Roger Ebert claims "video games cannot be art"; molests children.

[tacticslion]

Originally Posted by Mike McC

A book has no variation in it's path without intentional subversion of the intent.

A videogame... I can choose to spare the goombas. I can warp to level 8. It's not a concrete path. it is very fluid, and alterations can be made to the experience. There is only a generalized sense of how to experience it. It is only a framework. It is, in essence, incomplete, because it requires a user's own personal input to complete it.

And every time it's completed it is likely different.

OBJECTION!

What of "choose your own adventure" books? What, then, of shared, persistant worlds by multiple authors with conflicting continuities (Star Wars Expanded Universe, say)? What singular "path" would one take there? What if a typo or plot hole appears in a book, or that book is written in such a way as to be purposefully ambiguous in its meaning or ending? What of Final Fantasy XIII in the non-linearity arguement?

EDIT:

Originally Posted by krogothwolf

I just think they all fear change.

I know I do. Man, can those pennies get heavy after a while. Oh! Ooooooooohhhhhhhhh! Oh. THAT kind of "change". Right. Oh yeah, They totally do. Also, I'm not afraid of anything. Nope. *runs and hides in the fear of pennies*

EDIT 2:

Originally Posted by Krylo

And it still provides a much more static presentation than say, seeing Midsummer's Night Dream as performed by two entirely different casts/directors/etc.

As my wife is a drama teacher (in addition to her English duties) I can attest this is entirely accurate from experience. Further, what of those famed theater pieces that beg or even require audience interaction? Even more, what of ImprovAnywhere - is what they do any less 'art', despite the fact that it can, inherently, only be done once to its full effect (unlike, say, seeing a movie or showing a painting)? Or is it more of an art because of that, in which case repeatable experiences, such as viewings of movies and painting would be diminished.

Or then again, an orchestral arrangement by Bethovan is a masterpiece - a masterpiece interpreted slightly differently by every single orchestra that plays it. Oh, wait, that's not art - it's played, after all, in a strict, straightforward pattern exactly as the creator intended, following rigorous rules to get from one path to the next.

Similarly, Mozart. Oh, but there is relief in sight: it has no choice! Or does it? Can it be played on piano? Of course, as that was how it was written. Or on a keyboard? Well... those are similar enough. What about on a synthasizer, electrically created with no keys or strings? Hm. Perhaps it can be elegantly distributed to various persons - a band of pianists - to create a duet (or larger) when none was originally intended? Indeed each person who plays a piece of music can play it to their own instrument, their own way of thinking, and can redistribute the notes as they see fit: minor, personal touches throughout the whole, creating a new arrangement all their own.

No, the argument that minor play differences seperate videogames from art is not valid. Music students study and play only specific movements of larger orchestras, often skipping around. Similar, I'd say, to warping to level 8 and ignoring the few goombas, non?