• drunkenfish - April 20, 2010 11:16 p.m.

    Jim, you have the charisma of a damp rag, the appearance of a low ranking bank clerk, and you're from Belgium which is essentially a non-country. We don't want you. We don't like you.
  • sdmf4ever - April 20, 2010 9:47 p.m.

    In all honesty, does it even really matter what this man says. He has critiqued movies for over 20 years and that is all. His reviews are not even that good because he nitpicks the tiniest things in movies. Sometimes he even criticizes movies for being what they truly are....entertainment. He negates the fact that movies are movies and doesn't really see all there is to see within the movie for what it is. Videogames are not Art......REALLY!?! Could have fooled me. They are a form of interactive art. I have a question for you Mr. Ebert and do pray tell: Isn't Art an expression of the senses, of the heart, of the mind, and of the emotions of individuals? I do believe so and that is just what gets put into video games from the time of their conception. What a damn FOOL he is to think what he says even matters in the game world...shame on you Mr. Ebert, shame on you. Your attempts are admirable, but without any kind of professional experience or expertise in this medium. Stick with what you half-ass know.....Movies!!!!
  • Strangleme - April 20, 2010 9:47 p.m.

    What a fuckin' turd!! Old man that is ill or not, he's a dumb prick and I'm a GAMER FOR LIFE!!!
  • msr265 - April 20, 2010 9:15 p.m.

    Mr. Sterling, You make good points, but I feel compelled to take issue with the seemingly anti-senior citizen (and anti-deceased) sentiment going on in this article. For instance... "Ebert is 67, and those who think like him aren't much younger. They are fossils. Leftovers. They are nearly all dead. In a few years time, nothing that Ebert has said will matter because Ebert won't be with us anymore." So people who have died suddenly don't matter anymore? Don't get me wrong - it's my opinion that Ebert is wrong on this particular issue... but not because he's old. And certainly not because he will soon be dead and therefore (according to you) irrelevant. "Nearly dead" or "dead" do not render beliefs obsolete. I invite you to tell that to a devout member of any religion, a respectful reader of any pre-20th century philosopher, or, more appropriately, any appreciator of Mr. Nolan Bushnell (who also happens to be 67, the same age as Roger Ebert).
  • Rodon - April 20, 2010 9:12 p.m.

    Well, according to Wikipedia, art is defined as the means of expressing oneself. however, this definition has been debated for quite a while. Now, looking into the video game article, there is a section called "Theory" that debates whether or not video games are art. it links to another article, "Game Studies", which expalins this deeper. It's also worth to note that most, if not all of the examples in the art article comprises of paintings, pottery, sculptures, or other crafts. There is no movies, novels, or even video games as examples. The links can be found below:
  • ensabahnur - April 20, 2010 8:19 p.m.

    Great read. Appreciate your points about we shouldnt care about what this guy thinks. he reminds me of the news caster on fox with Mass Effect.
  • SophiaDragonMaster - April 20, 2010 7:33 p.m.

    As a young artist myself, I must say that I loved that article you wrote and all, reading it made me smile and it made my day! I don't about the opinion of that old man, I'll have as much fun as I want with my games!
  • Zeb364 - April 20, 2010 7:03 p.m.

    @ GamesRadarEricBratcher: Exactly. The only reason Ebert's statements have any bearing at all is because it's just one more round of ammunition for all the non-gamers trying to destroy our medium simply cause they don't understand it. But like you pointed out, they fucked everything else up so bad there's no reason to believe they'll succeed in their efforts to take down gaming. And like it says in the article, it's only a matter of time until we're the generation in charge and when that happens then most of this crap will dissapear.
  • mutantsquid - April 20, 2010 6:03 p.m.

    Haters gonna hate.
  • Palitroke - April 20, 2010 3:49 p.m.

    In a world where an individual can dump a bucket of paint on himself rollover a canvas hang it up and call it Art, why do we care what an unfurtonate individual thinks about our medium? I personally don't give a shit about his opinion even on movies! He is just a film critic it's not like he is the utmost critici for all the art mediums! Enjoy your games as the interactive and artistic experience that you have with them. After all that is what art is all about how you feel and view that experience is yours and yours only.As far as Ebert's opinion on games all iI have to say to him is "Opinions arelike assholes everybody has one but no one gives a shit about yours!"
  • ultimatepunchrod - April 20, 2010 3:12 p.m.

    i thought it was a tad harsh that you said we shouldnt care because the haters will be dead soon anyway(paraphrase) but on the whole i agree. we shouldnt listen to anyone as long as we're doing something we enjoy(within reason). its going to be difficult to convince anyone to think differently, especially when they have so publicly stated their beliefs and hundreds of thousands of people have read it. it would just make him look bad to retract his claim even if he ever did change his mind.
  • JohnnyMaverik - April 20, 2010 1:56 p.m.

