Miyamoto: "I never said games are art."

[Pitchfork]

Eyebrow-raising remark during Miyamoto's acceptance of the British Academy of Film and Television Arts award.

Not my quote: "Ebert says games aren't art, the gates of hell open, and an internet flame war begins. Miyamoto says games aren't art...crickets chirping..."


I give this thread one page before it turns into an argument about the definition of art.

[Malroth]

It's Miyamoto just being humble. Besides that, it seems his original intention was to create something that was "fun" rather than artsy. Nothing inflamitory as far as I'm concerned.

I'll sidestep the whole art debate as well. Seems like that conversation/argument boils down to the eye of the beholder.

[Warchief Onyx]

I think the big difference here is that Ebert's so much as never touched a video game while Miyamoto's entire career is creating them.

Not getting into the insipid games as art debate, but I think Miyamoto's words on the subject are worth a hell of a lot more than Ebert's (who has since retracted them anyway).

[ReyVGM]

Didn't some artsy fartsy museum already officially declare games as art?

The thing people don't realize is that anything can be art, but it's only officially considered art when the artsy fartsies say so.

[wyrdwad]

That's why I just live by this general rule of thumb:

EVERYTHING is art.

Period.

-Tom

[kal]

It's clear that Miyamoto has always considered himself more of a workman and less of an artist. This doesn't actually stop anything he's producing being art...which is of course why no one would get up in arms about this.

[kitten]

Maybe when he makes good games again I'll consider his commentary relevant. Why does anyone care what the geezer has to say, anyway? He's been damn out of touch for ages, now.

[Catalyst]

Um, I'm pretty sure it's him being sincere in the fact that he never set out to make something that would be considered art. It was just him sorta fiddling around to make something fun.

[X-pert74]

I don't have a problem with his comments. He just comes across as being humble in that interview.

Jun 15, 2011 1:17:40 GMT -5 ReyVGM said:

Didn't some artsy fartsy museum already officially declare games as art?

The thing people don't realize is that anything can be art, but it's only officially considered art when the artsy fartsies say so.

Video games are now legally considered an art form in the US.

I feel pretty much the same way. Not that I think too much about "art" in general though.

[Ryu the Grappler]

Jun 15, 2011 3:38:32 GMT -5 kitten said:

Maybe when he makes good games again I'll consider his commentary relevant. Why does anyone care what the geezer has to say, anyway? He's been damn out of touch for ages, now.

Quoted for truth. I always found Miyamoto to be rather overrated, with the exception of the early Super Mario and Zelda games for the NES and Super NES (even then, I wouldn't consider any of them to be the "best game ever"). I sometimes wonder how much input Miyamoto had in the actual development of his games (especially considering none of the NES Super Mario Bros. games had any staff rolls and he's only credited as a producer in all of the SNES games). I get the impression Miyamoto is a cartoonist who simply came up with the characters and worlds, while someone else (perhaps Takashi Tezuka) did all the actual game designing.

As for the whole "games are art" nonsense, it's an argument that will go nowhere until people can decide for a consistent definition of the word "art" (in the same way people has a definition for the word "chair"). It's the same reason why theists and atheists continue to argue over the existence of God when none of them are consistent with the definition of "existence". When the majority people say a game (or a film or novel for that matter) is a "true work of art", they're saying it's a "great game", so the label "art" should only be reserved to truly great works in that context.

[justjustin]

Yeah, it seems like a case of just being polite to me. When he describes what he does as a game designer-- creating interesting worlds for people to play in, developing fun experiences, bringing joy to people-- his aim is basically the same as any other good artist.

[9inchsamurai]

Jun 15, 2011 9:25:55 GMT -5 Ryu the Grappler said:

Quoted for truth. I always found Miyamoto to be rather overrated, with the exception of the early Super Mario and Zelda games for the NES and Super NES (even then, I wouldn't consider any of them to be the "best game ever"). I sometimes wonder how much input Miyamoto had in the actual development of his games (especially considering none of the NES Super Mario Bros. games had any staff rolls and he's only credited as a producer in all of the SNES games). I get the impression Miyamoto is a cartoonist who simply came up with the characters and worlds, while someone else (perhaps Takashi Tezuka) did all the actual game designing.

I've always thought of his "producer" role as being a form of quality control. He comes up with a general idea of the game design, the design team makes something to show him, and then he offers his opinions on whether it's good or not. He definitely has more direct involvement with some games rather than others now (like Wii Music), but I've always thought of him as the final decision maker on whether something gets implemented in a game.

[Ryu the Grappler]

If the Japanese Wikipedia article is reliable, Miyamoto hasn't directed any games since Super Mario 64 and even then, he didn't direct any of Nintendo's Super Famicom titles (his last game before Super Mario 64 happens to be Super Mario Bros. 3). Strangely Doki Doki Panic is not listed in the page, which many English fansites claim to be one of his works (only the Super Mario USA edition is listed, which he produced). I always found the claim that Doki Doki Panic was a Team Miyamoto game rather dubious.

Of course, if crap like Wii Music and Wii Sports are the latest stuff Miyamoto is churning out (he only worked as "General Producer" in those games), it's no wonder he doesn't like his newer games to be recognized as "art".

[Ace Whatever]

Jun 15, 2011 0:46:11 GMT -5 Pitchfork said:

I give this thread one page before it turns into an argument about the definition of art.

You were too generous.

[kitten]

I give it till the first post before someone posts irrelevant commentary by a dinosaur that no one should care about ;p