I agree to an extent. I agree that for you style is getting in the way of the message. I don't agree that it's clear from the writing that the author is despe

I agree to an extent. I agree that for you style is getting in the way of the message. I don't agree that it's clear from the writing that the author is desperate, or wants to impress you. Instead I speculate that the author does not care what > you < think: I believe that the author is not writing for "you", at least not the you that is in your current state of mind. I speculate that they are writing for somebody who's in a more freeform kind of word poetry state of mind. I mean that's the only kind of conclusion I can come up with reading the article because it is clearly non-strunk & white english. So that leads me to think okay this is probably poetry or prose of some kind of whimsical or rhyming form. And then I reread it and I see the words are closer to a stream of consciousness, as is talked about in other comments here. They're a little bit more structured than a stream of consciousness, in my view because the words appear to evoke feelings like notes in music, to a degree. The overall point of the article, as it appears to be overtly stated in the footer, to help writers to be effective at writing for video games. And this post specifically is about pulling emotions from the writer into the video game that are appropriate to the meandering experience of a player. So I liken the presentation here to be less conventional technical structured writing and more a song or a tune. And that's how I find this article useful.