Roger Ebert is an irrelvant fogey.

[GSZX1337]

I've always thought of games and movies more of a combination of art forms instead of one artform in itself. *shrugs*

[Erik_Twice]

It's absurd to think that say "Spiderman" is not "art" but Citizen Kane is. They are both art, one just happens to suck.

He has not even played a few games and he thinks he can say whether videogames are art or not? Please, I don't tell him that Baraka is not art because I don't understand it.

But it's nothing new, he is like those who thought that cinema was just something "for fun" but couldn't be serious, those who thought that Picasso's most famous paintings were horrible because they didn't understand how art could not be photorealistic.

I also find funny how his own arguments can be used against himself when he talks about Voyage to the moon.

EDIT: Being frank, given how much he is mentioned I expected a better critic.

[GSZX1337]

It's absurd to think that say "Spiderman" is not "art" but Citizen Kane is. They are both art, one just happens to suck.

FINALLY! Someone who gets it. I'm tired of fuck heads saying that "Quake IV isn't art! Shadow of the Colossus is!" If Quake IV isn't art, does that mean that Duke Nukem isn't art?

On a separate note: I liked Spier-Man. I guess I was wrapped up in the spectacle of my favorite Super-Hero on the big screen.

He has not even played a few games and he thinks he can say whether videogames are art or not? Please, I don't tell him that Baraka is not art because I don't understand it.

In the review of The Wizard, he admits he's a dummy when it comes to video games.

[Hatta]

Please, I don't tell him that Baraka is not art because I don't understand it.

Eat more LSD.

[MrPopo]

Andy Warhol made "art" a meaningless term.

[WiseFool22]

Marcel Duchamp's Fountain

If you don't know what it is, look it up. That is considered art nowadays. I'm not going to go into all the details behind this work, but Duchamp entered this (under the fake name 'R. Mutt") in an art show that claimed to exhibit anything as long as the artist paid the entry fee. The art show rejected it, and Duchamp wrote a response as if he didn't know who the artist was.

He argued "Whether Mr Mutt made the fountain with his own hands or not has no importance. He CHOSE it. He took an article of life, placed it so that its useful significance disappeared under the new title and point of view – created a new thought for that object."

The artist creates art by his choices, conscious or subconscious. This is why I believe video games are art forms.

[Kebo]

I consider games art, because I have no definitive standard for art, so I must judge on a case by case basis.

If I write a letter on a piece of paper, is it art?

If I scribble a line on a piece of paper, is it art?

If I half scribble, half doodle, is that art?

If I doodle, is that art?

If not, then why is a full-blown drawing art?

Is sheet music art? It is a set of instructions to be experienced, a set of rules that must be followed, like a game. Is acting art? It's a means to an end. Game engines bring together visuals, sound, music, with creativity and imagination. The final artistic piece would not exist without the engine. I have no reason to believe it's not art or no objective criteria to rule it out. When you go to an exhibit, you are in fact interacting with art. The angle you view it, the lighting, your perspective, the way you walk around it, it all changes your perception of the pieces, and more so if it's a sculpture. If you look up at a statue your experience will be different than if you look down on it. That, to me, is a level of interaction. I can't disagree more with the notion games are not art, or that there is a definitive standard of art.

[GSZX1337]

I consider games art, because I have no definitive standard for art, so I must judge on a case by case basis.

If I write a letter on a piece of paper, is it art?

If I scribble a line on a piece of paper, is it art?

If I half scribble, half doodle, is that art?

If I doodle, is that art?

All those are outsider art.

[the7k]

The definition of art I was taught throughout my life was "anything created through an artistic medium that attempts to speak to the human condition". In this definition, it does indeed disqualify almost every video game as being art - with exceptions such as the Ico Trilogy, Flower, Braid, Gabriel Knight and more.

However, it seems like what Ebert is saying is not just that no video games are art (which is a lie), but that video games aren't even an artistic medium (which is a damn lie). He's basically saying that video games are completely incapable of speaking to the human condition, and that's the most moronic thing a person of his intelligence can say.

[Haoie]

I respect him for his opinion.

Looking at what most people buy, yech. I'll agree that most have no sense of taste.