Though Roger Ebert supposedly gave up his debate against video games being art, mostly by publicly stating that he's sorry he ever brought the subject up in the first place, he apparently isn't above posting the occasional childish retort on Twitter. To whit:
Aaaaaand, here we go again. This comment of course stems from the Smithsonian's upcoming video game exhibit. Now, I'm not posting this to say that Ebert is wrong, or bring up the "games as art" debate for the hojillionth time. This is just a general plea. Don't be this guy. Don't be this guy who has spent so many years immersed in his medium of choice, his life's work, that he has become a parody of himself. The man in the ivory tower sneering at something he doesn't understand, nor chooses to make the effort to do so. As someone that spent four years in college studying film history and theory, and critique, there are aspects that I admire about Ebert. He has an encyclopedic knowledge of film and a deep respect for the medium. But he chose to stir a pot, and was not prepared for the violent splash he received. Eventually, he chose to take his ball and stay in his tower, and now he's content to merely sling taunts and insults from his Twitter feed.
No matter whether you believe games are art or not, keep an open mind and maintain a willingness for civil discourse. Just because we disagree on something, nor may we ever agree, mean that the debate can't still take place. Both sides can learn things, so long as they're willing to learn. Ebert, unfortunately, isn't, and look where it's gotten him.
Kudos to the OP for the post. May none of us ever become Ebert. Furthermore, let us be thankful that the GiantBomb officials aren't this sort of critic.
As for the rest of this discussion...
@Slaker117 said:
Whether or not you think video games are art, you can't deny that they have been culturally significant. Berating the Smithsonian for acknowledging that is silly.That being said, I can't help but feel like the exhibit is a joke. The way they organized it is nonsense, and not conducive to recognizing the form in a meaningful way.
Generally I agree, but the exhibit is called "The Art of Video Games" I guess I don't know enough about it to say if it's a joke or not.
From their website: "The Art of Video Games is one of the first exhibitions to explore the forty-year evolution of video games as an artistic medium, with a focus on striking visual effects and the creative use of new technologies. The exhibition will feature some of the most influential artists and designers during five eras of game technology, from early developers such as David Crane and Warren Robinett to contemporary designers like Kellee Santiago and David Jaffe. It also will explore the many influences on game designers, and the pervasive presence video games have in the broader popular culture, with new relationships to video art, film and television, educational practices, and professional skill training."
Does it really matter if some guy does not think that videogames are art? The world does not need Roger Ebert to believe Video Games are art to keep turning.
Considering the overwhelming proof against this false opinion is staggering. It is a dead meaning that could've been used with the atari 2600, but now, that meaning is dead, just the fact that the US government officially calling videogames art proves it wrong.
Didn't Roger Ebert say that Minority Report was a good movie that made the slightest bit of sense? I think he did, and that was probably the dumbest statement of the century.
" I could get mad at him, but, then again, I don't understand the appeal of dance or sports, and I make fun of those more than Ebert does with games. "
We've all been there, it's just that some of us like to pretend we haven't.
I think you're overreacting. Just ignore what Ebert says. He's just voicing his opinion, as he and anyone else should. That tweet doesn't seem particularly awful, but maybe I'm just not easily offended.
Roger Ebert is a old scrawny dick that just craps on movies that are actually good. Movie critics are idiots who have nothing to do more than point out the most itty-bitty details.
I think he's a good critic when it comes for movies but he has to stop being a dick about games because one day, he'll have no choice but to put a video game tab on his stupid blog.
An old guy like Ebert doesn't have the wherewithal to handle the internet and this is his reaction to the aggressive responses he's undoubtedly received. I don't know why he has a twitter account or why people still react so strongly to him, he's just a critic.
Maybe it was a complement since the Smithsonian is the nation's archive. I mean, certain video games could be entrusted there just as Chuck Yeager's X-1 speed-of-sound jet is and the flag that inspired Frances Scott Key to write the National Anthem. I'm going to choose to see this comment in a positive light.
