leo-j on 18 April 2010
| amp316 said: According to the criteria that makes up the definition of art, Ebert is right. He presented his case and proved his points effectively. There are rules to a game and this is what makes it a game. I liked his comparison of saying that what Michael Jordan did wasn't art. He used this example to show that regardless of how extraordinary "gaming" of any form might be, it is a game and tied to rules. He is correct and I didn't find anything that he said at all to be insulting to my favorite hobby. |
I have to say from that viewpoint I agree.. but art is subjective, anything can be considered art in my opinion, and I believe those games that offer an artistic view to there own world's are a perfect example of art in gaming.
mM
