Is it reasonable to consider computer games as art?

1)How does Adams define art? Do you agree with his definition?

         According to the article, Adam defines art in different ways as follows:Firstly, he made classifications.---- Sort by it’s content: representational, expressional…--- Sort by art forms: paintings, sculptures… Literary art V.S. Fine art

He also believes that as a piece of art,it is important to deliver messages.I think Duchamp's fountain is a typical examples to this definition.

Furthermore, he makes an advanced definition on good art; he thinks that good art must last for eras, even though there are different perspectives to define art referring different periods.

It is crucial for a piece of good art (we usually call "masterpiece) passing through the challenges of times, or even spaces.

Overall, Adam has come across many ways of art-defending, those he covered is fairy agreed by the generals.

2. According to Adams, what is needed for videogames to be considered as art?

Adam thinks that to be an art, here are some features:

- Content to give people a new idea or messages

- Aesthetic qualities to give people sense of pleasure

- To make people feel things- to outweigh its consideration of utility and salability

- To do something that other art forms will do

- To have an artist who has received adequate public recognition

- to do something to persuade people to believe it is an art form Computer games is art as it creates new depiction of images, new meaning to us.

A work of art by Cory Arcangel

The original videogame: Super Mario


Features of the game:
-The clouds and the eyes-catching blue sky are came from the Mario Brothers
-Clouds slowly move from right to the left / left to right
-All the main characters in the Super Mario have been removed,
although they are the significant subject leading players to play the game
-The background music,which is supposed
to make player more filing into the game, is removed too
- The audience/players can only imagine they are playing the Super Mario videogame when looking at the slow motion of the clouds which illustrating you are moving in that digital world

Art or not?Why?
I think it can be called as an art.
Appearence:
There are some formal elements of being a art work. The forms, colors,composition is attractive, the image is still appealling after adjusted, like the nice contrast of the white and blue, although most of the character used to appear in the Super Mario is missing
Sustains:
It makes me think when I can JUST look at the moving clouds in such a slow motion. It is which could also allow me to have enough space and time to remind my memories and emotion when I am playing the Super Mario. This is the new idea and perspective for me to look at a videogame.

Cory Arcangel: Super-Mario Clouds, 2002
http://www.zunta.org/blog/archives/cloudsscroll.gif

Some other viewpoint on vediogames aesthetics or not :As Ernst Gom- rich asks in Art and Illusion:

'The rope hanging from the pulley- where does it lead?

How is the drawbridge tied up? What is the angle of the bannister near the lower edge?'

The artist used his illusionistic craft to create agnawing sense of uneasw in the viewer. In videogames so far, on the other hand, verything is fanastically, obsessively "ture" in three dimensions. There is no room for interesting fuzziness or spatial ambiguity.