Computer Games As Literature

So my brother gave me Civ IV for Christmas. It's a fun game, although I can't really write a thorough review yet. It did remind me of something I've advocated before, though, which is the concept of computer games as an art form.

The most obvious case is Myst, and that leads to the central question. Are computer games art only when they incorporate traditional artistic elements, like beautiful scenery? I think the answer is no. To adress the issue rigorously would be difficult, so I'll just assert that games like Super Mario 3 are an important part of the American aesthetic experience. Games freely borrow from (and augment) traditional art forms, such as music and cinema, but the games constitute art regardless of these elements.

Computer games are different from paintings and movies, obviously. One interesting aspect is that, while everyone might view a painting differently, many computer games are necessarily unique experiences. No two games of Civ IV are alike. This leads to a second point, which is that computer games are much more interactive than other forms of art (an exception might be Andy Kaufman-esque projects where the audience is part of the performance). The quality of the art hinges not only on the skill of the artist, but the skill and intelligence of the player/viewer.

This leads finally to my last point, which I just realized as I read back over my post. The properties that I identified as unique to computer games are in fact present in all art. No two people see the same thing when they look at "Guernica." Likewise, the quality of art comes in part from the intelligence and tastes of the audience. If I think of any ways in which computer games are actually unique, I'll post them. In the meantime, I'll be engaged in the important artistic exercise of conquering the world as Louis XIV.