The argument that games need to be fun, or need to constantly force events and action (violence/dialogue/narrative) on players seriously kneecaps what games can do. If you have a requirement that games need to have specific goals, or need to be fun, you are limiting the ability to approach ideas and themes in ways that are interesting. Let's use a game about ennui, for example. To cover the subject of ennui, it doesn't make much sense to approach it with fun and constant excitement. An interesting take on the theme would be to create the game to not only show the theme through art design and character interaction, but to actually make the player feel it through gameplay.

What I'm saying is that there are certain themes and ideas that don't lend themselves to conventional approaches. Some things need a loose narrative, or no substantial narrative at all. Some need to be vague or else they would be doing a disservice to the material. In a game about alienation, it would be more poignant to use a loose narrative and be vague about characters and details, because it would make the player feel alienated. Using a conventional narrative style and being too direct would tell the player they feel alienated. There is a motto in filmmaking, "show don't tell." It needs to be adopted to game design (though slightly altered, with interaction placed together "show").



Fortunately we are in the midst of what could be considered the first true creative movement in gaming. In the last few years, with all the various development programs available to everyone/anyone, we have seen a major increase in expressive and personal games (Jason Rohmer's Passage for example). This isn't to say that there weren't expressive and personal games released before the early to mid-00s, but rarely were there games designed with expression taking priority over accessibility or marketability.



This approach to game design will initially frustrate people, like it did with me, but with an open mind and the abandonment of what you think games should be, you might learn to love it as many already have. This apprehension about change is normal for artistic mediums, they all go through it, and soon people will realize that it isn't threatening them or the style of game they love, it is adding a new option for curious gamers. For someone like me, who has grown increasingly bored with the typically derivative sequels and new IPs churned out every year, this movement is a breath of fresh air and a reason to stick with gaming.

Saying games need to be fun, is just like saying film/literature/theater/etc. needs to be fun; it's silly and shows you to be narrow-minded. I'm not saying you all of a sudden need to respect a game because it seems arty, but instead of dismissing it because it isn't fun or you didn't understand what it means, approach it with a different mindset. Perhaps it will open itself up to you, and you'll find something to appreciate.

Just remember to keep an open mind.