introductory note

I think we should go Bill Mitchell's way. All the digital tools shoould be familiar to us, but the wider perspective shows, that architecture is all the same, changes are only in its circumstances. Like unapreciated difference of sense of space between medieval or rennaisance city and now. These differences are even beyond our imagination (half a year of travel versus several hours). But nowadays we (we, people, turists, users) try to measure mediaval city by our notions and dimensions. The feeling of space bacame different, became merged with time and culture. We, architects, those about creating space, have to deal with such problems no matter which tools we use.

I would recommend you the lecture of The Social Logic of Space by Bill Hillier. Not the Space Syntax which is accessible for free but this former book.The approach presented there is pretty less defined and thus - in my opinion - more true. Or just includes more factors which had been neglected after in the further software development.
There is quite nice story by Neil Gaiman in Fragile Things about a Chinese emperor who constructed an island - a model of his country. This took place about two thousands years ago. The construction of the model was quite expensive as it used to be updated constantly. His plans to build another, more detailed model finished with his death - and cronics do not state whether it had been perfectly natural. May be not, as the model construction finished then.
Personally I am just pretty convinced to the approach by Guhathakurta presented here: http://www.envplan.com/abstract.cgi?id=b12857
Professor Mike Batty also confirms such considerations.