Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of video games considered artistic

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. RL0919 (talk) 05:48, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of video games considered artistic[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Sleeps-Darkly (talk) 04:40, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a weird article, mainly having a vagueness problem. I've been looking at this, and concluded that criteria is too vague, mainly warrants inclusion by opinion more than fact. A lot of references are basically opinions that in the end do not warrant inclusion into the list. The whole talk page also has lots of criticism in regards to article. Super Mario Bros. as an artistic game? Really? Probably better to rewrite as "List of video games in museums", that makes more sense. Sleeps-Darkly (talk) 04:33, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Pretty dumb considering that video games are art [1][2] which the article admits itself. Just because reliable sources hold certain games to a high standard and are like "this game is artistic!" does not really mean a damn for an encyclopedia. If all games are art (as most sources hold and the article admits), then there really isn't a point to the list. Why? I Ask (talk) 04:52, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I will point out that Video games as an art form does not conclude they are, only discusses the debate around them. There's still plenty of debate, even with the court ruling, that video games are not "art" when compared to films or novels when it comes to the more philosophical ideas, for example, not the "does it qualify for copyright" question. Masem (t) 21:02, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to List of art games, which is a more obvious and clear criterion that encompasses both games that emphasize art in their presentation and those made for an artistic purpose. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:33, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think that list could be deleted as well, quite honestly. It's still a bit too vague. Why? I Ask (talk) 05:39, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If art game exists as an article, then it goes to reason there are art games that can be categorized. If there are games that don't fit the list, they should be removed, but Wikipedia goes by WP:RS to determine what they are, not opinions of individual editors.

I'd say that drawing a distinguishing line between games that are "considered artistic" and are not "art games" is kinda pointless, though, since, as you said, all games are art. There is probably one game that every gamer thinks is a work of art to them. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 06:38, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Art games are not the same as games that are considered artistic. An art game is one determined by how the developer has created it and more comparable to an arthouse film than a game that is a work of art, while games that are artistic are based on critical response to a game that are used to justify why games are an art form. --Masem (t) 20:55, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 07:56, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to list of art games for now, and we can decide whether that should stay later. Dronebogus (talk) 08:27, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but drastically rework and prune article, ideally if a volunteer is willing to do so. I don't know if it needs a rename but the definition should be akin to List of video games in museums: that this article should specifically be about games that the equivalent of MOMA considered art (List of video games in the Museum of Modern Art). Merely having references of someone somewhere saying the game is artistic is not significant, even if the reference is a normally reliable source - this article should specifically be about arts references. If nobody is up for the cleanup work, consider Draftifying as a second choice. SnowFire (talk) 08:53, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but if it's List of video games in museums, then this page should still be deleted. Those are two completely different things. And it's not like the MOMA "considers" those games in particular as art; those are just the ones that are featured. Why? I Ask (talk) 09:02, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Too vague and subjective of a concept to ever coherently populate with reliable sources. Sergecross73 msg me 13:20, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:IINFO. Artistic is just another WP:BUZZ word, like "fun" or "exciting" or "deep". There will never be a consensus about which games qualify under this heading. Even if you find multiple reliable sources that give it that stamp of "quality", that leaves hundreds of reliable sources that didn't. The qualities of each game should be covered at each game articles, instead of trying to list every game where journalists used a common descriptor. (e.g.: "scary", "amazing", "revolutionary", "emotional") Shooterwalker (talk) 19:19, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The subjective nature of the concept of an "artistic video game" makes it difficult to determine what should be included on an encyclopedia. We strive to proviEe objective information that can be verified and supported by reliable sources, but the determination of what makes a video game "artistic" is a matter of personal opinion and cannot be definitively determined. Some may view games with beautiful graphics and sound design as artistic, while others may place more importance on a game's storytelling, character development, and themes. Mooonswimmer 18:22, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Too subjective. Hard to determine what qualifies. The article "Video games as an art form" explains how the whole concept is debatable. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 03:55, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia follows WP:RS - so if some people believe it is outright impossible for games to be artistic and others do, as long as there is a significant number of people that do in reliable sources of note, it can merit an article. Something doesn't require abject proof to be an article, which is different than notability. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:41, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've said in a past discussions, there are reliable sources that discuss which NASCAR drivers drive Ford or sources that discuss what celebrities wear Supreme. I would still oppose a list to be made out of those topics for various reasons. Similarly, as mentioned above, we wouldn't have a List of scary video games. And while it's fine to have a page on the "debatable concept", similar to any article on the Global warming controversy, denying video games (which have narratives, music, and various other traditional artistic elements) as art is only held by a fairly small minority, including Roger Ebert who also said in the same essay that "hardly any movies are art", so WP:DUEWEIGHT should be given to those minority viewpoints. And as I see it, most reliable sources, including the Smithsonian and the literal federal government, see games as art. Why? I Ask (talk) 10:36, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Well-produced juvenalia. Games considered art by whom? Even if we restrict it to reliable sources, the operational definition in the list itself seems comically stretched to "looks good visually". I challenge anyone to conclusively prove that no one has called any particular game "good looking" before, and therefore be excluded from the list. There is no possible set of coherent inclusion criteria that doesn't eventually amount to "all games". "List of games not considered art" would be both more verifiable and shorter. Axem Titanium (talk) 03:46, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but trim I think the logic we need is that this should be a list of games that are used directly as counterpoints to the question "are video games art?" So simply a source that says "this is an artistic video game" should not be sufficient to include. On the other hand, a source that says "X game proves that video games are an expressive art form" or similar language is more appropriate for inclusion. The reduced list may then be better located at Video games as an art form, which is about that whole debate. --Masem (t) 20:58, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Still don't really need a list, though. Certain examples? Sure. A list? No... Why? I Ask (talk) 21:39, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a maintenance nightmare... Sergecross73 msg me 22:42, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This topic doesn’t seem to warrant a list per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. The subjective nature of what is considered “art” in a video game is also problematic, if reliable independent sources are to used to make that determination. Also doesn’t satisfy GNG. Shawn Teller (talk) 05:26, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.