A King here, a Princess there, and don't forget the flying monkeys and wealthy bachelors.
I have been disallowed from taking the vantage that comes of seeing one's boyhood as a closed thing, and this has much to do with Microcomputer games (but this would be nothing as to one whose boyhood was yet plundered after he became a grandfather).
We consider some of our knack at grasping facts to come from the playing of games. But games are an app for an effect, and such an app requires a product manager. Thus the facts presented in the game are filtered through a person who is responsible for the success of it.
Product managers are very seldom people with artistic sense.
The very thing about art is to be a control freak. This is exactly the opposite of micromangement: a control freak doesn't want to know why you didn't do it right. People who are not artistic follow contemporary fashion, such as to make sequences of marriages as if their life is to be a carrier signal with the letters M and D.
Curiosity is a dangerous thing. Note, however, that there are things that we'd like to know, and there are things that we do in order to see what happens. I'm unable to stand on my head. It is for lack of trying. When we want to know something, we sometimes find we have to shut up, because when we ask, we get a response such that we feel like someone has just bounced on our head.
Making a man that can walk and jump is the easy part of making a game. Making him walk to the gallows to his death if you don't guess a word right is surely one the product manager of which would advise parental guidance for.
'What do you mean it's all about opportunity?'
I don't know if my dad shared his game with his friends. I know that a few of them challenged each other with the Microcomputers that they owned. The thing of a game was to finish it, and this was the problem we had with many of our games: they seemed to require more persistence than we possessed. For the sake of completion I was able to use Microcomputer emulators, which was at a time that my interest in computer games was waning.
There was a time I used games as a distraction and nothing else. But some of them required us to accept a challenge which required the persistence of a very bored child to surmount. And some of them, with product managers who were more cynical than those who know how to drive cynical product managers to distraction, suggested that no-one exercises their free will.
All you do is give a thing an instruction, and it carries it out. Exercising free will carries the risk of disciplinary action. Entering into debate with the teacher is not a thing that is done when the game is about not having free will.
Or rejecting it.
Choosing to play a game is not something I often do, because I am obsessive about the ones that are about persistence. And the ones that are not are much less interesting than coding for fun. Not to mention that I've been FOSS confused.
Some games provide great conversational matter for dinner parties. Those who've decided that not arguing with the teacher is the only way a man can get all he needs might use analogies that come of games to support their packaged life style. It isn't too difficult to conceive that such people might take to insisting that wiggling the joystick and bashing the buttons carries an element of risk. Certainly if a simulated sport becomes sufficiently realistic we're likely to find a use for the phrase, real thing. In fact, because motorsport became too dangerous, it may well be said that driving games are better than the real thing. Certain it is for me for one in which we can drive around in a pink Cadillac.
Solve crimes? How did you get that car?
Realism of course provides endless conversation matter, but special effects are no differen