Maybe because most people experience the art? and don't feel the need to inflate their ego by thinking their interpretation or experience is the best way to interpret something?

this feels like a bunch of nerds sitting around complaining that gamers miss stuff, while not understanding that most gamers don't miss it. they just experience it and don't feel the need to externalize it.

[–] Freeman@lemmings.world 38 points 5 months ago (8 children)

Imo its the other way around. If you experience art, you think about it and try to get a meaning out of it (even if there is none, as in some modern art pieces). But if you just play a game you are not getting the art-aspect of it, you just enjoy it for the gameplay or maybe even the story but not for the deeper meaning.

[–] HiT3k@midwest.social 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Absolutely. If the value of art were just "experiencing" it without processing it, there's an argument to be made that soulless blockbuster movies are as significant a piece of art as something with actual substance because so many people like the "experience."

People who do more than just "consume" the art in front of them are not just self righteous nerds (though many are, sure)... it's also a prerequisite to, you know, actually creating something of artistic value.

[–] intensely_human@lemm.ee -1 points 5 months ago

No, it’s not. The prerequisite to creating valuable art is ability, not some stance toward intellectualizing visceral media.

load more comments (6 replies)