What is Non-Trivial about?
Non-Trivial is here to do three things:
First, publish great games crit. Not games industry crit. Not reviews, not features. Great games criticism. We want every piece on Non-Trivial to connect readers more deeply to the games they play as well as to their own tastes and feelings. We are here to spotlight the incredible talent keeps pushing at the boundaries of how to talk about video games in the midst of a media ecosystem that has done everything it can to marginalize them.
Second, bridge the gaps between people who play games, people who write about games, and people who study games. Non-Trivial has its roots in academic game studies, and more specifically, in the frustration with the degree to which, despite the persistent popularity of video games in popular culture, game studies has struggled to emerge into any kind of public consciousness. Non-Trivial is not itself an academic publication, nor do we have any ambitions to be like one. But we do hope that it can be a space where the important work that has happened in academic spaces for the last four decades can find room to play.
Third, deliver a conversation. At Non-Trivial, we believe that some of the best experiences a reader can have are when one writer responds to another. Maybe the response is direct - a challenge, a rebuttal. Maybe the response is more of a jumping off point, or a new take at a jaunty angle. Each issue of Non-Trivial is about that call and response, and then on top of that, a moment of reflection in the form of an interview with the writers themselves. We think that’s a powerful package.
Why Non-Trivial right now?
It might seem like a bad time to launch a new games writing website. Legacy media models have fully crumbled out from beneath us and the game development industry is a shambolic impression of a boardroom pitch. It’s not clear if people under the age of 25 care about video games at all - or at least, video games in the sense that they’ve been understood since the 90s. To paraphrase Joan Didion, the center is not holding.
Non-Trivial is not trying to fix all of that. It’s not even going to address any of that, not really. Instead, Non-Trivial is about the worthiness of games for our attention. Not the kind of attention people mean when they’re worrying about doomscrolling or pop-up ads. The kind of attention that gets lost when cultural and economic forces work to narrow, reduce, and limit the kinds of things games should be.
Does Non-Trivial pay its writers? What are the rates?
Yes! And we always will.
Our current rates are to pay $175 for our monthly longform piece and $75 for our monthly shortform piece. Non-Trivial does not have any ads nor do we have any investors. It is entirely self-funded to begin with. As Non-Trivial builds more support, we hope to reassess our rates regularly.
How can I write for Non-Trivial?
We will be open for pitches soon.
Until then, reach out to us at editor@non-trivial.games or on Bluesky @non-trivial.games
What are some examples of writing that Non-Trivial really likes?
We are long-time admirers of the writing at Stop Caring, Bullet Points Monthly, The Imaginary Engine Review, and No Escape. We are deeply inspired by the original Kill Screen run as well. Academics whose work we look to include: Bo Ruberg, McKenzie Wark, Alexander Galloway, and Adrienne Shaw, among many others.
Here are a few specific recent pieces we love:
In Ruins by Autumn Wright
I Hate Skateboarding by Ryan Wagahoff
Street art, strength, and selling out: How Street Fighter 6 sacrificed its identity to chase brand synergy by Ashley Schofield
Dead as Dreams by Astrid Ann Rose
What is a “close read”?
We are still partial to Robert Yang’s 17-year old take on what it means to close read a game, but basically it comes down to this:
A close read of a game is an interpretation of what and how it means. A close read of a game always keeps the fact that the thing is a game and not something else at heart. This doesn’t mean ignoring the game’s narrative, cinematic, or literary qualities. It does, however, mean that understanding the relationship of those qualities to the way a game structures play is essential.
A close read may be strident or conservative. It may be more or less formalist in its approach. It may take a swing at a big cultural moment or it may limit its scope to only what is within the magic circle.
But whatever else it may be, a close read notices. And it helps readers notice too.
What is Non-Trivial’s position on generative AI?
Non-Trivial does not use any generative AI in the production of its writing, its graphics, its social media content, or any other elements of its work. Non-Trivial may occasionally engage directly with cultural artifacts that have been produced entirely or in part by generative AI, but only ever in the course of critical analysis, never in the name of platforming or promoting.
Does Non-Trivial allow any of its contributors to use generative AI in their content?
No.
What’s with the name?
Non-Trivial takes its name from Espen Aarseth’s book, Cybertext, in which he frames video games within the lineage of something called ergodic literature.
“In ergodic literature, nontrivial effort is required to allow the reader to traverse the text.”
This website is about that traversal.
What’s with the grasshopper?
The grasshopper was drawn by Carley Wood. It refers to The Grasshopper by Bernard Suits.
“First, evidently I was put on earth just to play out my life and die, and it would be impious of me to go against my destiny.”
“I have the oddest notion that both of you are Grasshoppers in disguise; in fact, that everyone alive is really a grasshopper.”