He was clearly comfortable critiquing literary type 'classics' as well as 'popcorn' films on a par. I think that his work will continue to make interesting, entertaining, reading as a result with thankfully none of the sensationalism that critics can aim for when they give a film that is actually merely average a terrible 'turkey' rating instead.
Obviously he had a different attitude to games than to films, mainly because games were not fixed- the player could control the speed of the plot and they did not necessarily show the same narrative every time.
I suppose he and Gene Siskel were a forerunners of the 'geek' age of movie criticism, only with a more intellectual, rounded, double act accidentally made up of 2 individuals, approach.
But they don't need people like me to say that - they were famous and respected by movie stars themselves.
Bless you Roger Ebert.
Would you pay less for a humanities degree?