DerekTickle

Qoute: "A more fruitful way of conceiving the question is to consider how much time we spend actually in non-trivial action when "playing" a videogame" (Game Studies Website).

This quote is a true statement because a lot of video games consist of beginning commericals and introductions along with after each level media. It is important to think that a lot of video games consist of non-playing time. Do you agree that video games include a lot of sit and watch graphics? I think this is important in a game because after you finish a level you want there to be a so-called "gift" or "reward" for completing the level.

On a personal note, I remember playing StarFox 64 and it was a lot of fun. If I can remember correctly the character was like similiar to a fox? I always thought it was a fun game to play with a lot of graphics.

For example, when your just watching someone play a videogame don't you become so into the game that when the player makes a mistake you say, "Oh darn! Here let me try." A lot of pleasure can develop just by watching someone play the video game because of the interactivity and fun.

Thesis: Although video games offer "onlookers" the pleasure of watching someone play a video game, having fun, and also developing a sequence for winning they suggest that having a lot of movies and graphics can be non-ergodicity.

Does this thesis statement seem true while playing video games while friends or family are watching?