Dimensional conflict: diversion vs. expression

While I mentioned in Three-dimensional games that games with the greatest magnitude in all three dimensions will be considered the best, this isn't to say that dimensions won't occasionally come into conflict with each other.  In other words, it is possible that attempting to increase the magnitude along one axis will decrease the magnitude along another axis.

I want to focus on a specific conflict that can arise when trying to maximize the magnitude along every dimension: the conflict between the demand of diversion to fill time and the demand of expression to reduce the time filled.

The case for expression

I think there's a reason two of our most beloved games--chess and poker--are also major contributors to our language.  Expressions such as "checkmate," "pawn," "playing the hand your dealt," "calling his bluff," "ace in the hole," don't have real linguistic equivalents.  They are areas of expression these games have claimed a monopoly over, and it won't take much effort to find many other expressions that find their roots in games.  It's not mere postulation that games could be used as expression--they already have been!

What is art?  I know you've heard the question a million times, but you haven't heard my answer yet.  You see, I'm utilitarian at heart.  I think in terms of utility.  Therefore, if A gives me the same utility as B, A and B are equivalent.  I get calories from pizza, I get calories from hamburgers.  While they are different in many significant ways, they find themselves identical when both are abstracted to "food."  I see no reason not to view art in similar terms.