I don't know how I missed this, but in last Saturday's Weekend section, Guardian television guru Charlie Brooker confessed that he thinks games are better than television.
After all, speaking in my guise as a so-called TV critic, I can confi dently state that games are markedly better than television. They're more immersive. Consistently more spectacular and surprising. The storylines and scripts are almost always utter rubbish, but that's part of their charm.
Furthermore, as a medium, TV encourages you to switch off your brain and slowly coagulate on the sofa. Video games force you to stay alert. Furthermore, you control them. They start and stop when you like. There's no continuity announcer jabbering over the credits. Your intelligence is rarely insulted, but regularly challenged. There's more invention (and sheer joy) in a single level of any Super Mario platformer you care to mention than most TV series manage in their entire lifespan. PC shooter Half-Life 2 is a sci-fi action thriller; it's 10 times more exciting than the best episode of 24 (which I love).
I highly recommend the entire article. Brooker speaks rather eloquently about why "games are brilliant".
