Roger Ebert Doesn't Play Video Games, So Why Should We Care?

Forbes- Film critic Roger Ebert says that games like Naughty Dog’s ‘The Last of Us’ leave nothing to the imagination. Why is Ebert commenting about games in the first place?

His well-distributed opinion about video games (not art!) is no less lazy, and his recent blithe agreement that Naughty Dog’s upcoming Last of Us PS3 exclusive leaves nothing to the imagination is at once preposterous (since the game has not been released) and uninformed (since Ebert doesn’t play video games) regardless of whether or not it turns out to be true.

The story is too old to be commented.
NastyLeftHook02095d ago

Everything is art, From buying toilet paper and throwing it at moving cars yelling taco bell, to mozart paintings, we should not have to have an opinion of another person what art is.

joab7772095d ago

Yeah, dung on a religious figure is supposedly art. I never cared for his movie reviews much less his opinion on video games. I was a gene siskel man myself... RIP.

t0mmyb0y2094d ago

WTF are you talking about?

Walker2095d ago ShowReplies(1)
Kamikaze1352095d ago

You cared enough to type an article about it.

NeoBasch2094d ago

He wasn't stating he didn't care. He was asking why should we. Also, if you read the article, he actually mentions exactly what you wrote at the very end. So... yeah.

Sucitta2094d ago

kami, try reading article before posting thoughts on said article.. common sense.

this also goes for all the thoughtless agrees that decided not to read the article.

snipes1012094d ago

He isnt crying about Ebert's opinion, hes asking why we should care about it. It's definitely worth asking.

Hell, why should we care about anything? If we all had your attitude no one would write anything ever.

LiamIRL822095d ago

We don't care, we just don't understand why someone who has no interest in gaming or as even played a game is even commenting on it. I feel nasty enough tonight to make a nasty comment about Mr. Ebert's appearance but I'm not drunk enough.

snipes1012094d ago (Edited 2094d ago )

Ebert actually did a game review in 1994 and even owned an NES. He has played games and even reviewed one, which makes his stance even more baffling.


word to predobear for leading me to this.

-Alpha2095d ago

He never said that. He just promoted an article from another guy who equated MW2 to the Dark Knight

Nimblest-Assassin2095d ago

And I facepalmed hard when I read that. MW2's plot was a joke, and he called it the best story in gaming.

The original author of that article this critic is promoting (I honestly have no idea who he is, or why people hold his opinion so highly)is doing the worst possible thing... he instantly dismissed the last of us as another third person shooter.

That is the biggest mistake anyone, especially someone who makes a living writting could do. You research what your talking about, otherwise you end up looking like an idiot. The guy did no research, and it is evident not only by him thinking the game is just another TPS, but other mistakes he made.

1) He thought the last guardian was at the show
2) He did the same thing to Watch Dogs, and dismissed it as another open world game
3) He wasn't at the show
4) He is commenting on a youtube video
5) He states the crowd was mixed and confused... If I remember correctly, their was immense applause and uproar.

Thats his mistake. As a journalist... its your job to do research before you write an article. Its obvious he failed that basic task, and thus proceeded to make himself look foolish

Its the same thing with people overreacting to AC3, calling it patriotic, etc despite ubisofts multiple attempts to tell people he is not on either side. The game takes place during,before and after the war. If I remember correctly, the british left america after the war right? Also, their not americans yet, they are colonists, techniqually they are all british

Sorry for getting of topic, but that really bugs me when people never research

Show all comments (69)
The story is too old to be commented.