There’s a very, very fine line between “really clever” and “too clever to be true” when it comes to critical analysis. Whether it’s a book, a game, or a film, a lot of so-called brilliant people cook up some ridiculous theses and wind up on the wrong side of that line. On the other hand, people unfamiliar with critical analysis tend to assume it’s all nonsense, but that’s no better - there are a lot of good things to be said about themes and metaphors even when they weren’t a part of the author’s intent.
Critical analysis of games is still in a weird position right now, because most people - and most gamers, too - don’t accept the idea that gameplay can be used to convey meaning. The other problem is that gaming lacks a lot of the specialized terms and knowledge that other mediums have developed, so analysis of games tend to be done through a literary or film-centric lens. So it’s a real treat to find analysis of the actual interactive part of a game, not just its narrative or themes.
Revisited: Final Fantasy IX’s Mechanics of Identity by Joseph Leray (of Destructoid and Electric Hydra fame) is one of those rare pieces that actually gets mainstream exposure. I’m sure there’s plenty of critical analysis going on somewhere, but it’s certainly not getting published on Destructoid and Kotaku and driving millions of hits. Which is a real shame. FF IX Revisited is a “really clever” piece, and it’s pretty well grounded in actual evidence and logical conclusions. So it’s sad to see the couple of comments saying “sorry, but you’re full of shit, it’s just a game man.”
What makes FF IX Revisited so great is that it has a limited focus and plenty of good evidence for its arguments. Identity formation and social roles are sensible themes that could even have been intentional - unlike most of what people say about Catcher in the Rye. In the comments, Joseph says at one point that the really fascinating part isn’t that FF IX does something new or exciting with its narrative or gameplay - just that “the two parts reflect off of each other so seamlessly.” That, right there, is the whole point - the ludic elements (gameplay) have an actual meaning, and a real connection to the narrative component.
Most games have no ludic meaning beyond simple power fantasy, and that’s because they’re designed to convey fun to the player, not meaning. Games are what they are because they’re interactive and systematic, and if we don’t use these unique properties for any good purpose, we’re wasting the incredible potential of the medium. Film didn’t become a respected medium in its own right on the basis of well-written dialogue (writing) or acting (plays) - it was the unique possibilities provided by the medium that proved film could be art.
In the United States, games are now legally considered art. The thing about critical analysis is that it requires you to look at something as more than just a simple piece of media, and that’s what we need in the gaming press right now. Film and book critics are expected mainly to do critical analysis, while gaming critics simply aren’t. Because the popular press spreads the idea that there’s a deeper meaning to everything, it’s a lot easier for people to accept a film or book as a work of art. The more we get pieces like FF IX Revisited on big name sites, the closer we’ll be to mainstream acceptance.