The problem with your picture Nephthys is that it is incredibly hard to prove that the same people who push the "games as art" agenda are also the guys who push the "**** feminazis in my vidya" agenda.
Furthermore, most game developers also don't send death threats to people criticizing their works, lol. Their fans do, absolutely. Because sad to say but the gaming medium still attracts a lot of stupid manchildren. A disproportionate amount of them than most other mediums, from my experience.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VhGfCTA_6wA
Read some of the comments supporting Hitler in this... disgusting.
Originally posted by NemeBro
The problem with your picture Nephthys is that it is incredibly hard to prove that the same people who push the "games as art" agenda are also the guys who push the "**** feminazis in my vidya" agenda.Furthermore, most game developers also don't send death threats to people criticizing their works, lol. Their fans do, absolutely. Because sad to say but the gaming medium still attracts a lot of stupid manchildren. A disproportionate amount of them than most other mediums, from my experience.
Hence why the comment just has it be "Gamers" in general talking and not some random asshat.
👆 I roll my eyes when someone like Moviebob on the Escapist comes up with theories that gamers can't handle criticism because they're still in a mentality of defending against Jack Thompson and the guys wanting games to be censored. Nah, gamers just have a shitton of entitled, impotent manchildren made way too aggressive and awful because of the anonymity of the internet and from screaming at each other in shooters.
Originally posted by NemeBroDon't see the relevance tbh.
[B]All of that hate mail is vastly overshadowed by the fan mail he gets for his portrayal of women and children though.
Most of his fans that aren't idiots wouldn't defend his art under the pretense that he is "just telling a story". That's a coward's cop-out response.Yeah, but who gives a shit? The validity of the criticisms is immaterial. Your points being good ones or bad ones doesn't influence the necessity of the artist to acknowledge them in order to still be considered an artist....
Sure it's not, but that doesn't make the criticisms go away nor does it make them invalid. If your art can't be adequately defended against criticism, even if you continue to sell well, then the criticisms are probably valid.
And hey, I'd agree that it continues to be art, because art is inherently subjective, which I am pretty sure you believe as well. But if I analyze a work and find it to be wanting, then it still isn't good art. Not by my standards anyway.Indeed, but the point is that in the meta, no one gives a shit about your standards. If I write a book and you send me some fan-mail explaining in-depth why the book is a piece of shit, me throwing the letter into the trash without even reading it in no way effects me "being an artist", and in no way makes my book "not art", is my point.
Alternatively, me reading your fan-mail and then sobbing in rage for hours and then throwing it in the trash while muttering that obviously you don't understand that it's just fiction also doesn't make me less of an artist. It might make me a fagot, but it doesn't make me less of an artist.
Originally posted by NephthysThe point is one in the same. I imagine Martin probably doesn't want to be flooded with fan-mail talking about how much his books sucks ass either (or he's a troll and he does, or he's just ambivalent and doesn't care). Martin aside, most people don't appreciate criticism of their work, mate. lol. "Wanting people to talk shit about your work" isn't a qualifier for being an artist, or for your work to be considered art.
[B]Who gives a **** about that? The issue isn't about whether Martin cares about his critics, the issue is that people don't want games to be criticized for having shitty depictions of women or promoting negative values or perceptions. You're focusing on the wrong thing and generally missing the point, lol.
Originally posted by Tzeentch
The point is one in the same. I imagine Martin probably doesn't want to be flooded with fan-mail talking about how much his books sucks ass either (or he's a troll and he does, or he's just ambivalent and doesn't care). Martin aside, most people don't appreciate criticism of their work, mate. lol. "Wanting people to talk shit about your work" isn't a qualifier for being an artist, or for your work to be considered art.
Why are you talking about the guys making the games? They aren't the ones throwing b*tchfits about people criticising games, it's your cheetoo's n mountain dew swilling gamer that's flipping out.
But the video game fanbase was largely part of the movement to get games taken seriously, not just developers etc.
More like they "should" be receptive of criticism. There's obviously no law that says they need to. And naw, it was about the gamers, not the artists. That's why the picture said "Gamers", not "Game Makers".
Why bring up "well if you want the genre to be taken seriously as art then you have to do X and Y", then?
The gaming community has no effect on whether or not games are an art-form. 99% of video games portraying minorities poorly and gamers getting butt-blasted when people point that out doesn't make video games not an art-form.
Originally posted by Tzeentch
Don't see the relevance tbh.
That there are plenty of counterarguments to the arguments you cited.
Yeah, but who gives a shit? The validity of the criticisms is immaterial. Your points being good ones or bad ones doesn't influence the necessity of the artist to acknowledge them in order to still be considered an artist.
Sure, the artist is still an artist, but if he can't respond to or adapt to constructive criticism then he or she is probably a "bad" one.
Indeed, but the point is that in the meta, no one gives a shit about your standards. If I write a book and you send me some fan-mail explaining in-depth why the book is a piece of shit, me throwing the letter into the trash without even reading it in no way effects me "being an artist", and in no way makes my book "not art", is my point.
