Looks like Lars thinks I don't I take games seriously, and hey, here's somebody confirming what I just wrote about Miran: he thinks I am narrow-minded too!
Coming from media theory, I come from a background of media panics. Film was sinful, radio was dangerous, television the source of all violence, the video would lead to constant television use and the computer would abolish reading for ever. To reduce the power of computer games, claiming they won't lead to instant attitude change doesn't mean to take them less seriously, it means not viewing them like the work of the devil, appointing them the new source of all which is evil in society.
While it is fine to look at computer games in a broader media sense, I find it narrow-minded to look on computer games only in a media perspective since computer games are so much more than what is possible to see from that angle.
I hope you don't suggest that one researcher should look at computer-games from every possible angle? I would like to remind you of the first lines of the post you're quoting:
Games: why it's important to write about their structure, content and style, genres and characteristics, their use and their utilisation of technology.
Dangerous question, and one with as many answers as there are people doing research in the field (and some for the people who are not).
I did the good academic thing and covered the diverse opinions of others before I aired my own : )