The Place of Video Games in the World of Art

            Art is a category of objects that is deemed to be creative and evocative of many different emotions, thoughts, and ideas. In some sense the term art is arbitrary, for we have designated what is and is not art from things that already exist and have more or less isolated them into a separate space which receives special attention and consideration. We have come to call certain things art in a very peculiar way, for as philosophers Walter Benjamin and Susan Sontag state: we have dubbed what we call art today in a retrospective process, i.e. well after the beginnings of their existence we have decided that paintings, plays, music, and other such artistic objects be considered art. When a new mode of producing art is established we do not clearly see it as such, but in time as the mode develops past its primitive form we are able to see it for what it is, or rather recognize the potential it has as a new artistic mode of presentation. It is worth noting that the “classic” forms of art we know today probably underwent this process of becoming art at a much slower pace than more modern modes of art such as movies, and this is most likely the result of the mechanical means of production that exist now. Art has become so reproducible and assessable that nearly anyone can view any work of art simply by pressing a few buttons on a tiny screen. This has completely expedited the process of a new form of art becoming recognized, but this is not necessarily a bad thing, in fact it is quite the opposite. If we can recognize a new mode of artistic presentation quickly, then we can avoid political misuse of the works. Works of art serve political functions and have the power and potential to motivate people to change or to manipulate them as propaganda. If people can see a new work of art for what it is capable any damage caused can be mitigated. What more, then, is undergoing the critical moments of this process than video games?

Video games are relatively new, the first ones being created sometime around the early 1970s. Just like paintings, music, and stage plays; video games have undergone an evolution from being primitive modes of presentation to a clearly distinguished and complex mode of artistic presentation. Movies had an easier time of becoming recognized as art, quite possibly because in some sense they resemble plays, an already well-established form of art. They both contain story, plot, and most notably actors. Video games are quite unique in that there had never been anything like them when they were first created. The only similar things would have been “games” like chess, games that held the sole purpose of winning, and for video games this was maybe true in the first years in games like Pong. It did not take long to diverge from that format and games began to develop elements of plot, composers created original music for individual games, and the visual/graphical component of video games became much more sophisticated. What one would question, though, is if games are art or if they simply contain art. In reality both statements are true: a video game both is art and contains other elements of art. As mentioned before, video games contain images and music, and this is akin to the way that plays and movies contain music and images to further the medium being presented: the narrative. How then, is, a video game a work of art? Each of the “classic” forms of art give us an artistic presentation through a certain medium, and this is what makes each art form unique. Paintings use images, music uses sound, and plays use narratives. Video games too, use a medium that is unique and makes them works of art in themselves, and this medium that gives us a mode of artistic representation is interaction.

At the heart of every video game is the idea of “play”. Video games are works of art that are played, and the only way to fully engage in one is to play it or else you are not experiencing the mode of artistic presentation that the video game is providing through the interaction medium. Hans-Georg Gadamer is a philosopher that wrote extensively about the role of play in works of art, “If, in connection with the experience of art, we speak of play, this refers neither to the state of mind of the creator or of those enjoying the work of art, nor to the freedom of a subjectivity expressed in play, but to the mode of being of the work of art itself” (Cahn & Meskin 370). Gadamer suggests that what is critical to works of art are the means by which we experience it, and play is what allows this to happen, “the work of art has its true being in the fact that it becomes an experience changing the person experiencing it” (Cahn and Meskin 371). Art, through play, is an experience that changes the one experiencing it. Works of art contain both players and spectators, and these are the ones who experience art. Gadamer writes that players are not the subject of play but instead the means by which it is presented. This can be seen in the “classical” forms of art (painters, actors, writers, and musicians). The players present the mode of play so that spectators (listeners, viewers, audience) can experience the work of art as well. Video games contain a unique form of play in that the one experiencing the mode of play is both the player and the spectator. The medium of interaction is what allows for this dynamic, for unless a person plays the game (through interacting with it) nothing can be experienced from the video game. The way a game plays out; however, is different for each person. Video games provide the aspect of choice, and different people can choose to play in a way that is completely different than how someone else does. Each player will interact with the game differently, and so, as a spectator will see something different than others. The mode of play within video games is shaped by the individual who simultaneously plays and spectates reality within the game.

