I can't read that article, not only because it sounds incredibly stupid and ill-researched, but because the website keeps crashing my browser.

But from that quote, and what you said, the man sounds like an idiot.

In a sense, at the core of his argument is this: When you play a game, you are not experiencing anything. Absolutely nothing. If anything, games can be more involving than other storytelling mediums. Because the viewer - or in our case, the player - is actively involved in the story.

Every time someone introduces me to a person like this - doesn't matter if they're talkng about video games or philosophy - it greatly saddens me that such people exist, and will probably not have changed their minds by the time they die. How can someone be so driven by bias as to blind themselves into such foolishness?