Well, here are 2 definitions that I find quite good at defining wide variety of what might be called game:
"At its most elementary level then we can define game as an exercise of voluntary control systems in which there is an opposition between forces, confined by a procedure and rules in order to produce a disequilibrial outcome."
"To play a game is to engage in activity directed toward bringing about a specific state of affairs, using only means permitted by specific rules, where the means permitted by the rules are more limited in scope than they would be in the absence of the rules, and where the sole reason for accepting such limitation is to make possible such activity."
So, I really don't think he has to worry that much about labeling. However, whether "modern" audience will accept his approach to designing games is entirely different matter...tbh, I would like to see him go back to Omikron game design, and build upon that in the future, rather than to continue this, somewhat diluted, Fahrenheit route.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
