Ebert blogs about games again. Apparently he's reviewed a game.

So, Roger Ebert has previously come out and said that games can't be art.  Now Ebert has come out and basically said, "Ugh, I wish I hadn't opened that can of worms." 
 
So, let me blow your mind: Roger Ebert wrote a game review in 1994.  In his latest blog, he mentioned a game I'd never heard of: Cosmology of Kyoto.  He wrote a positive review of it in 1994 in Wired magazine.  Say what? 
 
Anyways, I wrote a response to Ebert's latest blog.  Who knows if it'll get approved. 
 
I was going to post my response here, but I'm a dope and copied it without pasting it anywhere and then I copied the URL of his blog.  Yup. 
 
So, basically my point was that if writing that works its way into non-interactive media is art, why does something being interactive make writing non-art?   Also, I pointed out that, while some games have branching/dynamic narratives, you don't have total freedom and the game designer(s) are always trying to funnel you through some specific experience, even if you have a few specific experiences to choose from.
 
I guess I'll leave it at that until it gets approved (if it does).  Blah. 
 
Edit: Oops.  There was already a thread about this.