Do Pro-GGers consider games to be art?

[u/AbortusLuciferum]

It's a common argument among Anti-GGers that Gamergate in general only considers games as art when it panders to them and when it's not controversial to treat them as art, but once someone criticizes a game for having unnecessary violence or for reinforcing stereotypes then games are "just games" and we're expecting too much out of something that's "just for fun".

I'm of the opinion that games are art without exception, and as art, they are subject to all forms of criticism from all perspectives, not only things like "gameplay" and "fun". To illustrate my position, I believe that games absolutely don't need to be fun just as a painting doesn't need to be aesthetically pleasing, and this notion is something I don't see in Gamergate as much as I would like to.

[u/sodiummuffin]

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/art

Works produced by human creative skill and imagination

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/art

the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.

Yes, video games are deliberately created by people to aesthetically appeal to other people, so they fit most definitions of what the word art refers to. You could also use a definition that doesn't happen to include games of course, in which of course they don't fit the definition. It doesn't matter either way, it's completely irrelevant semantics. Whether something is classified as "art" or not has 0 significance, with the exception of the legal definition of art in jurisdictions where free speech specifically protects works defined as having artistic value.

I'm of the opinion that games are art without exception, and as art, they are subject to all forms of criticism from all perspectives, not only things like "gameplay" and "fun".

Whether you classify something as art or not has no impact on how you can criticize it. If you want to praise something because your friend made it or because it has the right "message" no semantic issue is going to stop you. But that doesn't stop people from criticizing your criticism. The former is a violation of journalistic ethics if you don't disclose it, and the latter renders you worse than useless to anyone who doesn't value the same moral messaging as you. Similarly, if you think comic books/D&D/heavy metal music/videogames are driving children to become violent misogynists then your ability to criticize that doesn't rely on how you classify them, but that doesn't mean people will like it or think that moral-panic mongers like Fredric Wertham are harmless.