Are Videogames Art? Does it Matter?

Thomas Cross, writing for The Student Life at Pomona College (“The oldest college newspaper in Southern California”), notes the debate between film critic Roger Ebert and movie/game/book creator Clive Barker in a column entitled “Video Games: Works of Art or a Waste of Time?” Ebert opines that videogames can never be art because people have to make choices while playing them. Their eye is not guided, so to speak, as it is in movies, paintings, books and music. Therefore, they are a waste of time. Cross points out that other media in their infancy suffered similar criticisms. Videogames, because of their interactive nature, hold the potential to transcend other art forms.

Ben Wood, a junior at Oklahoma, writes in a November 1 article for BlogCritics Magazine about the games as art controversy. He points out in “Video Games As Art: Does it Matter?” that Mike Musgrove with the Washington Post gave a copy of BioShock to book critic Michael Dirda to play with for a couple weeks. Dirda agreed that BioShock held “artistic value,” but was not a “work of art.” Wood concludes that art currently holds an insufficient definition.

The best thing about this sort of dialogue between opposing sides is the fact the debate is occurring in the first place. As the medium matures, it is starting to gain attention from others outside its circle of influence. Consequently, as with previous media, videogaming continues to grow in stature as a serious medium.