Reply With Quote
I just like that the guy is willing to admit that what he thinks is just due to his own stubborness.
Darksider
The more important inquiry is: who cares?
I just like that the guy is willing to admit that what he thinks is just due to his own stubborness.
You sir, are a hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman.
formerly The Gas, LordPerrin
I think the problem is that a lot of people, Ebert included, don't seem to recognize that accepting something as art doesn't mean you accept it as GOOD art. There's plenty of work in already-accepted fields that sucks, but still undeniably is art, because it attempts to convey an idea or elicit a particular response. And that's all the word art is about. The attempt, not necessarily success. It is likewise undeniable that certain video games make this attempt (again, leaving off the question of success) and thus are art.
Are all video games art? Of course not, but then neither are all movies or all novels.
Last edited by Space Pirate Roberts; 02 Jul 2010 at 03:04 AM.
Originally Posted by Gohron
I don't want to argue it or debate it, lets just talk about how Ebert is a good man for what he wrote in his latest blog.
You sir, are a hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman.
Darksider
I don't know how good a man he is. Half the time he has no idea what he's talking about or talks about stuff he doesn't understand. He also spoils movies in many of his reviews.
I spoiled your mom in my last review.
You sir, are a hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman.
formerly The Gas, LordPerrin
...
So, you're new to this whole "internet" thing then?
Button Masher
I just wrote a blog post about this actually: http://newenggamer.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/old-fogeys/
But no, I think saying fuck Ebert is a bit much. I don't agree with all of his reviews but I still find him to be an interesting and intelligent writer. And while I don't agree with his views on video games, I do think he at least approached the debate in an intelligent manner. He demonstrated fairly well that he doesn't understand video games, something he's fessed up to, but he was still less derogatory then many of the gamers who responded to him.
You're going to disagree with reviews sometimes. That's just the nature of opinion and if you can't hate a reviewer just because of that. If they're being a dick just for the sake of being a dick, then sure, but Ebert doesn't strike me as that.
For us, there is no spring. Just the wind that smells fresh before the storm.-Conan the Barbarian
Check out my blog: New England Gamer
So he's a good man for starting a controversy over something he later admits to not even understanding? Sounds to me like he shot off his mouth (no pun intended) and then had to backpedal. He criticizes gaming for not meeting criteria he never defined, he admits to making an uninformed opinion, and then he admits to not even wanting to play any games to confirm said opinion because he's too "bullheaded" and believes people will find fault with it no matter what he says. That's a pretty convenient back door out of the shit storm he started.
Last edited by Melf; 02 Jul 2010 at 04:59 PM.
Hostages? **** em'
I've had to listen to more than enough idiots talk about whether or not something is art for this lifetime. Just because he was able to articulate why he felt the way he did (and why he might be wrong) doesn't negate the fact that he has now posted two blogs about his struggle to define a form of entertainment as "art". That shit is 100% certified retarded.
If someone asked me "Is [insert general noun here] art?" I would slap them and say "Of course it is, why is this even a question? Fuck you."
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks