Quote Originally Posted by Mirage View Post
Either all are, or none are. It'll just be varying subjective opinions on how "good" art it is.

Just like even the crappiest movie ever made is still really art. Just not very good art (which again is subjective. Maybe the director thinks it's the most wonderful movie ever).
Quote Originally Posted by Dreddz
If games are art then all are equal in terms of artistic merit.
This isn't true. In many mediums, they differentiate between what is art and what is entertainment. There are long treatises on the differences between movies and "film," and between books and "literature." I doubt a similar descriptor will arise for gaming, but I personally believe there are titles that are art, and titles that do not have enough creative elements to constitute anything other than a business venture.

Because gaming is a unique amalgamation of storytelling, images, animation, and music, there are games I consider art for two different reasons.

A) Some games I consider art because their stories introduce themes, explore the complexity of them, and in the end present some kind of conclusion to the consumer, if not probing them to think about it further. Games like this are:

1. Metal Gear Solid 4
2. Far Cry 2
3. Metal Gear Solid 2
4. Heavy Rain
5. Stacking

B) Other games have what probably pass as poor or cliche stories, but their efforts are so progressive in putting together a visual presentation, they can't not be art:

6. God of War III
7. Valkyria Chronicles
8. Ico
9. Dragon Quest VIII
10. Killzone 3

Don't get me wrong - a visually artistic game isn't just packing in as many polygons, but doing something interesting and creative with the imagination, coloring, shading, and effects like motion blur to create something beautiful. That's why I would say God of War III is artistic but Crysis 2 is not.