This is empirically untrue. How? Because you have asked me my opinion on things I have seen and read. As have others. Just recently Estacado asked for a summary on Lords of the Fallen and directly asked me if it was worth its price. I have asked for your opinion as well, which has influenced whether or not I wanted to experience a work.
That is all strictly small-scale though. On the large-scale critics and reviewers can heavily influence whether or not people will buy a game, a movie, or a book. Furthermore, plenty of artists rely on critical approval for their work to be viewed or purchased. So in an absolute sense, and on the "meta level", sorry, but people's standards do generally matter. An individual's stance might not, but no one person lives in a vacuum.
Also, you seem to be going pretty far off topic. You never really understood Nephthys' point from the beginning and seemed to think that the picture caption was about the creators of the games, rather than the fanbase. It was always about the fanbase though. Whether or not you think that is irrelevant is itself irrelevant.
Alternatively, me reading your fan-mail and then sobbing in rage for hours and then throwing it in the trash while muttering that obviously you don't understand that it's just fiction also doesn't make me less of an artist. It might make me a fagot, but it doesn't make me less of an artist.
Actually I'd disagree. If your work can't be defended and you indignantly assert that there is nothing wrong with it then you're probably not a very good artist, lol.
The point is one in the same. I imagine Martin probably doesn't want to be flooded with fan-mail talking about how much his books sucks ass either (or he's a troll and he does, or he's just ambivalent and doesn't care). Martin aside, most people don't appreciate criticism of their work, mate. lol. "Wanting people to talk shit about your work" isn't a qualifier for being an artist, or for your work to be considered art.
I agree. Most people also aren't artists. 😛
No one wants people to talk mad shit about their work, but constructive criticism is to be appreciated. By those who aren't fajets anyway. Why do you think I always ask people what I could improve on when playing Pathfinder? 👆
Originally posted by NemeBroWhat part of my stance are you actually disagreeing with. mmm
That there are plenty of counterarguments to the arguments you cited.Sure, the artist is still an artist, but if he can't respond to or adapt to constructive criticism then he or she is probably a "bad" one.
This is empirically untrue. How? Because you have asked me my opinion on things I have seen and read. As have others. Just recently Estacado asked for a summary on Lords of the Fallen and directly asked me if it was worth its price. I have asked for your opinion as well, which has influenced whether or not I wanted to experience a work.
That is all strictly small-scale though. On the large-scale critics and reviewers can heavily influence whether or not people will buy a game, a movie, or a book. Furthermore, plenty of artists rely on critical approval for their work to be viewed or purchased. So in an absolute sense, and on the "meta level", sorry, but people's standards do generally matter. An individual's stance might not, but no one person lives in a vacuum.
Also, you seem to be going pretty far off topic. You never really understood Nephthys' point from the beginning and seemed to think that the picture caption was about the creators of the games, rather than the fanbase. It was always about the fanbase though. Whether or not you think that is irrelevant is itself irrelevant.
Actually I'd disagree. If your work can't be defended and you indignantly assert that there is nothing wrong with it then you're probably not a very good artist, lol.
I agree. Most people also aren't artists. 😛
No one wants people to talk mad shit about their work, but constructive criticism is to be appreciated. By those who aren't fajets anyway. Why do you think I always ask people what I could improve on when playing Pathfinder? 👆
Originally posted by NemeBroThe artist. Zing!
Then who does?
Originally posted by Tzeentch
Why bring up "well if you want the genre to be taken seriously as art then you have to do X and Y", then?The gaming community has no effect on whether or not games are an art-form. 99% of video games portraying minorities poorly and gamers getting butt-blasted when people point that out doesn't make video games not an art-form.
Because people (gamers) want games to be taken seriously as an artform, but also level death threats and abuse at those who critically analyse it's issues. The comment was just pointing out the hypocrisy and stupidity of that contradiction. That's it.
I never said anything about whether it was an artform or not. That's barely anything to do with the point. The issue I'm talking about is the guys getting butt-blasted, not that.
Originally posted by NephthysI think the crux of the discussion then is, why is that a contradiction? The gaming community acting like morons in response to valid criticisms of the state of gaming prevents vidya from being taken seriously as an art form?
Because people (gamers) want games to be taken seriously as an artform, but also level death threats and abuse at those who critically analyse it's issues. The comment was just pointing out the hypocrisy and stupidity of that contradiction. That's it.
Nephthys is saying that the community which tries so hard to make gaming a recognized art form also pisses and moans whenever it is treated like a recognized art form.
Whether or not that is true is another matter.
Originally posted by Tzeentch
What part of my stance are you actually disagreeing with. mmm
That's actually a good question. I think we both had different conceptions of what was actually being discussed at the start.
The artist. Zing!To an extent, sure, but the interpretation of the artist does not supersede the interpretation of the viewers or players or whatever.