Advertisement

Untangling Gameplay: An Account of Experience, Activity and Materiality Within Computer Game Play

  • Olli Tapio Leino
Chapter
Part of the Philosophy of Engineering and Technology book series (POET, volume 7)

Abstract

In this chapter I discuss the notion of gameplay in the context of computer games. While the concept widely used within the discourses of game studies and game design, its definitions are less than satisfactory, often reducing the phenomenon to consequences of rules or interactivity. Assuming a premise from the colloquial use of the term as referring simultaneously to qualities of the player, the game artefact and the activity of play, I seek to establish a footing for the concept beyond its colloquial use. After inspecting the notion as a composite of the established terms game and play, I suggest that the description needs to be complemented with attention to the ways in which the both the activity and experience of gameplay are shaped by materiality. Trough an analysis informed by post-phenomenological philosophy of technology I establish the involved materiality as a game artefact. I describe how it is intertwined with the processual and subjective constituents of the phenomenon of gameplay, confirming the assumption that gameplay can be descibed as an ontological hybrid.

Keywords

Computer Game Game Play Game Design Computer Game Play Technological Artefact 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Aarseth, Espen. 2001. Computer game studies, year one. Game Studies 1(1). http://www.gamestudies.org/0101/editorial.html
  2. Aarseth, Espen. 2007. I fought the law: Transgressive play and the implied player. In Situated Play. Proceedings of DiGRA 2007 Conference, Tokyo.Google Scholar
  3. Avedon, Elliott M., and Brian Sutton-Smith, eds. 1971. The study of games. London/New York/Sydney/Toronto: Wiley.Google Scholar
  4. Bartle, Richard. 1996. Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit MUDs. Journal of MUD Research 1(1). http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm
  5. Caillois, Roger. 2001. Man, play and games. Urbana/Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  6. Consalvo, Mia. 2007. Cheating. Gaining advantage in videogames. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  7. Crawford, Chris. 1982. The art of computer game design. http://www.vancouver.wsu.edu/fac/peabody/game-book/Coverpage.htm.
  8. CryTek. 2004. Far cry. Paris: Ubisoft. PC game.Google Scholar
  9. Culin, Stewart. 1971. Mancala, the national game of Africa. In The study of games, ed. Elliott M. Avedon and Brian Sutton-Smith, 94–102. New York/London/Sydney/Toronto: Wiley.Google Scholar
  10. Darrow, Charles B. 1935. Monopoly. Parker Brothers. Salem, MA: Board game.Google Scholar
  11. Dekker, Andrew and Erik Champion. 2007. Please biofeed the zombies: Enhancing the gameplay and display of a horror game using biofeedback. In Situated Play. Proceedings of DiGRA 2007 Conference, 550–8, Tokyo.Google Scholar
  12. Fink, Eugen. 1968. The oasis of happiness: Toward an ontology of play. Yale French Studies 41: 19–30.Google Scholar
  13. Frasca, Gonzalo. 2007. Play the message: Play, game and videogame rhetoric. Ph.D. thesis, IT University of Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  14. Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 2004. Truth and method. 2nd ed. London/New York: Continuum Impacts.Google Scholar
  15. Heylighen, F. 1993. Epistemology. In Principia cybernetica web, ed. F. Heylighen, C. Joslyn and V. Turchin. Brussels: Principia Cybernetica. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/EPISTEMI.Html.
  16. Huizinga, Johan. 1998. Homo ludens: A study of the play-element in culture. London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  17. Ihde, Don. 1990. Technology and the lifeworld: From garden to earth. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Ihde, Don. 1995. Postphenomenology: Essays in the postmodern context. Chicago: Northwestern University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Ihde, Don. 2003. A phenomenology of technics. In Philosophy of technology. The technological condition. An anthology, ed. Robert C. Scharff and Val Dusek, 507–529. New Jersey: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  20. Infinity Ward. 2007. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. Santa Monica: Activision. PC game.Google Scholar
