The chief argument in the games-as-art debate seems to be that if games can produce emotionally evocative experiences then they have to be considered art, as that’s the definition of artistry. We may all get a rush facing down a Zerg brood or pulling off a slick 360® no-scope, but these are basal emotions that the medium has always excelled at.

What takes real finesse is for a game to deliver an experience that makes us feel something other than the blunt thrill of violence, and there are few titles that do it well. They may be a little more abstract than your usual linear titles, but these are the games that make the best effort to let their player get in touch with their feelings.

Tags: games-as-art, art, emotion

5 Comments | Add a comment

  • [icon]

    mohamed goda November 12th, 2011 at 09:20 PM

    Thank you dear ... Great article ????? ????? http://www.bladnaradio.com/ ------------------------------ ???? ???? ??????? ????????? http://www.line-marketing.net

  • [icon]

    Andrew Littler November 13th, 2011 at 02:40 AM

    You are fucking retarded. emo != emotional Art direction != emotional

    • [icon]

      sarah December 22nd, 2011 at 08:00 AM

      u guys are som assholes

  • [icon]

    Gilian November 13th, 2011 at 01:53 PM

    "Emo" really? The title of this article is completely misleading.

  • [icon]

    precious December 22nd, 2011 at 07:58 AM

    emo is hot. im emo

Show Next 10 Comments

Add your comment: Login:
Logout

NAME

EMAIL Will not be displayed publicly

WEBSITE Optional

Post to Facebook Post to Twitter Post to Google