As long as videogames model other art forms, the presence of an auteur is necessary, but not all videogames do model other art forms. The game Little Big Planet, created by british company Media Molecule, is far closer to Lego than it is to Mario. The game offers the player with an indelible set of user-friendly tools and the ability to create their own sidescrolling levels. Little Big Planet represents the apex of user-creation in videogames, and there was no one auteur behind it - is it a piece of art?
Games like LBP push the medium forward, but they also bring into question the definition of art itself. In order to understand the underlying form of videogames, I think it's best to start with games that model other media. Thus far I've focused on narrative games, and I've drawn an analogue with film, but videogames are conducive of many other existing art forms.
I've always been fascinated by the idea of videogames in a gallery setting, for example. Each piece depicts a different space envisioned and meticulously developed by the artist and his small team. Lights dimmed. controllers? headsets? motion sensors? Mo-cap actors and programmers mingle with art critics and painters at the opening reception.
How does player input manifest itself in a videogame modeled after visual art? Games like flOw, by the group That Game Company, might give you an idea.
LittleBigPlanet really is the perfect example of a game that completely blurs the line between "game" and "art". At its most basic level, it is a platformer. The sackboys run, jump, and avoid falling. From this view, it is incontrovertibly a "game". However, when one factors in the ability to create one's own level, the possibility for art is created. Depending on the creator's goal, a LBP level could certainly be considered art, provided the creator had artistic goals in mind (as opposed to me, who so far has only tried to reproduce the first level of Contra). Of course, if users do create art, it may not function well enough as a game level, which would mean that it could not connect with the audience. After all, movies connect when the audience watches them and music connects when the audience listens to it, so it is only logical that games connect when the audience plays them. If the audience cannot appreciate the art through playing, the piece is really not a game that is also art, but rather a piece of art with mildly interactive elements.
ReplyDeleteWell said, Ameterasu. I definitely consider LBP a work of art - in the same way that I consider Lego a work of art.
ReplyDeleteI think fostering creativity in the user/player IS artistic. The level of creativity, imagination and intelligence put into the tools and framework of LBP elevate it's artistic value.
Also, as you touched on, the simplistic gameplay mechanics that LBP relies on serve to forward the way we look at the sidescroller and videogames themselves.
Anywho, it's good to have someone providing thoughtful discussion. Congratulations on leaving the first comment!