It wasn’t until this week’s readings, especially Ebert’s journal, did I ever consider the question of whether video games should be viewed as an art form. The hardest part, which Ebert points out, is finding a concrete definition for art. In my opinion art can be described as anything created that shows an individuals imagination and brings out one’s emotions. There are so many different categories of art, who is to say video games can never achieve art status. Ebert argues that the way he plays chess could be viewed as somewhat of an art form, then how can playing video games such as the Fallout series, or Bioshock not be considered art as well? Just as Jane McGonigal said in her video when she pulls up a picture of a gamer playing a game, his facial expression shows his emotions coming out as he is playing. I was very interested in continuing research about this topic and found an article showing how the Fallout series could be considered art.
The author Swaim says that Fallout is art, “by drawing on the buttoned-down iconography of the 50s and infusing it with the paranoia and very real dangers of the Cold War era, the Fallout series presents a pastiche of an America that could have been. Traces of the boundless, wholesome optimism of the Leave it to Beaver era barely obscure twisted, smoldering corpses of what may have once been human. Monuments to our faith in the ability of science to bring us the convenience of the future, today! dot a landscape made scarred, barren, lifeless by that same overgrown technology. And all of it set to the uncomplicated music of bygone days, like vinyl ghost voices blown on an irradiated wind,”.
Games like Fallout are created to put the gamer into an alternate realm where their whole emotions change as if they are really living a different life. On the other hand, I can see why Ebert is so reluctant to say that video games could never be distinguished as art. Would you categorize animated TV shows as art just because of the illustrations and emotions they create? Ebert makes a great point when he says, “One obvious difference between art and games is that you can win a game. It has rules, points, objectives, and an outcome,”. Art is about no rules. It’s about how you feel inside and letting your emotions take control of your work. Even though Ebert does a wonderful job at defending his argument, I still believe that some games can be viewed as art. With the right mix of visuals and story-lines in a game, I believe that they can create the same emotional feel a nice song, or painting can make.
