Because it's a self-proclaimed game. It has no purpose other than to entertain. It is not intended
to edify or instruct, merely to amuse.
And what about a painting? What does it *do*?
Should art instruct, though?
'Art for art's sake' and so on.
Snakes and ladders? Kiss chase? Conkers?
Dogs playing cards, that kitten on the washing line. Janet & John, Run Spot Run.
Does that help with illustrating the futility of your argument?
I bet you make 'pew pew' noises when you should the baddies, don't you?
Do you dress up like the Milky Bar Kid?
And a video game is somehow inherently incapable of edification? Or is it just GTA?
You know full well just how much of a massively subjective argument that is
And, I'd suggest, the same people that damned the works of Bacon, Dali, Wright of Derby, Cezanne, Seurat or many others displayed similarly puritanical and massively parochial attitudes at the time too.
"waaaughhh it doesn't fit my learned rigid constructs. DECRY IT!!"
There's no reasoning with someone incapable of reason
