Now I don't want to start a war here, but this is the way it's always been.Originally posted by UndeadKing
It makes games seem like less a piece of art and more like a mass market product.
Games are not art for the simple reason that they are mass produced for profit. I understand I might be the only one with this view, and I'm not "forcing" you to see otherwise. I also believe that there are elements of art incorporated into games, but that doesn't make the final product "art." It's just like making toothpaste or pretzels.
Now, that said, I take it you don't get upset when a film maker cuts certain pieces of footage to achieve a PG-13 rating. Why? I don't get upset because I know it's a business move in a business environment to achieve the highest profits possible. I understand that, and sympathize with the company/film maker. It is no different in the world of games. But why should it be? To satisfy your ideas of art and how it behaves and should be treated?
Game making is a business, not an artform. It should be viewed as such. If it were looked at this way by more people, you wouldn't be so wounded when your favorite developer decided to cut something for rating's sake.
Bookmarks