It’s a tireless debate: are video games art? Respected film critic Roger Ebert has long carried the belief that they are not, an opinion that he has defended vigorously throughout the years. There’s one perplexing caveat, though. Ebert hasn’t exactly played many games, outside of a select few. How can one begrudge an entire art form without fully experiencing what it offers?

Ebert today finally owned up to his statements — conceding that he made a mistake. Although still of the opinion that video games are not art, he recognizes his hasty judgement:

I concluded without a definition that satisfied me. I had to be prepared to agree that gamers can have an experience that, for them, is Art. I don’t know what they can learn about another human being that way, no matter how much they learn about Human Nature. I don’t know if they can be inspired to transcend themselves. Perhaps they can. How can I say? I may be wrong. but if ‘m not willing to play a video game to find that out, I should say so. I have books to read and movies to see. I was a fool for mentioning video games in the first place.

While the debate of whether games are art will undoubtedly rage on, it’s nice to see Ebert put the continued rants to bed and accept that games can be considered art. About time, we say.

Okay, kids, play on my lawn [Sun Times]

Follow this author on Twitter.

Read more: Jerry Lawson, Video Game Pioneer, Dies at 71,  Iwata Believes Digital Distribution Not Overtaking Retail for At Least 20 Years,  Silicon Knights Scores CDN$3M Grant, Creates 80 New Jobs In Canada,  Harrison Aims To Prove Activision Wrong With Ghostbusters,  Reggie Downplays OnLive Service