Just like many things in life, the definition of an "artist" has evolved over time as well, IMO. Even one of the definitions of an artist at
www.webster.com is "One who is adept at something". And you've probably seen books and/or articles with titles like "The Art of Programming". Simply put, a result of combined effort at giants like Pixar would not have been possible without all the people involved, especially considering the time it was accomplished at. Can an artist paint a photorealistic-looking ocean that is also fully animated and realistically reacts to some sort of physical action that is happening on it? Not without proper tools like Maya. That is why there are research teams for products like Maya that study the fluid formulas, then translate them into code, which allows people to play around with how different things would react on ocean waves, for example. Half the fun is to experiment with the physics rather than have a "pre-drawn" plan on how the waves would act in your specific scenario.
Let's take "Lord of the Rings", for example. It involved a team of programmers, 3D artists, pencil artists, sculptors and more to archieve many results you see in the movie. Could a sculptor or a painter make the same incredible looking battles scenes with computer AI that acts on its own? Could the 3D rendering and animation team easily have such detailed models without first having an actual sculpture that was later laser-scanned into Maya? Sure, something like ZBrush might come close but if you have an option for a real sculptor, that would probably be preferrable. Could the crew easily envision what the Shire would look like without the amazing pencil drawings on-the-spot first? Probably not as easily. The point is that all of them depend on each other for big projects like that. I personally like this balance. It's true that in big teams, even with 3D animation and rendering, you'd probably do only a small part. You may just be asked to make a face model, then the next guy will animate it, the next will make textures for it, and so on. But it is always preferred that you know a little extra than your specialty, be it programming/scripting or arts and design.
Look at webdesigners, for example. If you post at webdesign forums that you're looking for a graphics artist for your sites, and that you will share the profits, you will be laughed at because as a webdesigner you are expected to know Photoshop and at least basic 3D. Not to mention all the coding of the pages and latest web technologies. On the other hand, once you're no longer a one-man team, there probably will be dedicated people for various tasks. In order to get a job for just one task, however, you're still required to know much more.
Anyway, the point is that I like that balance and that cooperation is often needed for truely talented projects.
Why do some big game or film projects fail? Time constraints and pressure, bad actors, bad directors, bad management, bad vision of what a particular story should look like in a game of film medium, narrow-minded view in a story or even too much propaganda. Then there are budget issues too. If you can't hire best people for a job, or if you can't afford all the needed resources, you have to cut corners and it shows in a final project.
Just IMO.
