I get really annoyed when people laugh if I claim that gaming can be an art form. You usually get snooty answers from non-gamers asking how Call of Duty can be considered up there with Monet or Piccasso. When you try to explain to them that there is more to gaming than the mainstream you get answers like, “Well it’s all the same, just pressing buttons and all.” In fact when this came up with certain people, even during my time at University, people often laughed at the notion. Not giving me a chance to explain why they deserve this praise.

While I will agree that most games are not art there is a certain selection that clearly have been made with a point to make, a decent story or just something special that moves us like nothing else can. Yes the market is saturated with war blockbusters and GTA knock-offs but there are still plenty of beautiful games for us to play.

Let’s take a look at film, which has been widely considered to be an art form for donkeys years now. Every film and I mean every film is pretty much labelled as an art form in on shape or another. Arnie and Stallone films are both considered as art in their own ways and before you think I’m just lying to make a point, I did my University dissertation on their films and believe me there are hundreds of books on the duo’s films.

The Rambo series is considered to be the one of the best reaction films to a sense of frustration and emasculation in post-Vietnam veterans. If you’ve not seen Rambo basically the peaceful veteran is picked on by some cops and then makes them pay for their mistake. Likewise most of Arnold Schwarzenegger’s films are linked to a feeling of loss and frustration after the Vietnam War rather than greased men wanting to blow crap up.

Now I’m not saying that every game under the sun should be judged as a marker for widespread social feeling, but surely we can look into why games sell well. Why at the moment are we having an extreme FPS craze and a resurgence from the beat ‘em-up genre? There must be more to this than the idea that people just like this kind of game. I mean if Commando is considered to a masterpiece as a reflection of male anxiety in the country then can’t we even start to look at games in a similar light?

Maybe I am being factitious though. Let’s compare a more widely accepted piece of film that is considered art – Pan’s Labyrinth. The film has been widely praised for creating a vivid and engaging story with superb acting and a visual feast. In fact it’s one of my favourite films.  Games like Limbo have done a similar thing though. The game has its own story (albeit a  simple one) a brilliantly crafted world and it engages the player. I remember the first time I realised what the spider enemy looked like. I was scared half to death. Later when I was trapped in the spider’s web there was a real sense of panic and fear. This isn’t like other games though where I just didn’t want to die. I actually felt some kind of involvement in the game. I frantically tapped buttons and tried to figure out what to do until I eventually escaped. If you’ve not played Limbo then try the demo to get an idea of what I mean.

What really does my head in is when someone cites the cinematography in a film as beautiful but then refuses to accept the same amount of meticulous planning has been put into a game. Yes the scenes and setting are virtual, but the same amount of thought and planning goes into creating that beauty. People seem to like to deny that games can even look beautiful. Show them something like Killer 7 and all of a sudden we are now “just playing an anime game.” Show them something like El Shaddai and you get told that “it’s all fighting anyway”.

L.A Noire is a great example of how when I felt engaged by a game’s story. While the game did get bogged down in the middle with the Dahlia murders things heated up a lot in the later parts. By this section I was gripped by the game and its intertwining stories. L.A Noire builds up to a crescendo and one of the most satisfying ends to a game.  In my view this game had one of the best plots ever, far better than some of the so-called AAA film titles in the box office at the moment. Trying to convey this to someone during conversation doesn’t really work and where a film takes 2-3 hours, a game can take you over 100!

This is the problem with trying to show people how games can transcend into art forms. They just wont get it until they play a game that has a stark effect on them. Until they let go of their rationale that games are a children’s toy they will not learn that gaming has grown up a lot over the last decade. Look at some of the different games out there that are considered art; Shadow of the Colossus, Braid and Okami are all highly regarded, but if you haven’t experienced them then you’ll never understand their power.

This is where the problem lies. Games are an interactive experience and most people who dismiss games haven’t touched a pad for longer than an hour. Where film immerse us in their world, games actually get us involved in it. I swear the amount of forums rammed full of grown men actually admitting to crying after Aeris death on Final Fantasy VII is amazing. Never before have I seen more emotion on the internet without lashback from lurking trolls. It isn’t only Aeris death either, there are a whole load of different instances that have affected people differently. It isn’t only sadness too, anger, disbelief, hate, pride. There is a cornucopia of emotions that can be evoked by games.

Games are something that need to be experienced. I wouldn’t comment on the label films as mindless trash if I had only seen thirty minutes of Bedazzled. Likewise I wouldn’t call the biggest paperback release a waste of time without giving it a read. So the next time you get someone tell you that games are not art, make up a whole load of stuff about how a classic film is crap, let’s say Casablanca. When they ask what you “have you seen the film?” Just reply that you thought that the conversation was about speculation rather than experience.

Related posts: