I shouldn't view cross-sampled gaming in this rather adulterous manner, and neither should you. And luckily, from perusing the forums and gathering Google feedback, it appears I'm kind of a glitch. Very few seem to share this freakishly bizarre set of singular platform-bonded morals.

You routinely collect and horde every useless rusted-out piece of spider-infested crap, even if it means crawling slower than old people screw across the entire game map to do so—over and over and over, until you no longer believe in humanity.

Tasks, hobbies, jobs, events: these things have a natural beginning, middle and end. A built-in life-cycle inherent to the mediums intended for fulfillment. Doesn't matter if it's a cigar or a football game, it's meant to be finished.

PC games without manuals are like keyboards without mice. But is there more to these booklets than a pile of printed musty paper?

Are great PC titles truly so morally polarizing? The ongoing trend seems to suggest so. For a while, I never questioned this dynamic. Seemed natural. You blast kindly old ladies in the abdomens with quadruple-barreled napalm-missile guns, you get a slight nudge in the ol' evil dial. Makes sense. At...

It’s our sad and bitter nature to abuse and neglect that which was once hallowed or unique. PC gaming expressions are, by far, no exception. What was once priceless and witty becomes strip-mined, overindulged, and mass produced to nausea.

Naturally, whenever I end up bashing/criticizing/defecating upon a game, or even sometimes, defending a certain game that others manically despise, the typical question surfaces: “Oh yeah? So what would your ideal game be, Mr. Stabs-the-Heart-of-Devs-a-Lot?”

What could possibly go wrong?

...betrayal is more fun than a trip to meet Captain America

Machinarium is the stuff that gaming revolutions are made of.