In my philosophy (and yeah, I xcall myself the only IT-Philosopher far and wide !
),
a game ceases to be a game, if the things that make a game a game are removed - and replced by something else.
This "something else" can be various things. "Mass appeal" is just one example.
In my philosophy, if a game is developed the way that it is meant to create good sales - or, to be more specific, more profits - then the "game" thin in a game is removed and replaced by ... well, so that this game ceases to xist anymor, and becomes instead a "tool to generate profits".
A tool. Not a game.
The "fun factor" can still be there, but imho the fun factor is an integral part of what makes a game a game.
But ... still a "fun factor" or *ny* factor that makes a game a game can be
exploited.
Exploited to gain more mass-appeal, for example.
And - from the point on ... well, the act of exploiting something in itself renders the thing that is exploited (in)to a tool that can be exploited, so to say.
It's a bit difficult to explain what I mean. If I exploit something, the act of an exploitation implies that the exploited something is not seen as the thing it is in itself, but rather as something that can be used, and that means, to be exploited.
Hence my thought/philosophy that if a game - or any thing - is being used as a a convenient tool, then it most certainly loses something of what it was meant to be.
Therefore I see some danger in how's the industry going on today. It treats games as tool for income, and humans as objects (I once had made up a philosophy of what i called "Objectiovism", wherein all things - and especially humans - can be degraded into objects that can be used (as tools), and thus this "Objectivism2 is in regards to humans nothing but de-humanization).
It's imho a difference if we say
"Games by Gamers for Gamers"
or
"Games by Businessmen for Gamers"
or, even worse
"Games by Economists for Gamers"
and the worst of it all, imho:
"Games by Hedge Fonds for Gamers"
and
"Games by Lawyers for Gamers"
See the differences ?
Uh, English as the second language ... How am I supposed to explain what i mean if I can only find words like "thing" ?
