Thu, Jul 01, 2010 | 10:26 BST
Ebert battered into submission over “games as art” comments
Film critic Roger Ebert has u-turned on his assertion that games can never be “art” – after 4,500 comments on his article claimed otherwise.
Apparently, Roger now thinks that games might be art “someday”. Something of a turnaround from the stance in his piece, “Video games can never be art”.
“My error in the first place was to think I could make a convincing argument on purely theoretical grounds,” he now reckons.
“What I was saying is that video games could not in principle be Art. That was a foolish position to take, particularly as it seemed to apply to the entire unseen future of games. This was pointed out to me maybe hundreds of times. How could I disagree? It is quite possible a game could someday be great Art.”
The humiliating back-track continued: “Who was I to say video games didn’t have the potential of becoming Art? Someday? There was no agreement among the thousands of posters about even one current game that was an unassailable masterpiece. Shadow of the Colossus came closest. I suppose that’s the one I should begin with.”
Roger? You’re rubbish. Thanks, Kotaku.
14 
Posted in: Stuff
Tags: art, robert ebert
14 comments
#1
mpiwo
01/07/10, 9:02 am
You are right, mistake his name so he knows where his place is, the bastard!
#2
MegaGeek1
01/07/10, 9:05 am
If they’re not art, then what the hell are they? Also, what kind of name is Ebert anyway?
#3
NGCes26294BIV
01/07/10, 9:40 am
Man, do people still listen to Ebert?
Wait, isn’t he unable to talk? Cancer took his vocal chords, right?
Correction… do people still read what Ebert has to say?
Oh, and “If they’re not art, then what the hell are they?”
Entertainment. And sometimes, trash.
#4
Freek
01/07/10, 9:47 am
Bob, can I call you Bob? You’re a movie critic, that’s what you do and you do it well. But don’t step outside the world of cinema, doesn’t make sense.
A bitt like a wine critic reviewing cars.
#5
Egon Superb
01/07/10, 9:48 am
Yeah, it took his vocal chords and his entire jaw IIRC. He doesn’t say anything anymore, he just writes a lot more.
#6
Dean
01/07/10, 9:52 am
@4 As @1 hinted at, his name is Roger – not Robert. So while you could call him Bob, he’ll probably just think you’re talking to someone else.
#7
Patrick Garratt
01/07/10, 10:27 am
God. Edited.
#8
Armitage
01/07/10, 10:45 am
Well that took him long enough.
#9
Freek
01/07/10, 11:19 am
Meh, Bob Ebert it is then ;-p
#10
frostquake
01/07/10, 1:38 pm
Limbo
#11
Shalashaska
01/07/10, 1:51 pm
For me the likes of Flower and Shadow of the Colossus would qualify as gaming art, especially Flower. Anyway, like one guy said, what does Ebert know about gaming anyway.
#12
Quiiick
01/07/10, 3:26 pm
Any piece of entertainment that makes compromises/concessions towards a targeted audience can not be considered art.
Same goes for movies.
#13
IL DUCE
02/07/10, 2:10 am
Yeah he needs to shut the fuck up…
#14
2plus2equals5
02/07/10, 8:14 am
This is only a partial turn.
He still thinks that past and present games are only garbage.