Jim Preston: games as art debate is meaningless

Scott Jon Siegel
S. Siegel|02.12.08

Sponsored Links

Scott Jon Siegel
February 12th, 2008
In this article: art, roger-ebert, rogerebert
Jim Preston: games as art debate is meaningless

Are games art? It's a question that comes up more and more, as the medium slowly grows out of its awkward, teenage years. EA producer Jim Preston thinks the debate is a meaningless one, as he explains in an incredibly well-thought-out feature on Gamasutra.

Preston takes his time to remind of us the state of art in general, and how art is continuously judged by its relative place in culture: a urinal can be art if Marcel Duchamp says so, and places it in an art gallery. Since it's all a matter of perspective, Preston argues that we shouldn't be bickering with Roger Ebert over whether games can be art, but instead spending our time improving the medium, and awaiting further artistic recognition from the community at large.

Makes sense to us. We'll stop waiting by the mailbox for our invite to the arty party, then.

[Image via this post]
All products recommended by Engadget are selected by our editorial team, independent of our parent company. Some of our stories include affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links, we may earn an affiliate commission.
Popular on Engadget