“Weekend Pluralism,” I’m calling it. A small showcase of non-elitist writing on video games or other such non-elitist things, to lighten things up and such. Just need to search such writings out and I’ll be set.
I think the last paragraph on page 4 showcases the back-and-forth nature of the writer. He states something to the effect of “You should find your own truth of what games are,” which sort of renders the article useless, and then follows that sentence up with “…so you can make the the most efficient, fun games they can possibly be,” which asserts that games MUST be “fun,” which invalidates the “find your own truth” advice he just gave.
Also, he gives the label “Enemies of the Decision” to game elements that he doesn’t like.
Articles on story/narrative in games seems to bring out the really obnoxious commentators it seems. Commentators smugly trying to assert their personal opinion as fact, claiming “games are actually THIS.” And when they don’t do that, they just default to “if I wanted story I’d read a book,” as if they thought the article writer was specifically talking to them or something.
An article about Dear Esther.
Starts out as a fair criticism of the game, but then suddenly turns into the same old “this will give younger developers the wrong ideas” and “if you like this kind of thing, there are better mediums for it.”
No, Mr. Goren, developers aren’t wasting their time when making a film-like game, because there’s people who like that type of game. Forcing people to adhere to some fictional Overlord of Gaming’s commandments won’t automatically produce better experiences.
(Also, I suspect his first name isn’t actually Blackjack. Again, why the anonymity on a site for discussing the “art and business of making games?”)