Wednesday, March 21, 2007

More Theory

Not to bring up the video games as art topic again, but here's a decent article on the topic. And here's a quote from it:

Molyneux says he and his crew at Lionhead Studios (now part of Microsoft) take a similar approach to creating games. “Does a painter decide to make art or paint a picture? Does a composer decide to compose a piece of music or make art? Does a film maker want to make a film or art? I think they're more concerned with evoking emotions and creating something meaningful and enduring.

“I set out, especially today, to instill emotions in the people who interact with my games, which are broader and more visual than they have been before,” he explains. “I want players to feel a range of emotions, not just excitement—that is my ambition. If on this basis some critics describe this as artistic, then I will feel like I have succeeded.”

1 comment:

  1. Stimulants aren't always art. Take the most brilliant narrative you've seen in a game (there have been a few that impressed me). It's still probably not good enough to be a book that would sell, and isn't a true reflection of a creator's passion or soul. It's a product that creator wants people to buy.

    When you have to pour through code with a team of software designers to "realize a vision", the creative burst disappears in favor of a guarantee for return on time and money invested. Molyneux can say what he wants.