Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGreenArt
Ebert's notion that if you can change every aspect of the story within a game means it's not art seems like he's jumping ahead of things, if there don't seem to be many games (if any?) that have really reached that level of interactivity.
|
My instinctive (i.e. I can't give you a good motivation for it) response to that is that it might be the other way around. A strictly linear game is art in the same way as a movie, but when you throw the interactivity in the mix, that's when you find a new artform. (I suppose it's the "new artform" bit that leads to it being called "not art".) I don't worry about it, though. Art is such a fuzzy concept anyway.
