and apols to anyone who reads i thought this was a private message, ah well.

If you get past 2 minutes you’ll know if you like or not.

We’re 5 seperate dudes all involved in gaming on some level and came together to do a night of podd’n then Dan said he would animate and bang like that we have a sembelance of a show..

would be indebted for any advice, though we know we already suck:)

As art is intrinsically subjective by its very nature, the ability to critique it requires a level creativity ability to show their interpretation of the work. It’s in situations like this that a critic can become a artist himself, yet more often then not a good critic’s work gets overshadowed by the original work as that is generally the main focus of the critique, and few critics and critiques gain as high a appreciation in their own right compared to the original artist. If given this premise, to quantify the art of criticism to the scientific method as Daniel Cook seems to want to do, will almost certainly restrict the way we as a culture look at games. Scientific approaches are as valid as any other but it’s ability to produce measureable results within it’s own paradigm can be blinding to the awareness and creation of new paradigms of thinking in reference to the medium.

The approach Cook may provide more value then other methods given the mechanical nature of video games, but people must always be wary looking at the world in absolutes, i could be wrong but it is this idea i think you are trying to get across and the idea i agree with.

Extremely interesting articles from both of you Daniels.

The host is kind of like a video games speculator and the show is brief enough that I can finish a whole episode on my half hour commute to work.

He’s also on web at eatgamer.com but mostly uses the site to notify people of new shows.

You’ve stated my process quite accurately. There are minor quibbles but I appreciate that you engaged with ideas instead of language alone.

To give a bit of history from a self declared empiricist’s point of view:
- My first draft was a functional failure because the majority of reader got caught up in the language. The ideas I cared about expressing got swamped by the emotional outburst.
- Many of my readers have been developers. I did not identify the audience nor the rapidity with which they would post full length rebuttals. (Weekends are usually pretty mellow) My mistake.
- So I spent Sunday as previously planned reworking the essay to state the core concept more effectively. Not the best situation, but better than having a poorly constructed piece of writing doing more harm than good.

There is still work to be done. My examples of writing I enjoy could be broader. Once the silly ‘only developers can write about games’ mutant meme dies down, I’m sure there will be further insightful comments to integrate or clarify.

BTW, I completely understand where Jonathan is coming from.

take care
Danc.

It’s a shame, really, as it’s generating some well-argued feedback.