I think it's particularly telling that the games the court reviewed were those tilting towards "mindless violence". Resident Evil is basically a (slightly) interactive horror film, and it's good at what it does: it scares you pantsless.

So most games are mindless. They're entertainment. Sometimes they're mind-bending. Sometimes they're thought-provoking.

What's the difference between Resident Evil, Night of the Living Dead, and an interactive art installation which parodies zombie culture? In my opinion, technology is moving in such a way that eventually games will be more and more difficult to distinguish from reality. What's the difference between a game character programmed to go on a tirade about the pros and cons of free speech, and a philosopher writing about said pros and cons?

I'm what you might call a hardcore gamer. I've played games a long time. Multiplayer games like Everquest and Anarchy Online do have things to say, about culture, politics, and economics... but a single player experience can express as well. I like the mention of Deus Ex in the article... man, that game was an awesome experience. The message is not the game, it is somewhere in the playing of it, and soaking in it.