Smithsonian extends voting on Art of Video Games exhibit through April 17

@JnRx

Ain't it though?

@Acosta02
I couldn't agree more.

@TheShaper

I remembered this exhibition about art so I voted for MM

@Vesuvium

I actually think they did the right thing. It's hard to pick games from an purely artistic point of view (do we go with gameplay, storyline, visual art, music?). Curators have problems even choosing paintings, which is a well stablished and studied field full of experts. Games are even harder to, although they did a good job in the selection (all games there are actually great games, from a player perspective)

In fact, I've seen the same thing (popular vote) being done to exhibits of Monet, Escher and Portinari, so it's not an unusual thing. It's also good publicity and a way to get people involved.

@Dashx747 All very good points. This is certainly an easy, practical way to do it.

Still, I can't help but wish that it was handled differently. Even if it meant identifying subject matter experts and having them vote or help curate.

Then again, accessibility has to be a priority in this milestone exhibit. Popularity contest certainly helps with that.

The PS1 "Adventure" choices are Lunar: Silver Star, Grandia and Final Fantasy VII. Gee, I wonder which one is gonna win.

If they cared about *art* then Final Fantasy IX would be on the list.

@Vesuvium Ok, so I realize people are always going to say "Oh, why do they choose this game and not this?" I'm all for showing off the different eras in gaming, but the way the choices are formatted is ridiculous. Each system has three games in four genres, and you can only choose one per genre.

So what ends up happening is you have the same amount of games up for nominations for the Commodore 64 as the NES. And instead of being able to vote for Chrono Trigger, A Link to the Past, and Earthbound, you can only choose one of the three because they're all Adventure games on the SNES. Yet there are three games to choose from among Combat/Strategy games for the ColecoVision.

And regardless, if they wanted to do a showcase on the "art of video games" they shouldn't be separating games into clear cut genres, but rather showcasing the games that don't fit clearly within a typical category. And even if a game DOES fit into a clear cut category, if it's not one of the four provided, it won't get nominated. I guess that's why I didn't see any sport games except for Tony Hawk's Underground 2(and really, that's the Tony Hawk game they're going to go with instead of one of the originals?).

@ceetheman

But no Yoshi's Island? That game was art.

@TheShaper

So did I.

@onan

I agree, it's not quite clear. I kept voting until it said I had no more games to vote on.

@Hawaii Jeff

Okami's on the PS2 voting list.

I honestly hope it wins.

@343 Guilty Fart
Because barring MGS1 stepping up the bar for 3D visuals, the games never did anything exceptional for the medium in terms of art direction. This exhibit is taking things a bit literal and not considering pieces on the whole, but by things like art direction, which is why it sort of makes sense some games that you'd expect to be there aren't. (Like Ico being MIA)

@Jennacide
I stupidly forgot to point out, MGS1 did make it, none of the others did.
/durp moment

@343 Guilty Fart
You drunk? Both MGS1 and 2 are there. But as MGS games for the PS2 go, I'd much rather see (and happily vote on) MGS3.

@Jennacide
Oh, and also having to pick between Grim Fandango and Fallout sucked a big one too. But had to go with Manny, he's so dreamy for having no skin.

@Jennacide
You're a weird, weird person...

@Bighouse

That and the eras and genres don't make sense. There was a 1994 game in the 1995-2002 era, and the genres were essentially Action, Adventure, Arcade, and Strategy. Just weird.

But I guess I can't complain, cause hey, video games exhibit at the Smithsonian.