>>49079159Pretty good questions. I am a Ducklet so cannot guess as to the deep reasons why, but I can comment on a few things.
The first point you raise centres on the entire purpose of a game itself. Why do we play games? Why do some of us make new games? In truth there are multiple reasons, and over the course of many years of esoteric hermeneutics (a common Ducklett passtime) I have boiled down five prime reasons for games to exist. I liken them to four tent pegs and one tent pole in the middle.
Peg A: The providence of a simulation, an attempt to render a situation real or imaginary in a detailed and relevant fashion that can be explored on the bus or in your living room, without having to travel to a fantasy world or risk your life in a deep sea dive with sharks.
Peg B: Narrative, which can be executed in a uniquely interative fashion via video games, a plotline where your choices matter.
Peg C: Exercise, a means of pushing ones own abilities against challenges formulated to test aptitudes not normally obvious or easily flexed.
Peg D: Challenge, which centres on either player vs player gameplay or the setting of leaderboards, with the purpose of showing what CAN be done with planning and skill.
CENTRAL TENTPOLE: Escapism, which does not care for detailed fidelity, plot, difficulty or balance - only that the experiene is out of the ordinary for the player and constitute a rupture in the monotony of modern daily life.
Well, as we can see, different games focus on different parts of this schema, but most very successful games hit all five nails on the head fairly firmly. Pokemon is a story, a wildlife emulator, an escape into another world, a way of keeping your strategic mind sharp, and a way of demonstrating greater principles of tactical combat to the world via endless pedantic online discussions.
Different players choose to focus on different things.
>>49079125Welcome, friend.
