ggg likes their game more than their players?

"

TheWretch wrote:

Is a videogame a work of Art or a product?

Yes.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I an inclined to interpret Mark's "Yes" as literal as possible, meaning: it's one, or it's the other. So no, according to Mark.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_disjunction

"

"A or B" is true if A is true, or if B is true, or if both A and B are true.

While the English language can be ambiguous with regard to inclusiveness of 'or', in gerneral programmers, mathematicians, and others trained in formal logic will be specific when they want to say 'A or B, but not both' (at least in cases where it matters).

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

"

Mark_GGG wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I an inclined to interpret Mark's "Yes" as literal as possible, meaning: it's one, or it's the other. So no, according to Mark.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_disjunction

"

"A or B" is true if A is true, or if B is true, or if both A and B are true.

While the English language can be ambiguous with regard to inclusiveness of 'or', in gerneral programmers, mathematicians, and others trained in formal logic will be specific when they want to say 'A or B, but not both' (at least in cases where it matters).

Well in any case, my experience in programming - specifically, lower-level programming courses at university - tells me there are plenty of games which are never sold and are utter lifeless uninspired shit. Therefore the "or" is not satisfied and the statement is false.

You don't have to sell something for it to be a product. You merely have to produce it.

Likewise, art can be lifeless or uninspired and still be art.

Both of these categories have exceptionally low barriers to entry.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

I feel the same mindset behind putting a urinal on a pedestal and calling it art is also behind giving every kid a medal regardless of how well they did. There's something sinister about the trend to refuse to differentiate between the wondrous and the shitty (perhaps literally, as far as art goes).

As far as I'm concerned, the definition of art should include the concept of beauty, and the concept of product should include the concept of utility (not necessarily trade).

People make a big deal about participation awards making kids feel entitled, but I don't buy it. Kids know the difference between a fake prize and a real prize.

I actually did tests in primary school where there were participation certificates. We all knew that was the lowest rank you could get, and nothing worth bragging about.

The fact that there's no barrier to entry for art doesn't mean we can't criticize it or value some art more than others. Art is a category, not an award.

The same goes for products. These words at best give us an indication of what the object is intended to be used for. They really don't need to tell us anything beyond that.