Video Games as Art?

The Ebert article really stuck out to me. I feel like he didn't look up the definition of 'art.' According to dictionary.com there are twenty results and the first one is "the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance" (Summary of Aesthetic Principles http://www.movierapture.com/summary.htm ) "Film achieves its artistic potential by offering experiences that are emotionally and easthetically profound - stories that resonate deep inside us, reveal truths about humanity, and alter our perception of the world" (Rodosh). While not all games are created for this purpose, there are some that have kept many people through the tough times. A game that asks the player to make a moral decision like whether or not to help someone out or a game where you are held accountable for your actions are rare but there are some. Most people who have played video games have found at least one game that is either "beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance" to them and maybe only them. Isn't that what art is? Art can appall people or appeal to people, its all about personal preference. Just because Ebert hasn't found a video game he likes, doesn't mean that he can dismiss video games as art.

(SPOILER ALERT)
I can think of a few instances where a video game has moved me to tears, but I will only write about one. How many people have played Final Fantasy VII? How many of those people do you think felt the pain that Cloud felt as he watched Aeris (Aerith) get run through be Sephiroth's masamune? What about the pain felt through the words that come from Cloud himself as he is yelling at Sephiroth? "Shut up!!!!! The cycle of nature and your stupid plan don't mean a thing. Aeris is gone. Aeris will no longer talk, no longer laugh, cry... or get angry... what about us... what are we supposed to do? What is this pain? My fingers are tingling. My mouth is dry. My eyes are burning!" The pain is as real as reading it in a book, the scene could be acted out on a stage or for a movie, would you be moved? Does just reading it make your fingers tingle, your mouth dry or your eyes burn? Does the emotional movement on the player make it art? Is it art because the player can't change the outcome of the this part of the game?

Chrono Trigger also comes to mind, where you are held accountable for your actions at a fair during your trial. If you eat the old man's lunch you are a thief, if you pick up the princess's necklace before talking to her you are accused of caring about the jewelry more than her well-being, etc, etc. Does that make it art for Daniel Radosh?

I agreed with Croal (I assume that is the author of this piece) that "[i]f, as Ebert believes, art is created by an artist, who is the artisht when we go to see a production of "Romeo & Juliet"?" Ebert says that Shakespeare was an artist, but during his time look at the critics of his plays and now they are classics, just like the critics of film when it was young and now look at where movies have gone. In just a few years, where could video games go? We could be like the guy in the youtube video and say Killzone 2 is the 2015 and that is the future of gaming and the future is now. The video game medium is young and growing, what does the future hold for it?