Katherine Isbister, at the beginning of chapter 1 of How Games Move Us, compares how games try to create a specific emotional experience to other kinds of media (novels, movies, music…). She uses the example of musicians using a minor key (a specific technique) to evoke a feeling of sadness or anxiety. She also ties this to film directors’ use of close-up shots to create intimacy. Then, she makes the argument that “games differ from other media in one fundamental way: they offer players the chance to influence outcomes through their own efforts.” I completely agree with this statement and don’t have any problems with it. However, next she quotes Sid Meier, the designer for Civilization who says “a [good] game is a series of interesting choices”, and this is where I start to have a bit of an issue. For this argument, I will use the example of Portal 2 (pretty much my favorite game of all time). Portal 2 has a set linear plot that you cannot deviate from. There are no choices to be made that change the game in any way. Going based off of what Isbister and Meier are saying, Portal 2 is not a good game. Not only do I disagree with that, but there is a large community of players that share my view of the game. While, yes, there are “choose your own adventure” type of games and they often are quite good, I think it is unfair to say that, strictly speaking, a “good” game is a series of interesting choices.