Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8644674" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Okay. Why use a digital display? The two are identical in accuracy (since the analog one is just a display, being digital either way in terms of its timekeeping). What does digital give you that analog doesn't? Clarity. That's my whole point. It is objectively faster and easier to read a digital display than an analog one. If the purpose of the clock or watch is to be functional and not simply  pretty, then clarity becomes a rather important virtue.And yet with game design, where the whole point of the rules IS very specifically to be functional, since that's literally all they are, clarity has been consistently sacrificed for aesthetics, specifically wanting LESS clarity. Why? That seems a very strange pattern. It would be like choosing the analog display because it is harder to read.You may note that my earlier posts in the thread said essentially this. I am aware.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8644674, member: 6790260"] Okay. Why use a digital display? The two are identical in accuracy (since the analog one is just a display, being digital either way in terms of its timekeeping). What does digital give you that analog doesn't? Clarity. That's my whole point. It is objectively faster and easier to read a digital display than an analog one. If the purpose of the clock or watch is to be [I]functional[/I] and not simply [I] pretty[/I], then clarity becomes a rather important virtue. And yet with game design, where the whole point of the rules IS very specifically to be functional, since that's literally all they are, clarity has been consistently sacrificed for aesthetics, specifically wanting LESS clarity. Why? That seems a very strange pattern. It would be like choosing the analog display [I]because it is harder to read[/I]. You may note that my earlier posts in the thread said essentially this. I am aware. [/QUOTE]

Verification