Follow-up:

If no one plays a game, is it because it is not worth experiencing - or is it because of the mindless pack mentality of the consumer public?

A falling tree of course makes a sound because a sound exists outside of one's mind.

An experience can only happen when there is a thing to make a perception. So if no one ever plays a game, there will be no experience. An experience cannot exist outside one's mind.

Louis sums it up nicely for me.

If you can't get people to play your game, even a small amount of people, then you've failed.

Unless you want to pull an eric cartman, "I have this great game that only I can play, and YOU CAN'T HAVE IT! na na na na naaa na"

Easy question to answer, a falling tree doesn't make a sound if there's no one to hear it, because a sound is defined by it being heard, else it is merely a vibration in the air.

As such a game does not create an experience if no one plays it because an experience is defined by the presence of the player.

Better questions are;

Does a falling tree make a sound if there's a deaf person standing next to it?

Does a game create an experience if the player isn't open to having one?

Well, it seems to all fall down to semantics. And that's, sadly, not a discussion worth having.

But if your real question is simply whether a game is worth the time to create if no one plays it, then I would have to say: Yes, if in making it you learn how to make a superior game. Of course, it's always more worth it when people play it, enjoy it, and possibly learn from it as well.

he-he, had a thought;

@Louis
But is not experiencing the game in and of itself an experience, I suppose this is completely deterministic. If a player exists then not playing is arguably an experience all it's own, but if the player does not exist, then I suppose not playing it would still result in no experience. But this would be because there was no potential for an experience in the first place.

oooo to take this further; Assuming there is a creator of the game, he had an experience regardless of whether he played the game or not. But lets go deeper, did the game "create" the experience or did the game's creator create his own experience? Even better, in reference to your original question, is a game at all capable of creating an experience or can it only provide the potential for a player/creator to create their own experience?

So underlying fundamental questions to answering your question;

- Can a game "create" an experience in the first place?
- Is "not experiencing" something an experience all by itself?

I really cannot help myself some days.

Thanks for all the comments.