Mr Khan said:
I (and Helios) am speaking in Metaphysical terms here. I don't disagree with what you're saying, that the core appeal is the fun that is had and not the goals that are attained, but primarily a game is a goal-oriented diversion, which differentiates it from a toy, though the end goal for both is amusement (which is what a lot of game designers forget) |
That's it, yes.
In additon, you will find it difficult to base a cogent line of reasoning on the peciculars of the common vernacular. You 'play' with a piano - is the piano a toy? You 'play' with swords - are swords toys? You 'play' with words - are words toys? Realize that the word 'play' has a wider application than either 'games' or 'toys', and that it is a fallacy to recklessly equate its many uses.
As for the argumentum ad populum - you know that's a fallacy as well, right? In any case, the academic consensus is that games are, in fact, not toys. I find that perspective quite useful, myself.







