Because I never said or implied the game was boring.
Nice way to get a good feeling about yourself: criticise someone's review and reach the conclusion it's negative by merely looking at the score and not reading the actual article.
@BushLitter The problem is that, while art is ambiguous, this does not mean that you can invent your own definition so that it is conveniently applicable to video games. In fact, the biggest flaw in the advocates of video games as an art form is that they seem to have no real argument but 'everything is art'. The ambiguity of human language, however, is no good reason to rob a term of all its meaning.
What I was getting to is that video games make use of artistic elem...
I didn't really like it myself. The fantasy elements were cool, but the civil war backdrop was... well, rather typical.
But anyway, it's a very interesting article.
Art is not defined by the amount of people working on it, so that makes no sense. Also, I admit that different cosmetic components of a game can be artistic in themselves, but a video game at its core is significantly different from accepted forms of art.
But, you know, I'm not going to repeat the entire argument here, as that would render the entire article obsolete.
Reviewing a game is always subjective to a large degree. And I disagree. Standards do not change that rapidly, and even if they do, it's easy to put things into perspective with the right mindset.