Quote:
Originally Posted by aux-in
The late Roger Ebert caused a stir when he said video games weren't art.
Video games can never be art | Roger Ebert's Journal | Roger Ebert
Loads of comments from users who I think got him to later state that video games might be art.
For me, I've always like the SNES graphics/art. Best colors, the sprites look cool...just something about them.
Can video games be art, though? For me, they contain great art, but for some reason I don't take them in the same as a painting or a piece of music. It's probably too interactive to be one single piece of art in the same context as the other mediums. Not saying that's fair or right, because to this day, nothing has moved me more as a single piece of "art" like Final Fantasy III (VI) did. I'd say video games are more an experience in art than art itself. |
If art can be meant to be interpreted by each person individually rather than simply being a blanket statement designed to hold the same meaning to everyone then it is certainly interactive, if possibly only in a passive sense. Why should making the interaction active all of a sudden make it not art? Are you not engaging with both in a personal, meaningful way?