Lovely Mixture said:
Different people want different things, we can both agree on that right?
If you bought a shooting game, and 99% of the game was racing. That'd be quite annoying right?
Or say you bought a racing game, and there was only 10% racing.
Distinction helps prevent confusion. People who want gameplay can be less worried about their purchases, people who want their interactive stories can buy them with ease.
I think my problem is that
Dear Esther and, say,
Bioshock: Infinite are the same thing in the same way that
Eraserhead,
The Godfather, and
The Fast and the Furious are the same thing. There is a benefit to the art itself to have all of those as part of the same basic category: film. Sure, the writing is lacking in
Fast, but I guess it has cool effects or something. Some movies don't have a real "plot", but that doesn't mean they aren't movies. It's not a problem to call all of those movies. Nobody goes to see
Fast and comes out annoyed that it didn't address the basic impossiblities of communication in absurd world.
If you want such a strict definiton of "video game" you'll need to come up with some new word to describe the art as a whole. It's absolutely vital to discussion of gaming to be able to consider
Dear Esther and
Super Mario Bros. at the same time. There's no reason to come up with this phrase since "video games" already is the overwhelmingly accepted name. If you want to break "video game" down into various categories like "racing game" and "shooting game", that's fine.