This series has been very interesting for me and I hope for some of you. In this post I critically conclude it.
Summarizing games as a combination of a simulation background, goals and rules, of which the rules generate the journeys towards the goals, is pretty good in my opinion. It's not perfect and there are examples that don't fit well, but so far I like it.
Not so for the assertion that any problem a game can have is either because the journeys aren't worth the goals, or because it fails at keeping the mind busy (=boring), or because it is 'frustrating'. This doesn't work all that well, really. The big problem is that the definition of 'frustrating' is too vague. For example boring activities, or journeys that aren't worth their goals, are frustrating, too.
What I like a lot is the list of things that keep the mind busy and the assertion that a mind that is not kept busy experiences boredom; and vice versa. I would add at this point that boredom is a critical design flaw and much worse than most others. I'll go into that in more detail in the next post using WoW as an example.