Bobtheduck wrote:When art broke free from that, it evolved into being the pouring out of someone's soul.
By that definition, Uwe Boll's movies are the greatest forms of art in the world. He loves what he does]I suppose, by kojima's definition, even individual pieces of something like "Grand Theft Auto" could be art, but the game doesn't come together as such.[/QUOTE]
How does it not? Have you played the GTA games? Because I have, and the story for Vice City and Liberty City Stories, are both absolutely incredible. If storytelling alone is the qualification for art, the GTA games (with the possible exception of III) definitely would be considered art.
I think it's just that no one can define art. You say it's the outpouring of a person's soul into something, I can't agree. You say it's a deep and thought-provoking storyline, yet you dismiss GTA because (I assume) you dislike the games, but if you're going to define art as something you can't dismiss something that falls in the same category just because you personally don't like it.
If I say art is putting paint on a canvas I can't say Picasso isn't art just because it doesn't make a picture, because Picasso put paint on a canvas, which fits my definition.
Sorry, I think I'm going to go the way of Kojima and AH. I can't really see games as art now given the criteria.