Why even qualify it as your opinion if you're trying to present it as an absolute statement? The two ideas are mutually exclusive.

Grawwawwwwawaaw

You're right.

Im leaving.

The fact that you can't see it explains the problems you have with the genre.

You seem to not understand the general basis of videogames as an art in your attempts to try and compare it to other forms of art.

It'd be equilvent to trying to judge a book based on it's pictures... since that's how you judge a painting.

I bet some people here gather at sundays and make a big fire were they burn every last backgammon board they can find.

Also, chairs suck. They just can't tell a good story.

It seems to me that bashing Nintendo has really worked for IGN. That Nintendo is Lazy article a couple weeks ago pbbly gave the web site quite a few clicks!! This article is just a spin off of the first one(talk about being mediocre)... If thats working for them right now. thats fine...

I personally wont visit the Site anymore... not because im ofended as a Nintendo fan. But because I dont like the business strategy they are taking just to get attention... It seems low and desparate...

"I personally wont visit the Site anymore... not because im ofended as a Nintendo fan. But because I dont like the business strategy they are taking just to get attention... It seems low and desparate..."

Same for me.

BTW just to illustrate... IIRC so called Pure Film Movement existed in Japan some time in 1910s - early 1920s that proclaimed cinema a modern art form, that far outpaced potential of traditional japanese theatrical play (whatever it's called). Actually if we look at films made at the time even outside of Japan, it's pretty clear, that it was common trend for the whole cinematography, though maybe not shaped in form of 'movement' everywhere. How long it took? About twenty years from first commercial use of cinematography before participants of new entertainment industry and artists acknowledged that new art form has bigger potential than just being plays recorded on a film stock.

The funny thing is... in gaming the more movie-like game you've made, the more artistic you're. Almost 40 years has passed and community still has no clue what this 'new art form' is about?

Artforms are like sports only those into them can really see the full appeal, comparing films and gaming as artforms would be like comparing Football (the proper one where you use your feet) and Basketball.

Actually, no, that's not the sole criteria in judging a painting. I'm an artist, mind you, with a classical background, and I work in the videogame industry.

I understand videogames as an art, I just don't think a videogame is solely about the gameplay. While one of the things that sets games apart from other media is player input, that isn't it's sole defining characteristic.

But further discussion is a moot point, we both have different opinions. Mario isn't a masterpiece, it's a good game with limited goals, and people project stuff to it that just isn't there.

And the whole "comparing games to movies thing is wrong" is just a fashionable thing to say, all art forms and media have different characteristics, but they have always adapted elements and cross-polinated with each other, it's called synergy. Saying two different media are different and cannot relate is an extremely oversimplistic way of putting things. Besides the fact you are putting way too much literal meaning into this, I already said a cinematic game and cinema are two different things, in no part of my posts did I say games needed to be like cinema. That just gets you the interactive movie that is MGS4.

"and I work in the videogame industry"

Um, which company?

"I just don't think a videogame is solely about the gameplay"

I don't think we're insisting you do that. We're just insisting you not put down games for not trying to be art.

"it's a good game with limited goals"

Name a game with unlimited goals?

"And the whole "comparing games to movies thing is wrong" is just a fashionable thing to say"

It's not the comparing thing. It's trying to make one more like the other. The experience of a game and a movie is as different as movies and books or games and a song.

Me specifically, trying to be movies is like a flashy cut scene. Not that it's bad by itself, but it shouldn't be the majority of all the cool things you can do in the game. Loads of recent games are offenders of this (and less recent than this current gen even). The point of a game is you can be in the movie, not just watch it.

I should give an example. Cut scenes in Call of Duty want to be like Saving Private Ryan (even Modern Warfare) at least in terms of dramatic effect more than the actual situations. But in the actual gameplay it's more like Commando.