Video Games Now Legally Considered An Art Form In The U.S.

Pac ManPaul Tassi writes in Forbes:

Roger Ebert’s Twitter has informed me this morning that the government has attempted to prove him wrong in the seemingly endless “games as art” debate.The famed critic got many riled up when he said that no, games were not art, and in fact, they never possibly could be. He was hailed by some as an old man out of touch, but more pressingly, one who didn’t PLAY the games he was critiquing, which is rather essential to the experience.

But gamers have now found themselves an unlikely ally in the debate, the National Endowment for the Arts, which for 2012 has reclassified their definition of “art” to the following:

Projects may include high profile multi-part or single television and radio programs (documentaries and dramatic narratives); media created for theatrical release; performance programs; artistic segments for use within an existing series; multi-part webisodes; installations; and interactive games. Short films, five minutes and under, will be considered in packages of three or more.

For more information, see original article.

16 Comments on "Video Games Now Legally Considered An Art Form In The U.S."

  1. Anonymous | May 23, 2011 at 8:53 am |

    Too bad they lost their art form around the late 90’s.  Well, there are still some good pieces that come out from time to time, but calling the Call of Duty franchise a work of art, for example, is a complete travesty.

  2. smooth_operator | May 23, 2011 at 4:53 am |

    Too bad they lost their art form around the late 90’s.  Well, there are still some good pieces that come out from time to time, but calling the Call of Duty franchise a work of art, for example, is a complete travesty.

    • Anonymous | May 23, 2011 at 1:03 pm |

       I take it you don’t game much.

    • DeepCough | May 23, 2011 at 4:19 pm |

       Play “Bioshock” and tells me that’s not a work of art.

      • superfluous | May 24, 2011 at 6:18 am |

        haven’t played Bioshock, so i couldn’t say. i play other 1st person shooters, though. 
        what i’m curious about is what, in your opinion, is artistic about the game?
        (impossible question, i know, trying to define art..)

        • DeepCough | May 24, 2011 at 3:15 pm |

           Don’t you think it’s ironic that Roger Ebert would say that “video games are not art,” and yet he would give Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within 3.5 stars out 4?

          • superfluous | May 25, 2011 at 8:09 am |

            sure, that does seem rather inconsistent. roger ebert can, however, kiss my butt for all i care..

            ok, i’ll try again; what is artistic about Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within? (that is if that movie, in your opinion, is art..)

  3. Anonymous | May 23, 2011 at 5:03 pm |

     I take it you don’t game much.

  4. DeepCough | May 23, 2011 at 8:19 pm |

     Play “Bioshock” and tells me that’s not a work of art.

  5. Hadrian999 | May 23, 2011 at 10:16 pm |

    Games are art, just because many games are derivitive trash doesn’t mean no game is artistic, the current game L.A. Noire is a work of art in every sense. many movies that are released are trash, the same can be said of literature, poetry, and music  

  6. Hadrian999 | May 23, 2011 at 6:16 pm |

    Games are art, just because many games are derivitive trash doesn’t mean no game is artistic, the current game L.A. Noire is a work of art in every sense. many movies that are released are trash, the same can be said of literature, poetry, and music  

  7. superfluous | May 24, 2011 at 9:37 am |

    may include….

    *sigh*

  8. superfluous | May 24, 2011 at 5:37 am |

    may include….

    *sigh*

  9. superfluous | May 24, 2011 at 10:18 am |

    haven’t played Bioshock, so i couldn’t say. i play other 1st person shooters, though. 
    what i’m curious about is what, in your opinion, is artistic about the game?
    (impossible question, i know, trying to define art..)

  10. DeepCough | May 24, 2011 at 7:15 pm |

     Don’t you think it’s ironic that Roger Ebert would say that “video games are not art,” and yet he would give Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within 3.5 stars out 4?

  11. superfluous | May 25, 2011 at 12:09 pm |

    sure, that does seem rather inconsistent. roger ebert can, however, kiss my butt for all i care..

    ok, i’ll try again; what is artistic about Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within? (that is if that movie, in your opinion, is art..)

Comments are closed.