Video games are OFFICALLY recognized as ART by NEA

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by Smarty McBarrelpants

Arts are essential to society. They increase happiness which is essential to productivity. They encourage the flow of ideas and education which is also essential. Opposition to repression ovften arises from the artisic communities- they have historical always lead the flow of ideas and political reform.
You can't just cut that off

Oh c'mon now, there's a pretty huge difference between "being against the arts" and "being against federal funding for the arts in the specific times of economic debt and recession."

Also, I never suggested I'd support complete eradication of all funding for the arts, I just don't think videogame companies should be receiving that funding. And yes, I suppose I would prefer that money went towards addressing other needs, if forced to make a choice.

[Aerozord]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

I just don't think videogame companies should be receiving that funding.

this is fair enough but why are video games less deserving then say, a film

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

Oh c'mon now, there's a pretty huge difference between "being against the arts" and "being against federal funding for the arts in the specific times of economic debt and recession."

Also, I never suggested I'd support complete eradication of all funding for the arts, I just don't think videogame companies should be receiving that funding. And yes, I suppose I would prefer that money went towards addressing other needs, if forced to make a choice.

These are times when they are perhaps more than necessaryl These are times when represion and corruption rein. And as Krylo has pointed out the tarts is cheap as fuck for the value it provides.

But the funding won't be going to videogame companies. Film funding doesn't go to movie studios.
Im against videogame funding for reasons outlined earlier but that doesn't mean you should cut arts funding.

[Lumenskir]

Thats an argument on how NEA is unwise in what they fund, not on video games as an art form.

I wasn't poo-pooing the "Video games as art" argument, I was poo-pooing the "Only things that 'address' the 'deep' issues are Art" argument.

I'm waitingfor the videogame equivalent of Wavelength- which locks up your comptuer and means you can't cloe it or shutit down and you have to push a single key faster nd faster aand faster till it lets you go.

There have been quite a few games like that. That Penn and Teller "Real Time Road Trip" game for instance, and I remember watching a Youtube review of a game where the developer had made it so that the final boss required the player to press the A button 65,000 times to defeat it. Also, I guess I Want To Be The Guy is nigh-functionally unplayable, and is definitely unmarketable.

But I'd support all of those games over some game that (thought it) had something to say about, I dunno, the immigration issue. I like the ability of high-art experiments to go to the outer limits of what is endurable, if only because it allows someone to be influenced by it later and refine it into something more palatable and enjoyable.

Otherwise we'll just end up with the videogame equivalent of the masses of "Aloof/disaffected middle class whites with relationship problems" that clog up film festivals.

I just don't think videogame companies should be receiving that funding.

Heh.

[Melfice]

Kicking back, and thinking about what I said (during a bout of "OH SHIT NIGHTKIN KILL IT!" (Fallout New Vegas)), I said stupid things.

I meant to say more, and more logical.
Basically more what Krylo said, exactly like Krylo said it.

Just figured I'd throw this out here. You're free to laugh at me, Snake.

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Again you would hope that the funding board are better than that. And Idon't know what film festivals you go to, the arthouse/indepedent film field is incredibly deep and the "middle class with relationship problems" is just sort of the most visible bit of it because journalists don't like to watch films exploring what happens weh film characters start to realise they are in a film and use the ability to pick up hot chicks.

[stefan]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

Oh c'mon now, there's a pretty huge difference between "being against the arts" and "being against federal funding for the arts in the specific times of economic debt and recession."

no there fucking isn't. especially when complaining about federal funding for the arts is, scale-wise, like bitching up a storm over paying 1.09 for a bagel instead of .99 just after you bought a 250,000 dollar sportscar you fully intend to replace in a year.

art is fucking expensive. I shoot digital photography as a student, which is by far one of the cheapest methods of photography, and I still run up my budget for travel expenses and printing fees. I have friends who regularly spend over two hundred dollars just for a single photoshoot for props, travel, and space, and that's counting the fact that the models are fellow students who are doing it for free.

[Solid Snake]

Originally Posted by stefan

no there fucking isn't. especially when complaining about federal funding for the arts is, scale-wise, like bitching up a storm over paying 1.09 for a bagel instead of .99 just after you bought a 250,000 dollar sportscar you fully intend to replace in a year.

This is such a complete misinterpretation of my argument that I don't even know how to respond to it, because I'm arguing both against the price of the bagel and the purchase of the sports car in your hypothetical.

But if I were to play around on your terms, I'd say this: America just bought the damn sportscar, right? And it was a mistake, so now we're $250,000 dollars in debt. We shouldn't have purchased the car, particularly if we weren't receiving enough income (federal equivalent: taxing the wealthy) to justify the cost.

So we simply can't buy all that many bagels anymore because we're in exorbitant amounts of debt. Being fiscally responsible means we have to measure the weight and the utility of each bagel we buy. It's not completely unimaginable that someone who was watching his money under such circumstances would say "No" to purchasing the bagel that was aesthetically pleasing but wasn't very nutritious, as opposed to purchasing the bagels that contained the nutrients necessary to ensure you had healthy meals.

(Like seriously it's a little annoying that so many of you seem hellbent to interpret my position as one against videogames or against art, like I'm some Neanderthal who takes deliberate joy in depriving artists of their income. That's not my position. If you'd like to have an actual policy discussion that's cool with me, and that was essentially Krylo's approach and I enjoyed that, but merely telling me off for "hatin' on artists" is kind of silly.)

[Professor Smarmiarty]

Being against federal funding for the arts is pretty much equivalent to being against the arts though. Cause that is a pretty significant part of arts funding and it's pretty essential to the health of the arts. Cutting it is going to seriously impair artistic expression.
Especially in a recession where private donors are few and far between.

Also its a policy game. If you give in on all the small battles, you give ground on the arts, you give ground on welfare because you're in a recession then you lessen the impetus for major change-people willthink it is ok because we are spending less on these small things, they think belt tightening can fix things.
It can't-you need major change if you want to fix things and fiddling around by cutting lightly funded and essential areas distracts from this need and lessens its feeling.

Using the example above it's like thinking that buying the sportscar was ok, you'll just cut out the bagels from now on.

Like I totally understand your position and where you are coming from, I just think that you shouldfight the big battles.
I also think that arts funding is essential and cutting it will cripple artistic output but that's not even a necessary argument in this case.


But I'm sure funding videogame art will bring us closer to videogame sex which is really what everyone wants so we shouldn't be against it.

[Aerozord]

Originally Posted by Solid Snake

This is such a complete misinterpretation of my argument that I don't even know how to respond to it, because I'm arguing both against the price of the bagel and the purchase of the sports car in your hypothetical.

there is no evidence there is any additional spending. From what I've read its just that they are expanding who is eligible. I saw no mention of additional funding going to NEA, so really its not even about paying $1.09 for a bagel instead of 99 cents, you are essentially complaining that they now offer 99cent danishes too.

They aren't increasing spending at all