    I'm more arsed about people in this industry saying that games aren't art. What art is and isn't is a pointless question, all I know is Bioshock touched me, Vampire TMB invigorated me and Morrowind presented me with an alternate universe where I made a destiny. But a game is yet to make me cry =/ They have to work on that... I meen it's not hard, I cry everytime I watch "The Pale blue dot" on youtube, making me cry is easy...
  • majorsuave - April 20, 2010 11:52 a.m.

    Bah te ol' Roger is just pissed because he can't get it up again. The only piece of 'Art' he was ever part of are a couple sexploitation movies in the 70s. OK, I give him credit, I enjoyed those that I saw - Russ Meyer directed them - but, as far as being an artist, he does not have much credibility. Video games are in fact the sum of many arts combined: Architecture, painting, theatre, sculpture, music, literature and sometimes drawing, conceptual arts as well as dance - Modin anyone? and then: movies of course.
  • Redeater - April 20, 2010 10:50 a.m.

    He will be dead soon. I'm not trying to be mean but he is a relic of the past. I'm sure that critics before him labeled "talkies" as crap. This is a new medium in which he is to old and stubborn to realize.
  • Pirateejaculate - April 20, 2010 8:10 a.m.

    While I certainly don't agree with Ebert, to label him as old, obsolete and irrelevant is stupidity. Yes; his opinion on gaming doesn't matter. He said so himself in the editorial. However, to claim that everything he has said doesn't matter, and will die out along with him, and to claim this as though its a good thing...that really grinds my gears. The guy is a brilliat writer. The first to win a pulitzer prize for his criticism. Even to this day, after losing his ability to speak, he still produces the best film reviews. To claim him irrelevant is to claim writing and film irrelevant; a crime I would put up there with claiming games irrelevant. Frankly, this article comes across as way too butt-hurt.
  • NorthGuard - April 20, 2010 7:55 a.m.

    I respectfully disagree with Mr. Ebert. Games employ and inspire an army of artists in order to conceptualize, develop, and market games to the masses. Gaming is as artful as anything else.
  • Octoboy - April 20, 2010 6:55 a.m.

    That is one very impressive article. Thank you so much for exactly wording what I - and many other gamers in their right mind - have been thinking for years. Also, I very much like your "bashing" of that dimwit, I never understood why the media pays so much attention to that obviously very ignorant man. Last but not least, I value your style of writing, it's very eloquent, you rarely see that, unfortunately.
  • Octoboy - April 20, 2010 6:53 a.m.

    That is one very impressive article. Thank you so much for exactly wording what I - and many other gamers in their right mind - have been thinking for years. Also, I very much like your "bashing" of that dimwit, I never understood why the media pays so much attention to that obviously very ignorant man. Last but not least, I value your style of writing, it's very eloquent, you rarely see that, unfortunately.
  • KCalder - April 20, 2010 6:35 a.m.

    And if I'm not being clear: it's not expression of profound ideas, or exquisite style, or deeply layered and nuanced story that makes a message art. Art is about you, a person, expressing your unique, conscious process of living to another person. You could be thinking about or experiencing anything, any emotion, any perception of structure or chaos, in any style, in any medium. I may like impressionism, or a detective novel, or a jazz song, but what I REALLY like underneath all of that is experiencing the other person's experiences when they produced the art. And I would argue that you never get a complete impression, because people are extremely complicated and unique in how they interact with the world. Even a little bit is satisfying. When you look at it that way, it's really ludicrous to suggest that interactivity kills the process. The process becomes much more complex and difficult to manage when the audience isn't passive and restricted, for sure, but also potentially much more rewarding.
  • Yaro - April 20, 2010 6:24 a.m.

    @oswaldleon I read your comments, I don't want to argue with you, but there is one thing I'd like to say. You said games aren't intellectually stimulating, I have to disagree and give an example. When I played Planescape Torment, I realized that for the first time in my life I actually considered things like philosophy, ethics, politics, poverty and such (I was 13), I also learned english on that one game. There is a shipload of conversations and they are LONG and most of them, if not all, are very, very deep, and it's not like reading Plato's Symposium or watching a documentary, you actually take part, answer the questions, make your own point, and create the nameless one's identity, and if you do everything honestly...then even your own. How stimulating is that? =) Now I'm not saying you should consider that art, but I sure as hell do. Whatever makes me think and consider or give me a different outlook on some things or just "stays with me" is good enough for me. It's totally the same as some songs, movies or books.

Showing 21-40 of 142 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000


Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.