1. If we define “game” as a formal, closed-form system, with a deliberate system of rules and mechanics, the first proposition suggests that critical play exposes/examines dominant values through its internal design: rules, environments, messages, culture and etc.
2. The second proposition suggests an approach to critical play by challenging the traditional “forms” of games, to evoke surprises that lead to discussions of larger social issues.
3. The third proposition suggests an even more extreme approach: building a counter-intuitive game mechanism.
I found the first two propositions relevant to my goals: creating novel/fun and meaningful interactive experiences that are accessible and intimate. Therefore, I do not wish to create counterintuitive games for the sake of evoking thoughts(not the 3rd proposition). However, in order for my experiences to be novel and fun, they can have unusual forms that bring positive surprises(2nd proposition). The first proposition is crucial. I don’t want any of my work to become a technical demonstration, so it’s important that my work is built upon messages/values that I want to convey. By designing a novel set of rules within an experience that I create, for example, generating music with subtle body movements, I can bring an intimate experience where the translation from movements to sound can be felt and enjoyed.