Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Johnsy" data-source="post: 9855647" data-attributes="member: 7055031">The anology is a good one, but not for the reasons you use it. Balls that used inflated bladders versus ones that use a synthetic material actually behave differently. As such, this leads to qualitative differences in how the game is played when it shifts from bladder to rubber. Modern football (or soccer, if you prefer) is a very different game now, for various reasons, but partly also because the medium through which it is realised has also changed (including the equipment).By the same analogy, digital tools are not just quality of life enhancements, instead they subtlety begin to change the nature of the play experience itself. This is not inherently good or bad, and depends on what type of experience you are seeking. But… and I think this is the point people are repeatedly making, right now we all have a choice of play from purely analogue to purely digital and everything in between. This is a good thing.If the game moves to being purely digitally mediated it will inevitably exclude those who don’t want to play that way and, more significantly, change the type of game that they want to play. Not because they are just Luddites, but because the properties of the medium through which it is played has changed, which alters the game itself.</blockquote>