The New York Times Takes On "Angry Birds," "Tetris" And Other "Stupid Games"

The New York Times Takes On "Angry Birds," "Tetris" And Other "Stupid Games"

The New York Times' latest article on gaming, by one Sam Anderson, approaches our favorite topic with a mix of adolescent longing and high-minded dismissal. The good news? You can also just destroy the whole page with the "stupid game" located just under the article's title.

It's worth reading, though, especially for the passages that touch on why exactly we love those stupid little games so much. Anderson speaks with indie designer Zach Gage and Drop7 creator (and the director of NYU's prestigious Game Center) Frank Lantz, who both have plenty of value to add to the discussion.

"Lantz’s best explanation is that Drop7 occupies a 'hinge in the universe' that is at once mathematical (it allows you to play between the ordinal and cardinal meanings of a number) and spiritual: it holds you in a place between conscious problem-­solving and pure intoxication," Anderson writes. "Which, come to think of it, is probably the cognitive signature of all the great stupid games."

For the most part, we prefer just to call them "great games." Let us know what you think in the comments or on Twitter.

Tags: angry-birds, zynga, tetris, new-york-times, casual-games
blog comments powered by Disqus