Why Ebert Is Right: Games Do Not Have to Be Art

From the PlanetXbox360.com feature editorial:

"Many gamers have heard of, and whole-heartedly disagreed with, film critic Roger Ebert's latest argument against the "video games are art" statement (find the entire article from his blog at the end of this paragraph). Many a word has been penned in response, both from gamers who vehemently argue that games are the greatest art form ever, and from those intellectuals that claim that gaming is only for brain-dead morons. Having finally gotten around to actually reading Mr. Ebert's long-coming substantiation of his argument, I admit that at first my response was something akin to rage - upon first reading I felt insulted, berated, and condescended upon. How could he have qualifications to judge if games are art or not, not having actually played any? However, I then took a step back. I caught my breath, counted to ten, and all that stuff that's supposed to calm someone down (which for me naturally involves playing video games, of course). I then had the brilliant idea to actually read Mr. Ebert's piece again, to see how I can pick apart his arguments. Then something strange happened…upon this second reading, I actually found myself agreeing with him. Not entirely, of course. There are still plenty of points he asserts that I'd fervently disagree with until my last breath."

[UltimaEnder]

Video games aren't art, just fun - games are fun and that's all that matters - Ebert knows only about movies, plus he can't talk anymore right?

[iFLOWLIKEWATER]

Games are art to me. As a matter of fact, I think that anything that is created from human emotions are art. I'm not going into detail about it and unlike these people trying to convince Mr. Ebert that he is wrong, I'll be enjoying art in motion...

[bnaked]

Art: the products of human creativity.

Ebert is wrong..

[SaiyanFury]

To be honest, the author makes a few interesting points, and a few to disagree with. Lord knows games are far more creative than a lot of the crap that's been coming out in the "art" of cinema for the last several years. Only a few movies that have come out in the last few years I would consider "art". Things like Avatar are nothing more than Hollywood's hate of humanity and their love affair with tribes that are in tune with their planet. I've not seen the movie, just read about it. But from what I read, I gleamed what I did. Movies like Transformers are not art, they're a medium to entertain people largely who don't appreciate a deep story. My wife and I watched the original Transformers movie and we were bored by the lack of real substance and plot. Maybe it's a personal note here, but I prefer a great plot like in Gran Torino and Hayao Miyazaki's recent Ponyo. Miyazaki is a big greenie, but at least his movies have a lot of great substance. I'm not calling Ebert an idiot, and I won't argue in his language that games aren't art. I will argue that modern games have substantial investment in artistic accomplishment, and games like Uncharted 2 have amazing art direction. Just look at the Himalayan snow cliffs you must find your way through. Truly jaw dropping.

[Riv4L]

Art is heavily subjective to opinions and bias; bringing perspectives such as these into gaming is only going to give more fuel to the fires.

[Aery]

I respect all opinions and taste, but games are ARTS. It's a fact.

[Inside_out]

Of course games are " art "....Mr Ebert wants to know why we care?...I want to know why " HE " cares...I doubt he plays any games...He thinks in the atari 2600 kind of way...

Remedy should send him a copy of Alan Wake....breathtaking scenery and atmosphere...games have changed/come a long way since the " good ole days "...STILL...you would think this guy would spend the time he has left in a more positive way....sad really....

[Qui-Gon Jim]

I think that's the mistake in Ebert's argument. He thinks of video games as being games in the same sense as other games. He thinks that video games are about "winning" by being the first person to achieve some goal. His criticisms of "flower" reveal that misconception. He doesn't know that video games are becoming a story-telling medium as much as movies. Not all video games are art, in fact very few are, but neither are most movies.

I agree that video games have a lot of growing up to do, but they are an art form with a lot of potential. ESPECIALLY BECAUSE OF their interactivity. For example, a movie can pose a moral dilemma to the protagonist and challenge the viewer to question what is the right choice (one of art's most important roles, imho), but only a video game can make that decision YOURS. A certain chapter from Heavy Rain did that, and I think it is where video games can really differentiate themselves from other media as a unique art form.

[nycredude]

Technically speaking, there is more "art" that goes into making a game than there is a Hollywood movie!

This guys should just stick to what he thinks he knows and stfu about what he obviously don't know!

[RememberThe357]

Lets take a look at Dictionary.com's definition(s) of "Art":
1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.

