This saucy and slightly controversial quote brought you courtesy of Official Nintentdo Magazine UK, in a recent interview with PlatinumGames.

Combining games and book-learning has always been a sticky point, generally because people seem to think that it's a battle over "fun" and "not fun," which isn't necessarily the case. First of all, the word "education" sounds more official than "learning," which makes the quote harder to pin down. Learning happens in all video games, because gamers have to adjust to control schemes, enemy attack patterns, and so on. On the other hand, "education" sounds a bit more formal and applicable to every day life, right? Dictionary.com's first definition is: "the act or process of imparting or acquiring general knowledge, developing the powers of reasoning and judgment, and generally of preparing oneself or others intellectually for mature life."

The key words here are reasoning and judgment, things I believe many games develop. But where do we draw the line between a game that makes on learn, and an educational game?

In Myst, players often resorted to taking page upon page of notes to keep up with the game's demanding puzzles. The kind of knowledge the game tested could fall under logical ability, as well as "common sense." In its sequel Riven, players had to figure out which written characters equaled which numbers, and that puzzle involved some basic arithmetic. Would someone draw the line here? I think that definition would be too narrow.

The problem with "educational games" is that they want to bridge the gap between interactive learning tool and video game. Games that ask for the application of too much real-world knowledge seem to invite tedium and repel new players (besides some anomalies like Brain Age). And yet, many people devote years of their lives to studying and mastering every aspect of a game like Starcraft, which requires a huge deal of memorization, pattern recognition, and strategic thinking. The weird thing is that most of them enjoy it.

Despite the huge variety of "learning styles" out there, it seems that the best learning still happens in the classroom. While games can be good at sharpening our senses and shaping abstract reasoning and behaviors like resource management and pattern recognition, part of the reason why games are so enjoyable is because we get to keep them separate from "education." The work/play dichotomy helps people structure their lives.

So, should games try to teach you math or foreign languages? No. But should they be stimulating and enriching? Yes. Hopefully PlatinumGames agrees with me.

EDIT: I don't understand how that comment got there.