I have never had any respect for Ebert as a critic of movies. "2 thumbs up!" lol?Originally Posted by Tasos
But, I believe that to gain the position and prestige he has that he must have at one point and time in his life, been a good movie critic. I think he's probably talented at being a critic in seeing beauty or art within something such as film, but just sell-out in the end that helps to promote movies rather than critique them.
Anyways, Ebert has argued that video games lack the potential to become a higher form of art such as painting, literature, or film.
At first I thought, "yeah say that to all the current digital artists whom were formally trained in classical arts." Hell, lots of concept art is painted on a canvas.
Then I thought, just because video games employ artists, doesn't necessarily make the video games themselves art. I started to see his point but I wasn't ready to accept it because video games are relatively new even compared to something like film. After all, a dictator could have an artist paint propaganda posters for him simply because of his skill, yet the outcome is just crappy propaganda kitsch that is lacking in any real artistic value.
I'm studying for a career in the gaming industry and I take some courses in design, life drawing, art history. Art is very hard to define, but one thing i've come to define it as, is art is never a means to an ends. It's an ends within itself. People don't have their portrait painted or buy any other kind of paint to accomplish a task, they do it to have it.
Now my point. Reading Tasos's quote of the beta tester's post reaffirmed what I have been brooding over in my own head why I think video games might could be a higher form of art comparable to any of the other fine arts. The thing that has always tripped me up on my own logic is that video games are interactive, and you're trying to have fun.
I don't know if Darkfall is as great as that guy says it is, but if it is that great to him, then Aventurine has created a game that through the game's aesthetic and visual qualities of creating a breathtaking world to look at; the game's programming to allow the player to interact with the world in a very specific way, the game's lore content; the game features themselves; and everything else that goes into creating the gaming experience; when it all works in a proper harmony, it does communicate a message. It's not simply "just fun to play" or some form of escapism, it's a working form of expression that gives people a new way of experiencing a fictional world that other forms of art can't do.
Ebert is not dumb because he doesn't agree. He's dumb because he never gave video games the proper respect to begin with and jumped the gun on behalf of his ego.