How can I brazenly declare that computer games are "so-and-so" when compared to board games? What do I know about computer games, anyway?
I've decided to do a little hypothesizing, history, and analysis of computer games in order to try to answer these questions. There appear to be a whole lot of topics to cover, so this will meander on over a series of articles. The subjects will be:
- My own history with electronic, computer, and video games. Why, if I love tech, am I a low tech gamer in a high tech world?
- A historical overview of e, c, and v games, covering well-tread topics, but also including a look at our social expectations and experience with each new genre.
- A look at the potential versus the actual current and future look at e, c, and v gaming. In particular, I want to find out if the popular games are the "trash" of computer gaming in the same way that the popular board games are the trash of board gaming. Maybe there is a hidden computer gaming subculture.
- A look at the best of all gaming cultures, and how they can merge. And market.
Those are just first thoughts. I can almost guarantee that more will be added.
Yehuda
1 comment:
Board games are admittedly fresher and quite more intersting (currently) than video games, at least on the two+ players front.
On the other hand video games -yes, even contemporary sub-par efforts- are definitely better at delivering a story.
Just my 2c. I'll be elaborating, soon.
Cheers,
gnome
:)
Post a Comment