We have established that video games are unique because they provide a mode of artistic presentation through a unique medium, interaction, but then how is it that video games function to bring about artistic presentation? In other words what is the artistic experience that video games take us through? This is actually answered in great deal by Gadamer in addressing the way that play works. Video games are immersive, to a much greater degree than other forms of art. First, the world of the video game is a distinct world that is set apart from reality, or rather the world of the game becomes reality. In works of art that use the medium of narrative, the spectator is expected to identify with one or more of the characters. This is how the mode of play works within the medium. In a video game; however, the player/spectator becomes a character that exists in the world of the game. There are rules that exist in this game in the same way that rules exist in the mode of play. One must take the rules quite seriously to succeed in the game and also enjoy it. The idea of a game as Gadamer speaks of is given a set of tasks that are completed using the rules that apply for the sake of completion. This is also what the essence of a video game is: you are presented a world that the player must interact with by becoming a character that exists within the world. This character, and therefore the player, are given set of tasks that are carried out using rules that must be followed in order to proceed in the world of the game and complete the experience. A good video game will immerse the player fully into the world of the game so that they have entered new reality, and once completing the given tasks will create a feeling of relief within the player which they can then recollect on in their dual role as a spectator as well. The nature of video games, in essence, is the nature of play that Gadamer speaks of.

With video games being in the critical stages of being recognized as works of art, debates over their place in the art world has been disputed relentlessly. A prominent film critic, Roger Ebert, made the claim that “video games can never be art” in the mid-2000s. This single claim was met with much backlash from the people that enjoy video games, i.e. gamers, and many have defended that video games should be considered art. Kellee Santiago is a supporter of the claim that video games can be works of art; however, she does not focus on the question of whether video games are or aren’t works of art. She instead recognizes that video games already are works of art which provide a unique medium to experience a unique mode of artistic presentation: interaction. In her TED talk she rejects Roger Ebert’s claim by comparing video games to other forms of art, explaining that all art forms start from basic principles and eventually evolve into something greater. She then provides three examples of games that point to the form of aesthetic activity that video games provide. Ebert, in response to Santiago, responds to her TED talk and (after never doing so) defends his past claim that video games do not have the ability to be works of art. These two opponents capture the reality of any debate between video games and its relation to art, whether or not video games, in and of itself, i.e. in principle, can be works of art. Ebert’s defense is that 1.) The artists that created the primitive works that Kellee speaks of were not in the process of evolving to become the renowned artists of the renaissance that we know today, they were geniuses of their time, 2.) The medium of video games, i.e. interaction, does not fit within the model of art that we accept, and 3.) Video games do not evoke the same intellectual and emotional responses as other works of art. To begin, Ebert fails to understand the medium through which video games present themselves as works of art. He makes the claim (or at least implies) that he has rarely touched a video game, if ever. He critiques games based on 3 aspects of a definition that attempts to unite all video games under a single umbrella, “They tend to involve (1) point and shoot in many variations and plotlines, (2) treasure or scavenger hunts, as in "Myst," and (3) player control of the outcome. I don't think these attributes have much to do with art; they have more in common with sports” (Ebert). The first two aspects of his definition are simply qualities of some video games. If anything they are more related to the narrative of a video game than the actual interactive element. It is not always just about finding a treasure (assuming that is the task given) but how the player finds it, when they find it, or any number of factors. His third aspect actually does address the medium but Ebert is incorrect in his claim that the player freely chooses the outcome. A player cannot will outcome X to happen if it is not present in the video game already. The interactive medium gives choices to how a narrative plays out (which can effect outcomes) but it is limited in what happens. The player does not “choose” an outcome, rather the player guides the actions of the character they become to influence the story to either go down path X or path Y, but ultimately both paths lead to the same destination.

I mentioned earlier that works of art carry a very potent power of influence within them. If we are to consider video games another type of art form then we must consider the influences they have and the resulting consequences that come about. What implications does recognizing this unique form of art have on the real world?  Video games are a form of mass media meaning that they are accessible to millions, if not billions of individuals around the world. The influential power, or message, of a particular game can reach an alarming number of individuals. Since video games are in the middle of becoming recognized as art, it goes without saying that the majority of people that experience (or rather play) video games do not contemplate the artistic mode of presentation given. Most people only believe video games to be for the sake of entertainment and distraction, immersing themselves fully into the world of the game, assuming the role of whatever character the game assigns to them. To not recognize a video game’s artistic ability means reducing oneself to the role of the player only, and ignoring the role of the spectator. The true artistic experience provided through interaction is fully achieved only when one is both player and spectator: the role of the player pulls the individual into the world and presents concepts and ideas that evoke emotions from the player. Once the given tasks are complete the player is removed from the world and is then able to be the spectator, resolving the heightened emotions they had while playing the game and transforming the experience to intellectual activity. If the role as spectator is not taken then the concepts and ideas given while in the role of player remains and can affect the individual. The risk of this varies between games. Games such as Super Mario Bros. are very light and deal with playful themes, some of which could actually be beneficial to remain in the player without any sort of spectator contemplation. The majority of games; however, are made for the sake of entertaining the player, which has demanded a variety of violent and culturally insensitive content. It is not the intention of those who make games to present harmful stimuli, but rather they do not acknowledge the influential weight the games they make have when they present certain events or groups of people in certain ways.

