ISTA 301 Blog: Video Games Are Video Games

      Recently in a lecture I was introduced to the ongoing academic discussion about a question that in my opinion is pointless: What is "art". I'll give the the quick version. "Art" is whatever you want it to be. Simple done right? Maybe. I would have never write about this just based on this but then my Professor continued to expand right into the category of games and specifically video games. Sweet now were talking, something I know more about than my professor. I'm thinking this is going to be good. "Art" and video games. Then he pulls up this video:

      Didn't make it all the way through? I don't blame you. Let me sum it up for you. Kellee Santiago thinks video games are "art". She gives several arguments why, all with gaping holes that anyone could walk through and argue the opposite. Then my professor offers the other side of the story presenting this article HERE. If you don't bother to read it I don't blame you and will once again sum it up for you. Roger Ebert thinks that Kellee Santiago is stupid and that video games can never be "art" for reasons that me nor you care about. (if you do read the article)
      For me it doesn't matter because both are wrong, kinda.  On Santiago's side how can video games be "art" if no one can define "art"? Now I'll agree that there is "art" in a video game but that does not make it "art", it makes it a video game with "art" in it. On the other side I will agree with Ebert, in that video games are not art, but not because of whatever he says but because video games are video games. So to sum up I'm arguing against arguing about this because there shouldn't need to be an argument in the first place. Video games are video games and "art" is "art" whatever "art" might be. Now stepping down from the soapbox. - Laters