Before he died he also wrote an article staking his position that video games are not a legitimate art form. That doesn’t necessarily mean he hated games or would never play one, but it does make it somewhat odd to see a list like this on a site bearing his name.
Roger Ebert also wrote an article staking his position that Star Wars Episode 1 deserved 3½ out of 4 stars, which makes it somewhat odd to see a website bear his name at all.
It’s a shame because I generally agreed with most of Ebert’s opinions and still miss him as a taste guide for getting an idea of what movies are worth my time. But video games can definitely be art.
I suppose it's relevant to the sort of person who also plays maybe 2 games a month. Having a reviewer whose approach games is similar to your own can be great. Someone who's played 50 hours of Starfield since October and "can't put it down" will be more relatable for the two-hours-a-week gamer than the person who tells them a game is really great once you hit the six hundred hours mark and have done enough grinding. Or the person who loves a game that has a bunch of meta-commentary about video games as a medium or that really shakes up the formula - your two-hours-a-week gamer probably isn't sick of generic formulas yet because they won't have experienced enough games for the novelty to truly wear off.
For the audience who subscribes here, like you or me, yeah, it's absolutely not worth the read.
Add comment