As @bigjeffrey said, I know you asked us to not respond to spam, but there has to be some consideration for spam of this caliber. I mean, look at this. It's more creative than any spam I've seen in quite some time!
I mean, it's even using a booty shot of Ryan Gosling. How are we supposed to avoid this? To deny us Ryan Gosling would be to deny us liberty itself.
I may not approve of spam, but if spam can be of this quality, I could get used to it.
And I would recommend a screen protector. That pretty screen can make it very obvious if any scratches get on it, and you may be touching it a decent bit. So, a screen protector is a good idea.
Alright, hopefully I don't fuck up and get dust under there as per usual. Any recommendations between Sony's screen protector and Hori's? I'd imagine Hori's is a little more effective, but I'd probably be much more likely to screw up the application of that one.
I prefer just over the screen; so, I'd say go with Sony's. But there are some Vita folks who swear by the Hori. So, look into it some more. There are plenty of places that have discussed the "Sony vs Hori screen protector" topic. I say that no protector is a bad idea, a Sony one is the least you should do, and the glossy Hori may be the best. Just look around for impressions.
I thought they did a fine job with the characters. They were just people who all happened to be placed in a terrible situation. Some were gay, some were bi, and some were straight. Their characterization and little stories were what mattered most.
Nah, and outside of small instances, I don't see why anyone would attempt to buy votes in America. It's much easier to spend tons of money manipulating how people's votes fit into districts and influencing public opinion to side with the candidates or issues you prefer to waste your time trying to buy individual votes.
The question is more whether we have seen much good or significant Fine Art in videogames, and I am happy to say I think we have.
But this is where everybody gets tripped up. When you use qualitative terms like "good" and "significant", you leave the Art-ness of something open for question. Art is not reliant on whether one considers something significant, because as I said above, it's a term relating to the experience of a thing.
Super Mario Brothers might not be expressing any "significant" emotional concepts, but if I get that from it while playing, it becomes art. The "cultural value" of something, as you said, is entirely separate from that.
Again, I'm not disputing the art-ness of things imbued with artistic meaning. My laptop can become art in a certain context. That's not what I am arguing. I am suggesting that there is a time-honored understanding of the difference between art and Fine Art. The OP and others clearly seem to be discussing Fine Art and not simply the broader concept of art as a way of experiencing some things.
So, I would agree in what the concept of art is, but we're attempting to discuss Fine Art and whether videogames are a Fine Art. I would say that they are, and within Fine Art, we might have our own feelings on the relative quality of different works.