Michael Brownstein
Videogames as art
	As a growing medium, there are a myriad of ways to look at videogames. Some of these methods are simple, some are complex. However, many people attribute false attributes to games for various reasons, such as the classic of blaming games for violence. These critics are not helping, but the proponents of games are not looking at things properly either. Videogames must be analyzed as an artform and treated as such. That being said, there are many ways to go about this analysis. Even as art, games can be used to disproves certain claims. They can also celebrate the quality and uniqueness of the medium. Finally, games can do things that other art does and ultimately bring people together.
	Fundamentally as things stand, there are primarily three schools of thought or ‘lenses that discussion of video games take place through. The first of these is of course the simplest- treating video games as exactly what they are on the surface. There are a respectable myriad of subconversations at this level, ranging from the ever-present debate about violence tied inextricably to the world of politics, to the simple question of where they belong in society. The second lens is tied to the first, and slightly more complex- videogames must be looked at through the context of a rapidly growing industry. The conversations at this level touch on many factors, such as the consistently inflamed topic of games journalism, as well as an up and coming influence on the world at large- Esports. The third commonly used lens is looking at games as a community and a culture- of the traditional views this is the most complete. The important subconversations here are those of what it means to be a gamer, who belongs and what it means, and of course the precarious and unique position many female gamers find themselves in. The goal of this essay is to take the fourth lens, videogames as an art, and show why it matters. To do such, first it will be applied on top of the previous three lenses and their subconversations, then the lens itself must be explored- what does it truly mean that videogames are art, and why does it matter to both gamers and the public as a whole?
	Fittingly, it makes sense to begin with the view of videogames most often seen by the public- simply as games. Every few years, like clockwork a discussion springs up about whether videogames can be attributed as a cause of mass shootings. As researched by Pew, “Four-in-ten adults believe that violence in video games is related to violent behavior.”(1)  Yet in one of the more recent incidents, a song literally describing a school shooting from perspective of the shooter went by with almost no commentary. “All the other kids with the pumped up kicks better run, better run, faster than my bullet.” There is no question of what these lyrics mean, yet society decided to ignore them. The only possible reason is because music is considered an artform, therefore it has as much free speech as it could want. Videogames have the same range of expression as can be found in the numerous controversial titles. On top of this, still within the violence subconversation, videogames can prove to be a unique angle of looking at it, that no other media can pull off. There are games such as Spec ops: The line that actively touch upon the violence issue, and make the player feel bad for being violent within said games in a way no movie ever could. And that’s the thing. Looking for art through the lens containing the violence controversies reveals a hidden side of the medium, where nothing else can come close- if it can surpass other artforms in this way, how can it not be considered art?
	Following on, of course, is the next lens- looking at videogames as an industry. Much like the film industry, this is inextricably tied to the other facets. The critical part of the industry that shows off art, however, is not the one people might think. It is actually Esports. In both fake dramas and real sports, performance in front of the fans is what matters. And ironically, while rather subtle that’s the kind of art that goes on in the industry, and ultimately what is a game but the performance art of the coders and designers?
	The final of the original lenses is the deepest by far. Videogames carry with them a complex culture in and of themselves. There are dozens of viewpoints, each turning around in a conflicting yet harmonious spiral which creates the confusing mess known as a community or culture. Here, of all the lenses is where the artistic forms of videogames are most prevalent. Many of the games with more artistic values and unique traits come out of ‘indie’ or independent developers, those who grew up on videogames and are inspired by them. These people make unique pieces, inspired by what came before, yet unique on your own. Depending who you ask, this process of complex iteration could be considered the spirit of art. Finally, the true artistic nature of videogames can be found in the conversations here, as well as in other places. The community is quite complex, but many developers offer tools to the players such that they may create their own spin or even completely new mechanics for a given game. And this practice of letting the players do this, known as modding, turns the artistic aspects from a mere act on behalf of the developers to an endeavor that anyone can participate in and work on. And that is the true artistic beauty of videogames at the community level- there is so much, yet this massive group has conglomerated around something unique, all to express themselves in the spirit of art.
