I've heard the 'cut scenes are art' argument, for GTA and others -- maybe, but is that proof that video games are art or that you can embed little movies into video games? Never seen the specific bit about the riots, I've only played GTA like four times. I know that art is in the eye of the beholder (within reason), so why do I have the kneejerk reaction that some video games are art and some aren't, which I don't have with music/paintings/etc?
I suspect it's simply the newness of the medium. Back in the old days, I'll bet a lot of folks argued over whether those new-fangled moving-picture-shows could really be considered an art form - but few would doubt it now (in spite of the prevalence of crap in the medium, to this day). Whatever it is, I believe it's art, if it can stir your emotions - not very objective, I know. I remember clearly the first time I thought that way about a video game - it was in FF7, when Aeris dies. I was a little in awe, that a game could get under my skin like that. If anything can pull you in and mess with you emotionally like that, how can you say it's NOT an art form?
Mine was that business with the Wind Fish and Marin in Link's Awakening. Special place in my heart for that little world. I imagine you're probably right that I just can't wrap my head around the idea that a video game as -- sorry -- pointless and idiotic as GTA V is art because it's so new to me. I'll get over it.I remember clearly the first time I thought that way about a video game - it was in FF7, when Aeris dies. I was a little in awe, that a game could get under my skin like that.