Re: [-empyre-] games and apathy (Regina)
I agree with Regina. Game technology itself is not the problem, it's what
you make out of it.
Game orientated artists should take from the commercial sector whatever is
useful to them, whatever inspires, revolts, appeals, cries out loud. Ever
more so, since the commercial sector itself doesn't have any hesitations to
feed itself of the arts.
On 6/11/03 10:45 AM, "arteonline" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> For myself, I think the games industry makes Hollywood look like a
>> bastion of progressive, intellectual, non-sexist cosmopolitanism.
>> However, there are quite a few games I have enjoyed playing over the
>> some, like Zelda on N64, have a special place in my heart.
>> But, I don't think I've ever played a game that made me think.
>> Art makes a person think.
>> We've all had punters angry at us (please tell me I'm not alone in having
>> had someone screaming "THIS...IS...NOT...ART!!!" in my face during a
>> and I love it because it means they are thinking about it.
> The important about games is just to know how they can influence ART. On the
> one hand lots of artists are working with games now and those games make one
> thinks. I am speaking about Art games. You certainly know Arteroids and
> perhaps The Black and the White, reflections on fog, which contains the fog
> On the other hand did you see Matrix Reloaded? It is the aesthetics of a
> computer game, you can watch the movie only observing the visual
> narrative. The narrative with images is much more important than the textual
> narrative. In this way, what you think about the movie is not the same
> message you receive if you read the legends (as me ) or listen to the
> To an artist who works with games is the challenge is: how to use the
> aesthetics of the games to do art and to make people think.
>> empyre forum
> empyre forum
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and