Top
60°

Whose Line is it Anyway? Hatred and concept of games as art

Yesterday there was a lot of buzz about the trailer for the new game, Hatred, by indie developer Destructive Creations and most of it seemed to be around the violence portrayed in the gameplay trailer and more specifically, the targets of said violence. Is it art? Sean thinks so.

Read Full Story >>
wethenerdy.com
The story is too old to be commented.
DragoonsScaleLegends1222d ago

The definition of art: the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.

How does this game follow that definition. People must be delusional if they think this game is art. This game is as much of art as Hitlers creative skills of lining the streets with bodies for no reason. Also why do people think no matter how disturbing or horrible something is, it has the given rights to exist in the form of art? If your family was brutally killed and then someone recreated it in a game, where you see your family beg and plead for you not to kill them should a game be allowed to exist simply because it's not real or so called a way of expressing yourself in the form of art? Now being allowed to create something for yourself is completely different then selling something. If this game was banned that doesn't stop what people think is a form of art from being created. So how are we stopping arts evolution if this was banned when it could still be created just not sold?

RabbitFly1222d ago (Edited 1222d ago )

Well according to your own defintion, this would definitely count as art. Which is what a lot of the people defending "Hatred" wants to get through.

You see Beauty is a subjective word and can be experienced in many ways and forms. What really triggers this though is your mention of emotional power.

You see the fear and disgust you are feeling for "Hatred" at this very moment is a very powerful emotion. That alone is enough to prove to some of us that this has a value as "art".

There is no definition anywhere that says art can only be considered art if it conveys a positive feeling. Which should be obvious considering how many art forms that play on negative feelings to get a point through.

Now weather "Hatred" is trying to convey some point or not, is at this time impossible to know. And considering how the value of art always has and always will be in the eye of the beholder the developers intentions doesn't really matter.

There are a lot of positive things that can come out of experiencing something negative. It can come down to some form of self-realization or self-reflecting. I can almost certainly say that none of the people that are defending "Hatred"'s right to exist consider the game beautiful within your definition of the word. I am pretty positive that those people don't want to play the game because they think it will be fun. No it's rather the opposite. They might want to experience something ugly to see how it makes you feel, because the exploration of that has value. Considering the landscape of today's political correctness I actually think it has more value, just because it is a bit of the beaten path.

At the very least it seems, at least so far, that "Hatred" does not try to glorify it's own violence. Which can also be an argument that it's a much more moral game than any blockbuster game coming out this year. At least they are honest about the game being about murder.

antikbaka1222d ago

Postal 1 has already done it.

DragoonsScaleLegends1222d ago

There already are rape simulators it doesn't mean we should not try to prevent games identical to it in the future.