Until last class, I had never heard the term "serious games." Wikipedia defines them as "...a software application developed with game technology and game design principles for a primary purpose other than pure entertainment" (WIKI). It makes sense that this shift in conciseness occurred during the 90's at a time when all technology was becoming a utilitarian commodity. Now, I think it would be more difficult for me to distinguish the differences between a "serious" game and a not "serious" game. Although games may be intended for pure entertainment, it is difficult to believe that they are not also capable of functioning as subversive education or literacy, especially with the high quality graphics being produced.
It seems like deeming a game "serious" or not "serious" is the same as choosing to define yourself as a pacifist or not. Everything has a latent content that will affect a person, especially games which are so involved and participatory.
The game I have chosen this week is a prime example of the kind of pacifism I am describing. It is Kuma Games "Kuma War". A game where headlines are literally torn from the real world and then made into a war gaming scenario where one must fight the enemy. Whether gamers and the industry consider this a "serious" game is unclear to me. This very issue has raised much controversy and praise in the media. Is it possible for such a game to be purely entertainment? Can any game, or art, ever be pure entertainment?
http://www.kumagames.com/
http://www.gamesfirst.com/index.php?id=884
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serious_game