You make a lot of different claims here, but I’ll respond to what seems to be your overarching concern:

If art compels us to draw upon the imagination, what are the standards of expression that make art compelling for us?

I think the degree to which you push the idea borders on nonsense - you’re purposely setting aside the aesthetic and gameplay values that these games introduce in favor of a blanket categorization of art. The games of course have their own aesthetic integration; whether or not *you* found much meaning in it is beside the point. “Certainly it’s not high art” - there is no doubt, but I’m arguing that it is a form of artistic expression and requires us to take a less dogmatic, and certainly less categorical approach, to understanding what it means. That was the point of this article: understanding games as art.

As for my personal opinion.. I do not see IF as the beginning and end of “true literary narrative”. I certainly don’t believe that the PC is any more developed than in other genres. And while I am sympathetic to the idea that IF has refined (in some ways) narrative expression, I have seen few writers take their time to explain just how IF is meaningful. That is the point of this post: offering a language for understanding games, rather than simply offering just another opinion of why I think [X] is good, or why [Y] is bad.

As for characterizing players of The Sims or GTA as being particular kinds of people, I’m not sure that such kinds of overgeneric, empty, and frustrated name-calling offers anything new to the discussion.

I apologize for the rather terse response, but like The Brainy Gamer I like to keep the tone of this blog civil and respectful - so please, in the future keep this in mind.

IF is not a sandboxed pointless mirror of reality: it’s true literary narrative with well developed player character with its own traits, code of conduct and objectives. Unless the game is about buglarly, you’re not supposed to be creating havoc in a museum by stealing paintings or by ruining them.

It makes perfect sense in the context and those players willing to quit because they can’t take a piss in the painting are better off playing The Sims or GTA indeed. There they can be mediocre artists and record their fun antics to show to friends in youtube.

Is she visiting her late husband? Is she looking forward to follow him? Is she just having a nightmare? Sure, this kind of imaginative, speculative dialogue is nice to try out, except this sounds just like the ELIZA simulation of a Rogerian psychiatrist: you get nothing but yourself.

I can get nothing but myself by having imaginary dialogues with any piece of crap, including such pointless, non-narrative stuff. It’s like the authors are saying: “Here’s the theme, the title and here’s a paper and pen, now write it to me”

Certainly it’s not high art, which is not without messages or purposes like you keep talking. High art is like jokes: not everyone gets them and those who get, also get something which relates specifically to them.

This is more like abstract paintings or atonal music. Yes: no messages, no point, so it’s all up to you to invent hidden meanings trying to read too deep into an inconsequential author.

I prefer feeding my fish. I can speculate whether they are happy or even if they are aware I take care of them. Am I God to them? Do they think? Do they dream of bubbles? Yes, very nice being an author for others, specially when I’m looking forward for being amazed and pleasantly surprised…