	Before explaining why videogames are art, it is important to take at least a cursory look at the previous conversation on the topic. There is a reasonable amount, though it is not nearly enough that it has covered even close to the whole area. A proponent for the treatment of games as art, author Steven Poole exposits “Video games are in one sense just another entertainment choice – but compared to many, a much more interesting one. And yet there seems to be a fear that videogames are somehow nudging out other art forms, and that we’re encouraging a generation of screen-glazed androids with no social skills, poetical sensitivity, or entrepreneurial ambition.”(3) Poole makes an accurate statement in this case. Video games offer something no other form of art or entertainment really can- interaction with a fantasy world. Books, movies, and other forms of entertainment or art simply cannot offer that. Yet, it would seem that there are people who dislike them purely for being different. They can pile on any excuse they want- but the crux is simple. These people see videogames as an acceptable target and are scared of them for being new. That is unacceptable to many proponents of games, and thus shapes the overall conversation surrounding them. It is ultimately divided into groups based on this line- those who believe video games are worth defending, and those who act out of fear hoping to keep video games out of other’s hands. The claim that video games are or are not art is often volleyed across the aisle, used by both sides to fuel their opinions. That being said, legally video games have free speech protection, courtesy of the supreme court ruling in Brown VS Entertainment Merchants association. ”Video games qualify for First Amendment protection.  Like protected books, plays, and movies, they communicate ideas through familiar literary devices and features distinctive to the medium.” And ultimately, that’s what art is. Simply the portrayal and communication of ideas through a medium. As such, according to this legal verdict it makes sense to call them art. However, even though the government has made it clear that it qualifies for free speech, the public hasn’t. Going back to the song mentioned earlier makes this clear- videogames are still under public attack for the content portrayed in them, even though said content is completely legal. Yet both sides of this argument have a unique flaw- they have a habit of saying video games are or are not art, yet just using it as a talking point. They never try and say why or why not. And that is what I aim to add and continue adding to this conversation.
That means, in order to look at games purely from the lens of art, without another in place, one must define art. Thankfully, Lisa Marder has a definition. “The definition of art has generally fallen into three categories: representation, expression, and form. Plato first developed the idea of art as “mimesis,” which, in Greek, means copying or imitation, thus making representation or replication of something that is beautiful or meaningful the primary definition of art.” This definition allows one to clearly analyze something and why it is art. The first video game to look at is a shining representative of the cause, the game known as Journey. Many reviewers, including Matt Miller have described journey as art: “If you’re open to that often nebulous realm of how a game might elicit emotion and the artistic potential of interactive narrative, Journey is an absolute must-play.” But he never expands why it is art-but thankfully Marder’s definition helps with that. Good art has a representation that is not merely the obvious one, but equally important is that it be debatable. Journey fulfills that criteria nicely as it is intentionally vague. The titular journey has no words, no plot- it simply is. One wanders through it and it could be any number of things from life to evolution. The expression criteria is also met, as journey shows off it’s unique style throughout the entirety of the silent game, leaving an experience that could not have been expressed outside videogames. The form is also appropriate to be considered art. It has a distinctive graphic style and aesthetic that evokes a sense of wonder and mystery, forming a game that is all about wonder.
Now, obviously a game such as journey can be considered art. But a unique game alone can’t prove the potential of the medium. While of course there are utterly horrendous games just like not all art is good, even ‘normal’ games can hold the artistic values. In this case, I’ll be using the game Trails in the sky. Returning to plato’s definition, the question is if it successfully replicates or represents something beautiful. The game tells a wonderfully human story, with characters that are impossible not to relate to. And human existence is fundamentally beautiful, so fittingly such a game most definitely fulfills the definition of art as mimesis according to plato.
In summation, this all goes to show why videogames are art and deserve to be recognized as such. However, the implications are reaching far beyond merely videogames themselves. As stated above, it’s no secret that video games have been dragged into the political sphere. However, recognizing that their most common use is by the right wing as a deflection tactic from the gun rights issue, this means that marking them as art results in them not being a socially acceptable deflection. Losing that could change the entire debate as all of a sudden there is a renewed focus. In addition, a changed perception of video games of course would have an impact on the medium itself. Without the shackles of a false perception, the industry would be allowed far more freedom than now, as it’s almost impossible to step out of line without some giant backlash. And that’s what it all comes down to. Yes, video games are art and they matter. But it is equally important to be able to understand the repercussions of said viewpoint.