this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2026
40 points (97.6% liked)
Games
21239 readers
276 users here now
Tabletop, DnD, board games, and minecraft. Also Animal Crossing.
Rules
- No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, or transphobia. Don't care if it's ironic don't post comments or content like that here.
- Mark spoilers
- No bad mouthing sonic games here :no-copyright:
- No gamers allowed :soviet-huff:
- No squabbling or petty arguments here. Remember to disengage and respect others choice to do so when an argument gets too much
- Anti-Edelgard von Hresvelg trolling will result in an immediate ban from c/games and submitted to the site administrators for review. :silly-liberator:
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
to be honest i agree with the article where the vast majority of the discourse was driven by gamers seeking validation by attaching their hobby to the prestigious title of "art". i remember people were going buckwild for anything that might indicate games have a positive effect. they improve your reaction time your socal skills your problem solving etc etc. on one hand yes it's juvenile but on the other hand games were still treated as for kids essentially, and by extension gamers were treated as juveniles so why would anyone be shocked that the reaction to it was also juvenile?
also some of the arguments don't make sense to me. im not an art philosopher so i particularly don't care about this stuff but if everything is either art or can be art, i don't see how that is a useful label at all.
Yeah tbh, like i was a child at the time all this went down and i was just using any and all arguments to justify why i should have more time playing with my toys like all kids have since the beginning of time. It's weird and kind of offputting to think about the grown adults that were ig 'on my side' getting so mad that a lifelong art critic didn't think much of their hobby.