" @RecSpec: Well, why would you expect them to know that? All they see is a man with a big name in the movie business making twitter posts about how their favorite medium is trash. The people who go out of their way to call out his cancer problem are scum, but who cares about them? There are plenty of people who have perfectly reasonable reactions even in just this thread. "
People who call out his cancer problem aren't scum. My mother died of cancer, it's shit and it makes you really angry at the world despite what ignorant fools and feelgood after school specials make you believe. He has cancer, he's angry at the world and he's acting out. It's really as simple as that. People who react to that kind of acting out deserve to be trolled.
@ThatFrood: That's just it though, he's not writing a full length feature article on why games are garbage, it's a single tweet that just relit the fire his previous comments caused.
As others have said, he is pretty much trolling at this point.
@RecSpec: Well, why would you expect them to know that? All they see is a man with a big name in the movie business making twitter posts about how their favorite medium is trash. The people who go out of their way to call out his cancer problem are scum, but who cares about them? There are plenty of people who have perfectly reasonable reactions even in just this thread.
" Movie fans wouldn't give a shit about what some game reviewer said about movies as a whole, why are game fans so up in arms about this. "
Oh come on be serious, it's easy to see why that would be the case. When established power criticizes a minority, the minority backlashes. When the minority criticizes established power, the established power couldn't give a rat's ass.I know it's always fun to call gamers entitled whiners, but putting some thought into it is good. Otherwise you might end up like HandsomeDead, I'll agree with the main ideas, but the actual arguments have so little thought behind them that it's hard to take him seriously. "
People are aware that he cannot even TALK anymore right?
" Movie fans wouldn't give a shit about what some game reviewer said about movies as a whole, why are game fans so up in arms about this. "
Oh come on be serious, it's easy to see why that would be the case. When established power criticizes a minority, the minority backlashes. When the minority criticizes established power, the established power couldn't give a rat's ass. I know it's always fun to call gamers entitled whiners, but putting some thought into it is good. Otherwise you might end up like HandsomeDead, I'll agree with the main ideas, but the actual arguments have so little thought behind them that it's hard to take him seriously.
I respect what Ebert did for the world of film critique and although I may disagree with some of the things he says about films I respect him as a movie reviewer, but we know Ebert's background with video games. Unless he has somehow managed to burn through a cornucopia of just about every type of video game made in the last few months then the guy still has next to zero knowledge and experience of games. At the end of the last 'games as art' debate he said he was putting this thing to bed (albeit while still not quite understanding why he should be doing so) and to see him start this whole thing up again is just frustrating, we went through this before. This kind of behaviour makes Ebert look at best a troll, and at worst the crotchety old man yelling at all the new-fangled things for being so damn new-fangled.
Of course there's going to be a certain amount of game consumer backlash to this, not anywhere near as much as last time, but there will be some, and while some of it will be reasonable and well-constructed I'm already seeing immature and illogical arguments for video games being thrown his way, which makes the debate as a whole that much worse.
" I remember watching a youtube video from 1989 where Ebert mentioned he had an NES at one point, and the only game he played on it was Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. After about a week of obsessively playing it he got rid of the system, deeming it too hypnotic and repetitive. Maybe his negative opinions on video games stems from that one week?
Though now it is generally regarded as a turd of a game, he has to be able to at least recognize the love and craft that went into making it.
"
What if we went back to 1989 and stopped him from getting that NES and turtles game stopping the years and years of holier than thou comments by Ebert on games and thread after thread of angry nerds cursing his name. Then we would go 'back to the future' and this thread would disappear. Maybe the whole 'are games art' crap would disappear too!
I remember watching a youtube video from 1989 where Ebert mentioned he had an NES at one point, and the only game he played on it was Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. After about a week of obsessively playing it he got rid of the system, deeming it too hypnotic and repetitive. Maybe his negative opinions on video games stems from that one week?
Though now it is generally regarded as a turd of a game, he has to be able to at least recognize the love and craft that went into making it.
Everyone has their own opinion about what is art. The fact Mr. Ebert doesn't think so is fine, it's his opinion after all. What's more interesting is the reaction that others have to his opinion. Are many people who think games are art so insecure that they must constantly shout how wrong he is for having such an opinion.
123 Comments