While many have celebrated the fact that film critic Roger Ebert backpedaled (thanks to E. Zachary Knight via the Shoutbox) ever so slightly this week, saying that videogames could be considered art given some sort of miracle, somehow, someday (but not in our lifetime), game critic Gus Mastrapa laments Ebert's return to the shadows of videogame criticism. Why would he do that? Because, Ebert was a worthy adversary, unlike politicians, a certain lawyer, children's advocacy groups and talking heads on TV; he inspired thoughtful, well-crafted arguments by columnists and gamers that we don't usually hear, and in turn, made us look better.

At least that's Mastrapa's theory. And like those well created arguments from gamers that games are already art, Mastrapa's opinions on the matter are important. In our struggle with so many uninformed outside forces, we often revert to childish arguments, pretty name calling, and character assassination instead of explaining in emphatic and clear terms that games are, at the very least, important to our culture. [URL=http://www.gamepolitics.com/2010/07/02/why-we-might-need-roger-ebert][B][COLOR=#8e0505]Read More[/COLOR][/B][/URL]

[URL=http://www.gamepolitics.com/2010/07/02/why-we-might-need-roger-ebert]read more[/URL]

[url=http://www.gamepolitics.com/2010/07/02/why-we-might-need-roger-ebert]More...[/url]