  21. James, William. 1943. Pragmatism and four essays from the meaning of truth. Cleveland/New York: Meridian Books. The World Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  22. Jørgensen, Kristine. 2008. Audio and gameplay: An analysis of PvP battlegrounds in world of warcraft. Game Studies 8(2). http://gamestudies.org/0802/articles/jorgensen.
  23. Juul, Jesper. 2003. The game, the player, the world: Looking for a heart of gameness. In Level up. digital games research conference, ed. Joost Raessens and Marinka Copier, 30–45. Utrecht: DiGRA and Utrecht University.Google Scholar
  24. Juul, Jesper. 2005. Half-real. video games between real rules and fictional worlds. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  25. Kirkpatrick, Graeme. 2007. Between art and gameness: Critical theory and computer game aesthetics. Thesis Eleven 89: 74–93.Google Scholar
  26. Leino, Olli. 2009. Understanding games as played: Sketch for a first-person perspective for computer game analysis. In Proceedings of the philosophy of computer games conference 2009, ed. John Richard Sageng. Department of Philosophy, Classics, History of Art and Ideas, University of Oslo, Oslo.Google Scholar
  27. Malaby, Thomas M. 2007. Beyond play: A new approach to games. Games and Culture 1(2): 95–113.Google Scholar
  28. Malaby, Thomas M. 2009. Anthropology and play: The contours of playful experience. New Literary History 40: 205–218.Google Scholar
  29. Malliet, Steven. 2007. Adapting the principles of ludology to the method of video game content analysis. Game Studies 7(1). http://gamestudies.org/0701/articles/malliet.
  30. Nacke, Lennart and Craig A Lindley. 2008. Flow and immersion in first-person shooters: Measuring the player’s gameplay experience. In Future Play ’08: Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Future Play, Toronto, 81–88. New York: ACM. doi:http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1496984.1496998.
  31. Nielsen, Henrik Smed. 2010. The computer game as a somatic experience. Eludamos. Journal for Computer Game Culture 4(1): 25–40.Google Scholar
  32. Pajitnov, Alexey and Vadim Gerasimov. 1985. Tetris. PC game, Moscow.Google Scholar
  33. Pankhurst, Richard. 1971. Gabata and related board games of Ethiopia and the horn of Africa. Ethiopia Observer 14(3): 154–206.Google Scholar
  34. Robbins, Merle. 1971. Uno. Reading: Mattel Corporation, Card game.Google Scholar
  35. Rodriguez, Hector. 2006. The Playful and the Serious: An approximation to Huizinga’s Homo Ludens. Game Studies 6(1). http://gamestudies.org/0601/articles/rodriges.
  36. Rollings, Andrew and Ernest Adams. 2003. Andrew Rollings and Ernest Adams on Game Design. Boston: New Riders.Google Scholar
  37. Salen, Katie and Eric Zimmerman. 2003. Rules of Play. Game Design Fundamentals. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  38. Saltzman, Marc, ed. 1999. Game design. Secrets of the sages. Indianapolis: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  39. Sartre, Jean-Paul. 2003. Being and nothingness. An essay on phenomenological ontology. London: Routledge Classics.Google Scholar
  40. Smith, Jonas Heide Bossow. 2007. Plans and purposes. How videogame goals shape player behaviour. Ph.D. thesis, IT University of Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  41. Stevens Jr., P. 1980. Play and work: A false dichotomy? In Play and Culture, ed. H.B. Schwartzman, 316–23. New York: Leisure.Google Scholar
  42. Tavinor, Grant. 2009. The art of videogames. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  43. Taylor, T.L. 2009. The assemblage of play. Games and Culture 4(4): 331–339.Google Scholar
  44. Verbeek, Peter-Paul. 2005. What things Do. philosophical reflections on technology, agency, and design. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Verbeek, Peter-Paul. 2008. Cyborg intentionality: Rethinking the phenomenology of humantechnology relations. Phenomenology and Cognitive Science 7:387–395.Google Scholar
  46. Vikhagen, Arne Kljell. 2004. Gadamer’s concept of play. In Proceedings of Sensuous Knowledge 1, Bergen.Google Scholar
  47. Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1973. Philosophical investigations. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Netherlands 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Creative MediaCity University of Hong KongKowloon TongHong Kong

Personalised recommendations