More Criticism of Philosophical Game Design
Mike Gamm writes in Gaming Journal #2:
"Earlier in the term we read the essay, "Philisophical Game Design" by Lars Konzack, in which he says that a game must have at least one dualist philisophical aspect in order to be successful in our society, because this is what gamers want."
My response: I have never made the claim that a game must have at least one dual aspect in order to be succesful in society.
Gamm states further:
"I will use Halo to contradict Konzack's argument: (Key Idea*) that the interaction between philisophical storyline and the choices that a player needs to make are what makes a great game."
That might very well be true, however, since I didn't make the claim in the first place the criticism seems inappropriate. Gamm is arguing against his own straw-man.
Mike Gamm writes in Gaming Journal #2:
"Earlier in the term we read the essay, "Philisophical Game Design" by Lars Konzack, in which he says that a game must have at least one dualist philisophical aspect in order to be successful in our society, because this is what gamers want."
My response: I have never made the claim that a game must have at least one dual aspect in order to be succesful in society.
Gamm states further:
"I will use Halo to contradict Konzack's argument: (Key Idea*) that the interaction between philisophical storyline and the choices that a player needs to make are what makes a great game."
That might very well be true, however, since I didn't make the claim in the first place the criticism seems inappropriate. Gamm is arguing against his own straw-man.
Labels: articles, video game
posted by Lars Konzack at 17:14
1 Comments:
After looking into a number of the articles on your site, I honestly appreciate your technique of writing a blog. I book marked it to my bookmark webpage list and will be checking back soon. Please visit my web site too and tell me how you feel.
Post a Comment
<< Home