On the basis that any form of expression can qualify as art, or that stirring emotion in the audience can qualify as art, I can agree that gaming mechanics can be art.
But it's that usual issue - when is something art? Are all creative things art?
In your examples, the artist had something to say.
Once the art becomes "interactive", it's no longer the artist speaking; it's we ourselves speaking.
True art is the expression of God through their work which others can recognize. Interactive games lose their expression of God since it's not the artist who is expressing God but the player who is expressing the developer.
Well, I assume that every artist needs what we call the God Spark in Poland ;-) let's consider what I wrote a mental shortcut ;-)
Although, you're making a good point, but in traditional (lack of better word) narratives also can achieve something similar. Events, character personas, even random words in order - might do something that the artist didn't want to say, but the reader/watcher/listener interpreted. In a way, that's still expression of God, I guess... A interpretation, if made, in a way can be considered a prototype of interactivity :D
Which leads us to games. Although, many interactive games are still scripted, and not truly random. Procedural games may lead to experiences as interpretations, making sense of the algorithm. May lead to self discovery and learning. Still a big chance of becoming expression of God, I think.
If you've ever been "in the zone", you know that the expression isn't a maybe but a definite connection between you and the source of your inspiration. Unfortunately, not every artist has the "God Spark". Some have a "Drug Spark" or a "Demon Spark". You can't get a clean glass of water when the inspiration for the art is pumped from the sewer.
On the basis that any form of expression can qualify as art, or that stirring emotion in the audience can qualify as art, I can agree that gaming mechanics can be art.
But it's that usual issue - when is something art? Are all creative things art?
If only art critics can sit down and agree on a definition, bloody snobs.
In your examples, the artist had something to say.
Once the art becomes "interactive", it's no longer the artist speaking; it's we ourselves speaking.
True art is the expression of God through their work which others can recognize. Interactive games lose their expression of God since it's not the artist who is expressing God but the player who is expressing the developer.
Well, I assume that every artist needs what we call the God Spark in Poland ;-) let's consider what I wrote a mental shortcut ;-)
Although, you're making a good point, but in traditional (lack of better word) narratives also can achieve something similar. Events, character personas, even random words in order - might do something that the artist didn't want to say, but the reader/watcher/listener interpreted. In a way, that's still expression of God, I guess... A interpretation, if made, in a way can be considered a prototype of interactivity :D
Which leads us to games. Although, many interactive games are still scripted, and not truly random. Procedural games may lead to experiences as interpretations, making sense of the algorithm. May lead to self discovery and learning. Still a big chance of becoming expression of God, I think.
Notice how many times you used conditional words?
"Procedural games MAY lead to....
MAY lead to ...
Still a big CHANCE of ..."
If you've ever been "in the zone", you know that the expression isn't a maybe but a definite connection between you and the source of your inspiration. Unfortunately, not every artist has the "God Spark". Some have a "Drug Spark" or a "Demon Spark". You can't get a clean glass of water when the inspiration for the art is pumped from the sewer.