytime, it's in my blood :E

CptStern said:
/me cries, pours myself another cognac, and grumbles dejectedly about the state of mankind

Cognac is awful, well, at least Cognac and coke is.

Oh, and mankind is just fine tbh tbh - I love life.
 
ComradeBadger said:
:D



I'll have a good ol' arguement about art anytime, it's in my blood :E



Cognac is awful, well, at least Cognac and coke is.

Oh, and mankind is just fine tbh tbh - I love life.

and by life you mean f*cking chicks, no?
 
LiquidToast said:
As a former game designing student, I for one can tell you that I put all that I have into my games. It is my art, and for anyone to say otherwise,in my opinion, is an insult.


I'm a graphic designer/web designer and I dont think what I do is art ..it's design, not art


comradebadger said:
I'll have a good ol' arguement about art anytime, it's in my blood

good, I may take you up on that, I think you're one of the few here that understand the concepts




never ever mix cognac with anything ...unless it's a $50 Cohiba and a svelt blonde in a cocktail dress ;)
 
Back
Top