But before I start, I need to make a distinction that I think is important. You mention ‘art games’ as a game that ‘intentionally portray a deeper meaning…’ and I agree with that definition. However, that’s not really the point I was making in the post. I’m saying that ALL games embed the creator’s worldview and often it’s UNINTENTIONAL. I don’t think the people who made The Sims of Fable II or Pong were trying to make a statement. But the fundamental way they understand reality will be reflected in some way in the virtual realities they create in a game. Unless I have a concept of things like fair play or competition or even the pythagorean theory, the game I make will reflect that.

Which dovetails with your question. Many of the scientists of the Renaissance (and later) pursued science as a way of knowing more about God. The thinking went that God was a rational, logical being who created an ordered and knowable universe. To learn more about the universe was to learn more God. G isn’t trying to make any kind of point or convey a specific message, but a belief that a thing like gravity exists and is predictable underlies the primary game mechanic.

I can image most people saying “so what” – fair enough. For a game like G, there just isn’t that much to it. It also has a lot less of an impact when the game displays rules that you already agree with. But haven’t you ever played a game that somehow felt like it was cheating? The boss seemed to play by different rules than your character or playing or a harder level simply made baddies spawn in a room that you KNOW you cleared (L4D drove me nuts on this!). That’s the kind of thing I’m talking about. Games convey the nature of reality in the rules they establish.

I have a sincere question for you, though. What would you say is the meaning of shooting missiles with gravity? What is the worldview of that mechanic?

Great post, love it.