Is this accurate?

Is this accurate?

It is but only because videogames are easier to understand than movies, and movies are easier to understand than literature.

But literature is by far the most rewarding medium as long as the reader is highly educated and well read.

No, vidya is a joke.

>Cracked

I mostly agree with this but Apocalypse Now is definetely better than Heart of Darkness

...

AN >>>>>>>>> HoD

>But literature is by far the most rewarding medium as long as the reader has a strong pre-existing preference for literature over other media

>educated and well read
>preference
>not qualification
stay mad illiteratepleb

movies take more effort to make, and are therefore more impressive.

US GAMERS HUH

combined effort, sure
they are more >impressive
that's subjective ...
objectively literature is a better medium because it engages directly with language - the basis for all abstract thought, it is the most direct communication in the arts

I wouldn't say it's that much better, since Heart Of Darkness is a fantastic work itself. But I agree that Apocalypse Now is better.

...

I think video games can have potentially more an emotional impact because you are feel involved in the story.

that's why I consider it art

video games are shit

"heart of darkness" is a good book to be honest.

>watching AN
>this guy comes on
>cool character, really sets the tone for what Kurtz seems to be, and how idolized he is
>seems kind of out of nowhere, though
>read HoD
>russian character comes on
>"Coppola is a genius"

Probably to most people, actually making the decisions that lead you down that road likely has a greater impact than reading about it to most

I don't really see how Heart of Darkness is anticolonialist tbqh

Winston Rowntree has decided that he hates vidya now, get with the times.

If you are a troglodyte-tier pleb, then yes, a shitty video game has more educative value than one of the greatest novels of the 19th century