5. any field using the skills or techniques of art

12. skilled workmanship, execution, or agency, as distinguished from nature.
http://dictionary.reference...

Now some from Webster:
1 : skill acquired by experience, study, or observation

3 : an occupation requiring knowledge or skill

4 a : the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects; also : works so produced b (1) : fine arts (2) : one of the fine arts (3) : a graphic art
http://www.merriam-webster....

It is clear the Mr. Ebert is wrong as proven by the very definitions of the word itself. Apparently Mr. Ebert wasn't well read enough to actually know what the word meant when he said it.

[LaurenKB123]

Roger is an idiot, well written piece though....

[PepperJack]

yeah, it's bad enough that they're always trying too hard to make films appear arty without doing it with games too

[Myst]

With the passage itself I kind of agree, but what I don't agree with is that games could never be art. To me games are like a video art project in a way at various instances. Take for example this scene: Aerith's Death in Final Fantasy VII [I know I know a lot of people are probably tired of hearing about it, but honestly this was a good scene].

Now as it stands this has been and always will be my favorite scene in any video game. The emotions it enlisted as it happened was quite amazing. The musical score that plays is quite beautiful, and the scene direction [ especially at the end is really nice. ] Now whether Mr. Ebert would agree with this or not I honestly don't really care. To me that was art.

[edit]
Forgot to say that no games do not have to be classified as 'art', but they pretty much are depending on who you ask.

[Qui-Gon Jim]

I had forgotten just how well that scene was done.

[Anon7349]

It's either art or tools, or even possibly both.

Video games are rarely have practical uses, so they're pretty much all art or practical art(Brain Age).

[Coke-a-Cola]

Roger E . can call games whatever he wishes but remember he is the guy
that flipped for Avatar . We all have an opinion .

So while the rest of the community discusses this topic I will spend my time
being charmed and blown away by the beauty and creative genius that is Video Gaming.

[T9X69]

Honestly why does this crap keep getting approved? Who cares, I'm a regular everyday gamer I play games to have fun and enjoy myself, not sit back and be like thats a beautiful piece of art right there. I'm not saying games can't be art but the average gamer doesn't care.

[Qui-Gon Jim]

But the average movie-goer or music listener doesn't really care if those are art forms, either. The artistry of those media are transparent to many people, but there are others who spend their careers examining it so that it can become an even better form of entertainment.

I may be looking forward to "Iron Man 2", but that doesn't mean I can't also appreciate the artistry of "Pan's Labyrinth."

[RedSky]

The whole question is largely meaningless because the definition of art is so vague.

The word is described by notions such as creativity, skill and imagination, all things that could be attributed even to menial tasks if you wanted to that no one would proclaim to be art. The point at which is becomes 'art' is when enough of this creativity, skill and imagination is employed and is entirely arbitrary between people.

So it shouldn't be any surprise that some people don't think games are art, and there's nothing wrong with them having a different litmus test than you.

[sugatmahanti]

Games should be considered art for a simple reason so that it can handle mature issues without getting flayed by the likes of ignorant media. It has more potential than movies in handling complex issues because of its interactivity.

[Qui-Gon Jim]

I said it in another post here, as well. Video games can give extra weight to the moral dilemmas of their protagonists by have the player be an active participant rather than an observer. There's a lot to explore there, including finding the best ways to explore it.

[AKS]

It's a personal pet peeve of mine to see yet another "X was right!" article by someone who is clearly far less intelligent than the original source. And did we really need to revisit this topic again? It's the same source as before, which has already been discussed on multiple occasions.

Regardless, no, I don't need Ebert's approval or blessing of my leisure activities, which includes video games and cinema. It's the statement that a given medium cannot be art that offends me. When you make such an asinine statement as that, it's quite easy to refute his points. In addition, few in their gamer rage seem to be observing something quite obvious: He doesn't actually have much in the way of expertise in this area. I don't go to a proctologist for advice about legal matters just as I don't bother to listen to Ebert about his uninformed opinions about games. I'd be interested in a film critic's insights on the cinematic components of certain games, as those could be interesting insights, but only if the individual providing the information wasn't as pompous and obstinate as Ebert has chosen to be in this debate. And I am certain that Ebert will never back down from his points once he makes up his mind; he's extremely stubborn, as seen in his repeated attacks on movies like "Blue Velvet" (he hated it based on peculiar reasoning and seemed to miss the point entirely) and bizarre infatuation with "Monster" (he loved it, much of which seemed to be due to his fascination and infatuation with the very attractive lead actress made up to look ugly in the movie; the movie itself was nothing special).

