Thing is, Blizzard can't properly make a guide for WoW, it would be out of date within a month. They're constantly adjusting abilities, adding new events and areas to the world, adding new items. The game is constantly evolving, and as such, game guides are only good for a month as they are, then they'll have to be updated.
The only way Blizzard would be able to make a game guide would be an online one, but then there's already a few of those that have a much more extensive guide than they'd ever put out.
Actually, watch as Michael Jackson becomes richer, as he bought the rights to the Beatles songs. He bid Paul McCartney out (while they were presumably friends).
Also, U2 is the richest band in the world, richer than the Beatles or the Stones.
Just because something stops being appreciated, or stops being viewed does not mean it stops becoming art. For example, if I write a poem/song/story/etc. and it's about something private that I don't wish to share, it is still art. Art has nothing to do with how many viewers there are, but it has to do with the creator and a single viewer, even if that is yourself, if you die, it still is art, maybe lost forever, but art. Ebert seems to be arguing that any of the lost works of Leonardo or Rapheal cease being art because no one sees them anymore, but what about the people that DID see them? His argument that games won't be enjoyed in 500 years is completely idiodic, as many have pointed out, most movie media will be lost.
However, many games ARE being presurved on the net, there is www.everyvideogame.com and tons of other sites that let you play all your old classics. Movies are being ripped and backed up as Divx or whatever encoding people are using. Technology is a way of perserving art, not losing it, especially when it comes to the net.
As far are movies being art, I agree, there are few that are art. Most art can be broken down into formula's and..imitated (best word I can find). Take music, there's so much uninspired music, or movies, how many action movies or chick flicks take a new concept? This is something that has always been happening, just call them 'wanna be artists'.
A lot of people have already mentioned older games that came from from independant developers, however I think he was speaking of new games with new ideas...to which he's still wrong. Natural Selection is a great example, a brand new concept and is continuing to go strong. If they ever finish porting it to the Source engine, I think it will be one of the strongest games of the year with some proper advertising.
Slashdot Mirror
hmm Atmosphere, that sounds..profitable. Race you to the patent office!
Thing is, Blizzard can't properly make a guide for WoW, it would be out of date within a month. They're constantly adjusting abilities, adding new events and areas to the world, adding new items. The game is constantly evolving, and as such, game guides are only good for a month as they are, then they'll have to be updated. The only way Blizzard would be able to make a game guide would be an online one, but then there's already a few of those that have a much more extensive guide than they'd ever put out.
Actually, watch as Michael Jackson becomes richer, as he bought the rights to the Beatles songs. He bid Paul McCartney out (while they were presumably friends).
Also, U2 is the richest band in the world, richer than the Beatles or the Stones.
Just because something stops being appreciated, or stops being viewed does not mean it stops becoming art. For example, if I write a poem/song/story/etc. and it's about something private that I don't wish to share, it is still art. Art has nothing to do with how many viewers there are, but it has to do with the creator and a single viewer, even if that is yourself, if you die, it still is art, maybe lost forever, but art. Ebert seems to be arguing that any of the lost works of Leonardo or Rapheal cease being art because no one sees them anymore, but what about the people that DID see them? His argument that games won't be enjoyed in 500 years is completely idiodic, as many have pointed out, most movie media will be lost. However, many games ARE being presurved on the net, there is www.everyvideogame.com and tons of other sites that let you play all your old classics. Movies are being ripped and backed up as Divx or whatever encoding people are using. Technology is a way of perserving art, not losing it, especially when it comes to the net. As far are movies being art, I agree, there are few that are art. Most art can be broken down into formula's and..imitated (best word I can find). Take music, there's so much uninspired music, or movies, how many action movies or chick flicks take a new concept? This is something that has always been happening, just call them 'wanna be artists'.
A lot of people have already mentioned older games that came from from independant developers, however I think he was speaking of new games with new ideas...to which he's still wrong. Natural Selection is a great example, a brand new concept and is continuing to go strong. If they ever finish porting it to the Source engine, I think it will be one of the strongest games of the year with some proper advertising.