It seems that Jane Douglas never got as far as the title of my piece. Otherwise she would have understood that I was addressing computer games, not interactive art. I don't think Richard Schechner's "I don't think" carries the intellectual weight it was perhaps intended to carry. In fact I don't think it even qualifies as a commentary. Together these two cases of non-communicative self-promotion show the current sad state of discussion on and around computer games: you can say pretty much anything you like if you don't care to define the concepts you use. Douglas and Schechner won't or can't define their concepts and I'm not interested in guessing what's behind their idiosyncrasies. As there is no ground for discussion, I see no reason to bother to repeat myself.

back to Ludology introduction