A response to Ted Reuter's op-ed

We talked
yesterday about an op-ed criticizing the practice of
teaching game design at universities. Today there is a rebuttal from Shawn Rider, the editor-in-chief of GamesFirst, and also an adjunct lecturer in the Department of Media Study, SUNY at Buffalo teaching "new media design and critical approaches to videogames and game design." This makes him exceptionally well qualified to lambaste the "naive moral agenda" of Dr. Ted Reuter, or should be call him...
Dr. Politics. Check out his site if you want to read more from Reuter or look into any one of his ten hardhitting political science books, including his quadrology: The 267 Stupidest Things Democrats Ever Said, The 267 Stupidest Things Republicans Ever Said, 449 Stupid Things Democrats Have Said, and 449 Stupid Things Republicans Have Said. Now we've established credentials, let's see some blood!

Rider's most potent response is explaining the role of academic game programs in changing the flaws that Reuter himself thinks are so endemic in the industry. On the role of women in games Rider says, "...to block game design from becoming a mainstream discipline is to force game development to remain an exclusive old-boys club, away from which it is trying to evolve." On violence in videogames he responds, "In fact, most of the games available from [Carnegie Mellon's] Experimental Gameplay Project are
not violent in nature, and they are some of the most intriguing new gameplay concepts we've seen." By turning Reuter's argument against itself, Rider has disarmed his opponent, his argument proven ineffective. Rider writes, "Limiting the freedom of individuals to practice and study the form will only slow its development. It will not prevent it. Rueter and his ilk have much more to gain by working to educate young developers to create better, more interesting and more fulfilling games."

[Thanks, Aaron]