this post was submitted on 27 May 2025
169 points (92.9% liked)
Games
38867 readers
1196 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here and here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
None. There's no such thing as an objective master piece. Games are art which is, by definition, subjective.
Edited to add, well this was way more controversial than I thought it would be.
"Masterpiece" comes from the art world, and there are absolutely works everyone seems to agree qualify, such as:
It's usually the best work by an artist, or at least the one that got them their recognition, and it stands out among other works in the field.
If it's the one that got them their recognition, it's little more than arbitrary; luck, place and time; things that don't have to do with how good the work is. Some "masterpieces" weren't considered such until they were exposed to people over and over again, like The Mona Lisa at the Louvre or It's a Wonderful Life on TBS. I'd have a hard time calling a number of games masterpieces that I didn't care for, because this isn't objective.
A masterpiece could just refer to a piece of art from a master. It could refer to the quality of an engineering project, or the skill involved in the work's creation. Are these not objective qualities?
I don't really think the Mona Lisa is a great image, personally (it's a boring portrait), but I can still recognize that it was masterfully done.
This gets trickier with games, because an experienced game designer can, for instance, look at the UI design and graphics programming of a Ubisoft open world slopfest, and say those parts were masterfully done (even if the overall game isn't so fun). And, even the best of video games have bits of them that weren't as good.
Right... So what game gets the most of those bits the most right?
That's how you start to separate out the best. Not that complex.
Games are not Art, they are Games.
Videogames can also be art, but they are also games and 'games' (note: not 'videogames') are not art.
Booooooo don’t act like an edgy atheist teen on Reddit booooooooooo
Edit: got it guys the light hearted element didn’t translate 👍
I think the word you are looking for is pedant.
Better vocabulary will help get your point across better. Without also sounding like an edgy atheist teen.
I figured that I was obviously meaning something like that, I also thought this would come off as more lighthearted than it did I guess. Mea culpa, fair enough.
It's low-grade trolling, chill bro. They're not serious.
I wasn’t being serious either as I thought the “booooooo” lines communicated but apparently I missed the mark lol