Mary Devereaux is a philosopher who writes about the way that media presents women in a harmful way. Historically women have been oppressed by men and given unequal opportunities, but even after numerous movements to equalize that gap there is still a political system (as well as a belief system) that oppresses women. Devereaux explains importantly that modern media (and all forms of media past) contains a “male gaze” which asserts that expectations (of a film) are “disproportionately affected by male needs, beliefs, and desires”. Video games are looked upon with a male gaze as well. In both film and games female characters play subservient roles to men, such that their subjectivity is renounced and they become mere objects or tools for the purpose of supporting male driven expectations. Many video games portray female characters in such a light as a means to enhance the narrative experience. Most video games add such elements; and this is not harmful on its own, but most games fail to address sensitive topics safely; they will use culturally sensitive themes (such as misogyny, racism, and criminal activity) without providing a safe resolution to the topic discussed. Since most players do not recognize video games as art, and therefore do not take on the spectator role, they will experience the culturally sensitive themes as the player but will not attain relief from the immersive experience.

Ramifications of this process has manifested in the controversial movement known as #Gamergate. This is a movement that claims to be concerned with the journalism ethics surrounding video games, but its origin and underlying goal has been an attack against women within the video game industry. The first attack was on a woman named Zoe Quinn, who was accused of sleeping with several men while in a relationship. This accusation was posted online which sparked a very long and degrading discussion about Quinn’s sex life and the quality of her video game, Depression Quest. During this time one of the men was said to be an editor for a game review magazine, and once this information was revealed the community of people (gamers) created the #Gamergate movement to criticize the relationship between game developers and game reviewers. This is really more of a façade to mask the many misogynistic attacks on multiple women over the last few months. Another notable victim of the #Gamergate movement is Anita Sarkeesian, creator of the Tropes vs. Women in Video Games series. Her series brings to light the sexist and misogynistic themes that exist within many video games, and how they have the ability to degrade women in the real world. She, as well as Quinn and many others, were the target of copious amounts of animosity: reaching to the point where their lives were threatened with some of them having to leave their homes. What makes gamers so defensive? Why do they consistently suggest that video games are art when someone says otherwise? Why do they attack women so relentlessly? This is the result of perceived threat to their shared identity.

What is probably the most unique thing about video games other than its use of interaction as a mode of artistic presentation is the creation of the “gamer” identity. No other form of art has led to the creation of a specific group of people that identify with the form of the art as a whole. Originally this community consisted of almost exclusively males, and more likely than not white males due to the fact that gaming consoles were expensive for the time. As games evolved the developers began branching off bit by bit to attract a larger consumer base than the gamer community, and once consoles became more affordable the gamer identity began to incorporate more people of different demographics. Obviously there are no racial disputes over the gamer identity, but the inclusion of women in the community has been met with resistance, but has also contributed to the expansion of video game themes to incorporate culturally sensitive issues in responsible ways. The target consumer of large video game developers, males, have responded with hostility to the evolving and more inclusive identity of the gamer. The identity that the typical “gamer” associates with is being changed because 1.) The community is becoming more diverse, specifically incorporating women into the new target consumer, and 2.) The kinds of games being made no are no longer just for entertainment but now tackle culturally sensitive issues. It is not only a threat to the gamer identity that they face, but also an awareness of their own privilege,

“Whether they realize it or not, they've just had what's probably their first real encounter with the concept of "privilege." For a very long time, being part of the "target demo" has meant being able to enjoy games made for (and, for the most part, by) people like you, without ever seeing those games interrogated from another perspective.” (Hathaway)

The gaming community of the past is being faced with the realization that the games they appreciate contain sexist, racist, and misogynistic themes. These reactions are so potent and hostile because most gamers identify strongly with the characters that are portrayed in games. They may claim that video games are art but do not fully understand how art is presented in video games, they lack the understanding to fully experience the medium of interaction. This lack of understanding is what allow major game developers to produce harmful games. Big companies are more concerned about the profits to be made from games, not the influence that the games they create have on an uninformed consumer base. They address culturally sensitive subjects and immerse the player in the interactive aspect of the game, but ultimately fail to safely incorporate such topics in a way that is positive. The gamer is not able to switch from the role of the player into the spectator role, which is the appropriate way to experience art within a video game, and therefore are stuck with the residual emotional ties to the characters that they become when playing video games. The failure of the gamer to understand the artistic process of video games, and the failure of video game developers to address controversial topics safely, enable to kinds of hostile movements like #Gamergate. Video games must, then, be acknowledged as art if not by the mass public than at least by the ones who play them. If we linger too long in our recognition of the art produced by video games we will be susceptible to a community that degrades not only women but other groups of people or places that have become the narrative tools of many video games.