What might it mean to situate games like Shenzhen I/O inside pro environments like an IDE?

How far can you break down the wall between the Enacted experience and professional practice? (Powerful enabling environments focus on expert use)

Shenzhen I/O is essentially a series of programming puzzles. It takes place in an artificial development environment, created for the purposes of the game. Could you instead situate those same interactions and lessons inside a professional IDE?

Would the intrinsically meaningful purpose for the interactions remain puzzle-based? Or would this be an opportunity to motivate those interactions by the user’s actual problems, more akin to Y Combinator? If so, would this become a more powerful opportunity because of Deep understanding requires (and is a result of) intense personal connection?

Some discussion on this in Dynamic mediums usually lack an authored time dimension.


Conversation with Jonathan Blow, 2019-09-28