Why is film and video games such inferior art forms compared to music and literature?

Don't tell me you like soundcloud rappers who sing nonsense to a simple beat made in FL Studio.

Not all art needs to be some deep meaning of life. All a game needs to be is fun, that's all it needs to be. That's why Quake, Doom, Team Fortress 2 even Halo was so good. They were just fun, it was funny playing as a 7 foot monster in power armor. You look too much into things.

Nothing wrong with fun, I like those games.
But the tripfag was talking about music being unrealistic.

for people with creative minds, music, literature and art give so much room for imagination
there are gaps (e.g. with music there is no visual stimulus) which the creative mind can fill as it wants - this can allow for much more emotional responses
those who lack creativity probably would disagree with your statement (preferring to watch Fast & Furious 319 rather than listen to Autechre)
a few counterexamples:
kubricks 2001 leaves so much to the imagination that I would place it alongside the "superior" art forms you mention
likewise, katy perry's 'fireworks' is so creatively bland and lacking that it cannot really be considered art

thoughts ?

So there is no such thing as bad art?

im not sure where i implied this but interesting question

the answer is only a matter of opinions really wouldnt you say?
there are, of course, varying degrees of creativity expressed in art and so i guess it could be argued that this creates a hierarchy

i think that ultimately art is a deeply personal thing, for there is always one person that can find 'art' where others see nothing
it seems arrogant, therefore, to say that a particular instance of art is objectively 'bad'

despite this i am sure we can all agree here that most art seen in popular culture is, indeed, shite; however arrogant it makes us sound
banksy, for example; is an artist whose works have an abject lack of creative expression, especially when compared to the likes of van gogh, daubigny, etc.

same guy here, be nice to hear your thoughts on this as well

well art is all subjective but some works of art are better at guiding its audience to a strong emotion

films aren't you just have bad taste

With the whole Katy Perry thing, it seemed like you were implying Firework could not be art because of it being bad, or lacking any real depth.
Did I get the wrong idea?

wouldnt you agree though that music is capable of producing a much stronger/more significant emotional response compared with film ?
comparing the pinnacle of film to that of music?
nothing beats the inexplicable chills i get when listening to this
youtube.com/watch?v=W94eOWwkQSE

i see,
yeah, i wouldnt really consider any mass produced music 'art' since it doesnt seem to be based on any creative insight or emotion
its purely a tool to extract money from sheep
i do think that there is bad art out there though

>i wouldnt really consider any mass produced music 'art' since it doesnt seem to be based on any creative insight or emotion
Beatles?

Fuck the Beatles they're overrated as fuck

But you really would not call it bad art?

i'm not a big fan of the beatles, cant deny theyre good musicians tho
wouldnt you agree theres a difference between mass produced and popular ?
the beatles became popular through their own creative vision
the likes of katy perry, rihanna, etc, are products of record labels and nothing more

too much of a compliment to katy perry lmao
thats a differnt guy as well man,
i dont mind the beatles, just dont choose to listen to them

I really like JRPGs and death metal

Theyre just different. There are things you can do with animation/film that cant be done via book, like manipulating camera angles or different shots or set design. Video games are also different, but they arent art for arts sake, they are just art incidentally, and theyre fucking amazing.

That's all zoomers listen to these days and I find it incredibly funny how those NPCs try to emulate the niggerish behaviors displayed by the rappers they listen to.

You can find some good stuff into modern times if the person making it has sense
youtube.com/watch?v=VWPACef2_eY
youtube.com/watch?v=OgvksB59bHs

you can encode more information in literature, so you can imbue your characters with a lot more depth and communicate information in a variety of different ways, which aren't really available to film given the limited time span. video games could be better in this respect, but video game writers are all brainlets so it aint gonna happen. music can communicate emotions on a much more base and visceral level, so you feel it more intimately than anything communicated via literature, movies, or video games.

>vidya and films
>art

Attached: 1566852533637.png (554x554, 47K)

fucking retard you ducking idiot you are

Nigger you can say anything is art you call anything art and it's fuckin stupid.

None of them are art.
Film and videogames are also more engaging and entertaining than both music and literature, especially since they can contain both genres while the same isn't true for vice-versa.

You are trying too hard to sound smart. Nigga.