Crafting Through Playing

  • Michael Nitsche
Part of the Gaming Media and Social Effects book series (GMSE)


Through productive play, the process of playing itself is reframed as a form of crafting. The essay explores the context for playing as crafting as it draws from craft research and game studies to present a different view of emergent play. Huizinga’s definition of play serves as a starting point into a shift to craft-like practices, which are illustrated with a discussion of selected machinima work that serves as example for this concept of playing as crafting. Finally, the overlap between playing and crafting is discussed as an example for critical making.


Craft Emergent play Machinima Critical making 


  1. Adamson, G. (2013). The invention of craft. London, New Delhi, New York, Sydney: Bloomsbury.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahn, L. V., Dabbish, L. (2004). Labeling images with a computer game. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 319–326). Vienna, Austria: ACM.Google Scholar
  3. Bonanni, L., Parkes, A., Ishii, H. (2008). Future craft: how digital media is transforming product design. In CHI ‘08 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 2553–2564). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
  4. Bunnell, K. (2004). Craft and digital technology. Presented at World Crafts Council. Metsovo, Greece.Google Scholar
  5. Camper, B. (2005). Homebrew and the social construction of gaming. community, creativity, and legal context of amateur game boy advance development. M.Sci. thesis in Media Studies MIT, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  6. Carroll, J., & Cameron, D. (2005). Machinima: Digital performance and emergent authorship. In Digra 2005: changing views—worlds in play. Vancouver, CAN.Google Scholar
  7. Castronova, E. (2005). Synthetic worlds: The business and culture of online games. London, Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  8. DeLappe, J. (2013). Playing politics: Machinima as live performance and document. In J. Ng (Ed.), Understanding machinima. Essay on filmmaking in virtual worlds (pp. 147–167). London, New Delhi, New York, Sydney: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  9. Dormer, P. (1997). Craft and the turing test for practical thinking. In P. Dormer (Ed.) The culture of craft (pp. 137–158). Manchester, UK/ New York: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Flanagan, M. (2009). Critical play: radical game design. