I do agree he didn't state the point quite clearly, and left a lot of room for misinterpretation.
So I'll just add I support his line in the sense that taking games in general too seriously has led to escalating costs while reducing mainstream appeal.
As in I don't say it's the serious games. I say it's the thought that serious games should be the dominant type. We got plenty of serious games in the 16-bit era, as noted. But not only was there a healthy mix of less serious games, the serious games were not so expensive.
Now the thought of a AAA game isn't that it's really good, but that it costs a lot of money and looks it. That is the kind of serious that is hurting the industry.
A flashy-first game is awesome when it comes out. A great-first game is awesome forever.
Plus, just for the hell of it: Kelly Brook at the 2008 BAFTAs
