Anyway, some guy emailed his AnswerMan column about it to defend video games.
I was saddened to read that you consider video games an inherently inferior medium to film and literature, despite your admitted lack of familiarity with the great works of the medium. […] Was not film itself once a new field of art? Did it not also take decades for its academic respectability to be recognized?
Email responds with some good insight:
I did indeed consider video games inherently inferior to film and literature. There is a structural reason for that: Video games by their nature require player choices, which is the opposite of the strategy of serious film and literature, which requires authorial control.
But, in the end:
That a game can aspire to artistic importance as a visual experience, I accept. But for most gamers, video games represent a loss of those precious hours we have available to make ourselves more cultured, civilized and empathetic.
And, once again, I can’t let an Ebert reference pass without mentioning that Ebert has emailed me. Twice.