Playing what we love

Do the games we play define us, or do we define the games we play? It is an insane question, since the answer is most certainly a bit of both. A game that delights one type of player may bore another, as some of the most popular games have shown. Love “Call of Duty”? Finding someone who thinks it destroys the fabric of humanity is easier than catching a Pidgey in “Pokémon Go.”

Whenever a game reaches the heights of success, an equal rise in dislike and distaste often accompanies it. I would argue this is healthy; games should elicit powerful reactions. They should play to different tastes and engage us in different ways. If they didn’t, they would never find new ways to challenge our skills or introduce us to new ways of playing.

A great example of this is in “The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt.” It is easy to say, “Why is this Gwent game here? I want to play my action/RPG, not a collectible card game.” However, what about the players who had never played collectible card games before? Gwent offered an opportunity to challenge their notions about what they like in games. In some cases, decisions like this could help someone’s gaming palate expand. In other cases, it could just reinforce a previously known dislike — but you don’t really know what you dislike until you try it. That’s why I think it is important for games to push their boundaries and test the established limits of a genre.