Ebert Claims He's "Too Well-Read" to "Get" Video Games

Gamervision reports: As the "games as art" debate roars on, film critic Roger Ebert finds his name in the headlines again, this time after a lengthy attack on the gaming industry in a recent article entitled "Video Games can never be art." In it, he claims that games can't be art for a number of different reasons, none of which deviate from his traditional slander on the medium. More recently, however, he has found himself defending his opinion on Twitter.

In the days since his article went live, many have apparently claimed Ebert is simply too old to "get" video games, an argument that he was quick to rebut: "Over and over, the gamers tell me I am too old to appreciate video games," he replied, "Not a one is too young to appreciate art."

Apparently, gamers hit a nerve. Since then, he issued another statement, claiming, "I'm not too old to "get" video games, but I may be too well-read."

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
mushroomwig3103d ago

Well it's just his opinion so he can't really be right or wrong.

Government Cheese3103d ago (Edited 3103d ago )

I don't think he doesn't "get" video games, I just doubt he truely knows anything about them. Probably still thinks all games are like Pacman or something. The fact of the matter is, many games are really like playable movies. I don't get how then movies can be art but games can't be.
I've always viewed Ebert as egotistical though so I don't care much for what he says

hay3103d ago

Nah, he's too old. Games will be art as movies became. It's a matter of when not if.

Baka-akaB3103d ago (Edited 3103d ago )

But then again guys look at what people use constantly as "proof" .

I disagree with his pompeous opinion , but if i was some old guy versed in art and literature , i too would be laughing if the counter examples proposed were constantly 2009-10 games such as GTA .

There are quite a few examples of games with great scripts or great art on pc and consoles ... yet people keep quoting back the same "old" games "that are cool cause they looks like movies" .

zootang3103d ago (Edited 3103d ago )


forget GTA give the guy flower and i bet he changes his mind

kneon3103d ago

Yes, because even the so called "experts" cannot agree on what is art, for example


until there is consensus on what art means then pretty much anything is art. In my opinion Flower is much closer to art than a red stripe on a blue canvas, and it costs considerably less than $1.8 million :)

XeroTrinity3103d ago

Maybe ebert just doesnt know video games have recently outdone movies and are now the biggest in entertainment.
It seems he still sees us as if it were the 80s and like 5 people played video games

MasFlowKiller3103d ago (Edited 3103d ago )

Actually i do think that most games are poorly written. I don't think there is enough coordination between video game writes and the rest of the team.

Video game story's right now are in the same level as porn movie stories, We always now whats coming. An in some cases (MW2, bellow that of the worst porno story)

Most scrips are written before the actual production of the game starts, unless a writer is there from start to end making sure that if a change need to be done it fits into the story nicely them video game story will have a hard time been great

We are talking about 8 to 12 hour long stories here,
but is not just the outcome that write have to compensate for, they also need to making sure that the actions a character does fits into his persona and into the story,I think developers should put more money into writer. Some of my favorite game are very story driven

Metal Gear Solid
Splinter Cell
Final Fantasy
Chrono Cross

Nineball21123103d ago

Roger Ebert is a douche.

And that opinion isn't even based on what he thinks about video games as art.

Do we REALLY need a pompous old fool like him validating whether video games as a medium should be viewed as "art" or not?

Regardless of what he or anyone else thinks, gaming is a force to be reckoned with.

corneliuscrust3103d ago

So are the VAST majority of movies. As soon as an industry is monumentally driven by profit OVER artistic expression, it becomes very apparent what the motivation is. The medium will then cater to the drooling masses rather than the much more niche crowd that actually appreciates a good story. (Which is probably why we are seeing tons of remakes of old IPs rather than new stories with fresh writing)

Avatar looked great, but it was written far more poorly than most games today.

Megaton3103d ago

You know, at first I thought this was a real D-bag comment, but I realized it's very similar to a situation with my dad several years ago. He's a huge sci-fi buff, shelves full of really classic books from the genre (has a whole row dedicated to Dune). He picked up 4 Halo books and absolutely hated them. Said they read like a video game, or what he'd expect a video game to play like. All action, no substance.

yog-sothot3103d ago

@1.5 zootang

Actually, the article reads

" In his article, he even finds time to say that Flower isn't a game, meaning he's even taking time out of his busy schedule to qualify "game" as well. Lucky us. What would we ever do without him."

so the guy knows Flower (or says he knows it), he just doesn't want to admit that the art form that made his career is not "superior" to videogames

Sarcasm3103d ago

"In my opinion Flower is much closer to art than a red stripe on a blue canvas"

Heck, I remember when I was a kid walking in an art museum, they had a BLANK canvas with an artist's name on a plaque. I was confused... :(

Inside_out3103d ago

I have no problem with someone expressing his opinion...It seems that everyone has an opinion on what art games are definitely art...What criteria Mr Ebert is basing his opinion on is the question.....

I would hope Mr Ebert would spend, what time he has left, in a more positive each his own....

edgeofblade3103d ago

Honestly, I see art IN games, but games themselves are not art. In fact, they are overwhelmingly science and business before they get to art. But there is a COMPONENT of art.

So, right or wrong is neither here nor there.

BYE3103d ago (Edited 3103d ago )

Well-read? GTFO!

If you were, you would be more open-minded about new mediums.

ico923102d ago (Edited 3102d ago )

Now im not gonna lie if you actually read what Ebert said in earlier comments on gaming he has got somewhat of a point about why games can't be considered art,although i strongly disagree heres my view on it.
it really depends on what games you're playing, im mean be honest would you really consider something like COD,Gears, Killzone 2,halo, mario, gran turismo would you really consider those games to be works of Art? there a fun and entertaining media but a work of art it hurts me to say ut no.
However there are games like Flower, Braid, Another World, Shadow Of The Colossus? i could easily regard those games as work of art i think if Ebert was to play those games in paticular i think his view would change, it really depends on what kind of game your playing.

XxZxX3102d ago (Edited 3102d ago )

nice spin, Ebert, we know your reaction are too slow and doesn't fit to play video games anymore. You basically can't handle it. It just too overwhelming for you. So let see what's wrong with you, instead of admitting your flaw. You covered it up by saying you are way better than gaming. LOL... who are you fooling, 3 years old?? HAHHAHAHAH good try, old man. If you are too well read, you will come out with better excuses.

OpenGL3102d ago

Yes; this is the same idiot that said the American remake of Death at a Funeral was better than the British original.

+ Show (17) more repliesLast reply 3102d ago
George Sears3103d ago

I'm just surprised he knows how to use Twitter.

3103d ago
MiamiACR3103d ago

Ebert, you are a very ugly man.

Hellsvacancy3103d ago

I bet your hardly an oil paintin yourself

MiamiACR3103d ago

Anyone could be considered an Oil painting if sided up with this man.

Pennywise3103d ago

The guy is lucky to be alive. He had most of his jaw removed. What a jerk comment.

Downtown boogey3103d ago (Edited 3103d ago )

He had his chin removed due to to cancer, genius!

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3103d ago
AliTheBrit193103d ago

Ebert is making himself seem more and more like a tool...

SKUD3102d ago (Edited 3102d ago )

I really cant believe hes still alive.