I vote the same. Spec Ops: The Line is a fantastic example. So is the Walking Dead.
I'd also try to argue Dead Space, as it's almost like performance art in how well its scenarios play out and are handled (not all art has to have an overt message. sometimes it's just nice to look at/experience).
I just liked Spec Ops because it made you hurt along side Walker, since you started to realize what you were doing was so terrible but at the same time the only way to progress was to keep doing it. Interesting POV. And ME is my favourite trilogy so I definitely support that being on the list.
I'm fixing to trade in a game for Spec Ops: The Line! Watched a little bit of gameplay and I'm baited. Can't wait to play it!
I know I talk a lot about Red Dead Redemption but it is seriously my favorite game. You're playing an ex outlaw who's trying to fix his life but as usual the government likes to screw things up and he gets caught in the middle of it. It's an awesome experience and I've played it so much.
I wouldn't argue that it is the best medium as it has a hard time conveying the inner thoughts of a person very well and cannot pull certain tricks that movie/tv shows and books can pull off. Music can say something much faster and leave a stronger impact.
As for if games are a form of art, I would say yes, but not in the way of "oh look how realistic I can make this!" or pointing to some character animation as proof (while games like Ookami and Skyrim has impressive feets themselves, what they do visually doesn't show what games can do.) The games that best express the experience in a story includes Journey (obvious reasons,) any Animal Crossing game (just the fact that you are part of a world that you can understand but is so different that the first one can really make an impression,) Halo Reach (a storyline that is almost meant to solely torture Halo fans,) as well as plenty of other games.
And I would argue that games rub off to people in different ways the same way a painting or a movie does. Some say that there is nothing much to it, while others took it pretty deeply. Then there is always the crap, but this has happened for every form of media.
With gaming though, you can allow a viewer to experience the inner workings of a character in a way that non-interactive media cannot. Take Spec Ops again, as the narrative forces the character to make more morally reprehensible decisions it has a stronger impact because it's ultimately the player that has to wrestle with their own moral judgements.
I'm curious as to know what tricks that can be displayed graphically or aurally in a movie/tv show that can't be done in games? Also if games incorporate music with higher context than music by themselves, couldn't it be said that games use music more effectively?
Ah yes, you reminded me of something else: experiencing issues that are hard to show anywhere else. Games that do this include Fallout: New Vegas (know from experience, and Fallout 3 probably gets the job done as well) as well as ZombiU (going off of reviews.) While it isn't to say that Hollywood has never gotten close to what these games did (Book of Eli and Dawn of the Living Dead,) the games could convey of sitting in that situation a bit better. Fallout New Vegas (as well as a lot of games) also shows what it is like to be the guy at the bottom to the guy who can take anything out and is all powerful (not every game allows this as it tends to be bad design.)
Now for characters like in Spec Ops, you are limited before you end up having something that movies do instead with a video game right afterwards. For me, personally, that is not what makes a game a form of art. When you have a character develop without the player's control, then it can't really be proof of gaming artwork but more of movie or even script artwork. Instead, when players reflect themselves into a character and the game allows such things to actually reward or punish the player for such things (read: Bethesda and BioWare games,) then you get what you described of Spec Ops in which the player is put in a situation with morale greys. (There is also a psychological situation in which something looks easy for a bystander but is actually difficult when in the middle of it.)
But reflecting into a character doesn't make mean that it can do every character. Let's take "The Hobbit" for example. As a video game that let's you reflect through the character (this was not done, so let's pretend,) we would imagine that most people playing it would be excited for some kind of grand adventure. Almost no one would seriously say that they rather go through the game and smoke their pipe, read their paper, and not go on some grand and dangerous adventure far away from home. Now take the movies and the books where our protagonist, Bilbo, can not be controlled by the bystander and actually doesn't want to go on an adventure. Because the bystander knows that they cannot control Bilbo's actions, they are more ready to accept the character as is and not enforce certain views of the character. So now our bystander is watching the adventures of a character they would never watch in a video game that utilizes the fact that it is a game.
As for the tricks that movies have, well, I already gave one (any character can be done and presented to the audience versus only one character that the individual audience makes.) But movies also have strong control of the camera while video games are limited to cut scenes or else specific places.
Then for music, well, it isn't exactly the same. I don't know of any game music that gets me as pumped up as "Fuel" by Metallica unless it was because the song was tied to a certain part of the game. Take GRID and when it plays music in races (only when the race is important.) I could play the song for people who have never played the game, and it wouldn't really match the feeling that "Fuel" or even another song could give. I could let the person play one of the important races and, even if the race was close, it probably wouldn't give any effect. But if they sat down and played the entire game, having listening to no music to any race then suddenly hearing a song, it could kick in. But after playing the game for almost an hour compared to just sitting down and listend to a 3 minute song. Video game music is empowered because we know what is behind it, not because video games make good use of music.
You can't really make the argument ' it can't really be proof of gaming artwork but more of movie or even script artwork.' if something in a game is done well through writing or visually. If you were going to make the argument that an art medium can't lend anything from any other to make something greater than itself you wouldn't be able to use movies at all since they're just still images mixed with audio, music and held together by writing (all their own forms of art). By that logic, a movie isn't even art at all since all its elements are in-and-of-themselves art forms.
And maybe nobody wants to play "Bilbo: Normal Everyday Stuff". But surely some people play games like The Sims for the ability to do the mundane through the avatar of another character with a unique environment and skill set. You can't discount games as art because people enjoy different areas of engagement. And not all games allow the player to force certain views of the character. Take for example Halo: CE, the Master Chief is still the same alien-killing bad-ass space marine no matter how the character plays the game, provided they play it at all.
As for music, games make use of music to allow the player to feel more immersed and engaged by what they play, so in that definition their use of music is perfect for what they want. It's not about the content of the music so much as how and when it is used and the context associated with it. If the player is invested in an RPG like Mass Effect, use of music at key points in the narrative and during gameplay connect the player to the game on a whole other emotional level than either the game could do without music or that music could do alone (lacking the emotional context).
Would you mind choosing one of these to debate back? It's kind of weird trying to argue three different points at once thanks.