The video games as art debate is a ridiculous sham. It seems that many who fall on the "games are not art" side have rarely or never played a video game, often a product of an older generation. If your only experience with video games is hearing news reports about 7 year olds beating up hookers in Grand Theft Auto, then of course your view will be ignorant and bigoted. But that doesn't give critical validity to start creating arguments against that with which you are very unfamiliar. I know surprisingly little about Somalian Islamic Literature, which is why I don't make inflammatory statements about it. To suggest that any video game is incapable of being art is remarkably narrow-minded.

Television and movies choreograph all characters' actions and responses, leaving the viewer as a mere canvas on which the creator's views and reactions are imprinted. Though it's often that a viewer connects with a character and draws individual interpretations, their failures and triumphs can always be placed on the choices of the individual. With gaming, however, the connection can be just as deep, and to some, deeper. When our character fails, we grumble. When our character succeeds, we rejoice. Don't like the outcome? Well, then, you should've done things differently, dummy. While I'm not suggesting that games are better than film, they are simply different and arguably just as valid as high art. At a primitive level, it's not uncommon to punch the sofa in anger after failing a gaming objective. Just the same, it's nearly expected to vocalize with triumph after conquering the same obstacle. Emotional response does not automatically equal art, but creating something which vents one's senses and emotions and appeals to those of others certainly is. Different than stubbing your toe or finding 20 bucks in the street, gaming situations were carefully orchestrated to provide an experience which is dependent on the gamer to interpret. Why should emotions such as fear, love, and sadness be excluded from gaming?

Making my way down from my soapbox, I'll say that perhaps the most intimate display of emotion is crying. Here's the Top 5 moments in gaming that seem to get me every time. SPOILER ALERT: I hate having something ruined just as much as you do, so I'm giving a fair warning right now. This list contains spoilers for several high profile Nintendo titles. None are from the Wii (excluding the Virtual Console), but I will say that the fifth item refers to the WiiWare-bound Cave Story. If you haven't played the game and plan on purchasing it (which you definitely should!), please skip to number four.

Want moar cosplay? We've seen creative folks dressing up to pay tribute to all sorts of DS games, including Nintendogs, Zelda, Professor Layton, Advance Wars, The World Ends With You, and even, um, Brain Training.

As someone who's been following Nintendo for quite awhile, they've almost never failed to surprise me. Though their origins are classic, Nintendo-developed games are continuously refined, retooled, and revitalized. Some may buy into that old standard line used mostly for musical artists that makes you sound cool: "their older stuff is better." Such broad generalizations are silly: to ignore Super Mario Galaxy because of a fetish for Super Mario Bros. would be dogmatic.

But for those of us growing long in the gaming tooth, we're led to wonder where all of these classic IPs are headed. It's hard to imagine a gaming world without Nintendo's current A-listers, but does anyone have a solid idea of what future iterations of our favorite franchises will be like? Now that just about every gangbuster franchise has been successfully embedded in 3D, we're at a loss as to the next big step for gaming.

Some of us have really good ideas, but I'm positively stumped as to where these franchises are going.