[INehalemEXI]

You may be in a game right.... playing right... but your siting in your chair in reality moving a digital representation of yourself or a character in a story.

You are viewing and interacting with art, it's an evolution of Art. A world is drawn to life for you to play in, the Ultimate form of man made Art the world has seen up to this era.

Video game. Is made of Art, Even the code used to bring the art to life could be so efficient , algorithms , systems it could also be art. Like the matrix.

http://www.dan-dare.org/Fre...

Even the code could be art. If you had eyes to see it in that light.

If we where actually in the matrix and reality was not ...reality. It would be art...the code...the visuals, the signals sent to us to represent taste, etc. It would all be art.

Even the coding of instances,or the way a servers populated is art. It's all art. If you ever tried to make a game , you know the way you program it to unfold for the player, is an art in itself.

Why are Video Games the Ultimate form of art the world has yet seen? Take Little Big Planet for instance. This game is the definition of art in both process and product, and LBP is not the first or only game to do such , but it was brilliant in it's simplicity.

[bjornbear]

but they can be, some of them anyway...

[yog-sothot]

"Games Do Not Have to Be Art" = OK
"Games Cannot Be Art" = bullshit

[xabmol]

–noun
1.
the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.
2.
the class of objects subject to aesthetic criteria; works of art collectively, as paintings, sculptures, or drawings: a museum of art; an art collection.
3.
a field, genre, or category of art: Dance is an art.
4.
the fine arts collectively, often excluding architecture: art and architecture.
5.
any field using the skills or techniques of art: advertising art; industrial art.
6.
(in printed matter) illustrative or decorative material: Is there any art with the copy for this story?
7.
the principles or methods governing any craft or branch of learning: the art of baking; the art of selling.
8.
the craft or trade using these principles or methods.
9.
skill in conducting any human activity: a master at the art of conversation.
10.
a branch of learning or university study, esp. one of the fine arts or the humanities, as music, philosophy, or literature.
11.
arts,
a.
(used with a singular verb) the humanities: a college of arts and sciences.
b.
(used with a plural verb) liberal arts.
12.
skilled workmanship, execution, or agency, as distinguished from nature.
13.
trickery; cunning: glib and devious art.
14.
studied action; artificiality in behavior.
15.
an artifice or artful device: the innumerable arts and wiles of politics.
16.
Archaic. science, learning, or scholarship.

http://dictionary.reference...

[xg-ei8ht]

Yep games are art, they still go through the same process an artiste does.

Draw, mistake rubout, draw oops mistake.

Everything drawing/painting in life has mistakes made. It's still art corrected or not.

I've seen blobs of paint worth thousands, half a cow, a dirty room with crap in it displayed as art.

ART=LIFE>?

[iFLOWLIKEWATER]

I don't know about mistakes being part of art. I mean its up to an artist if they want to consider a mistake a part of the art they created. Myself personally, I wouldn't call it a mistake unless I've erased something and pointed it out to someone while explaining the process. But even thats not likely, because if one aspect of my creation is a mistake then the whole thing probably is.

Its funny because in high school, my class had to go a whole semester of drawing something without lifting our pencils off the paper. This meant, no erasing, which then turned in to a practice of adding to something that was considered a mistake to make it look better, instead of taking anything away or simply erasing it.

[5tgyw3ty34]

Of course they are art. Who cares what this bloke has to say.

[zag]

Don't know why people are fussd about this.

Flims aren't an art anyway.

[CARRIERHASARRIVED]

I dunno about you guys, but when I see objects in a videogame, I treat it like an actual sculpture. Sculptures are just as much art as a drawing/paintings are (the most common form of art I find). Game assets are those things and more.

Each game to me is more or less an art gallery full of sculptures and paintings. They also provide a great deal of fun which is the most important feature.

Speaking of games and art, has anyone checked out Machinarium? It's a great example of interactive art.

[AliTheBrit19]

Again with this?

Of course not all games are going to be art

The same way not every picture painted is going to be considered bloody Art! but plenty of games, I think are easily classed as Art.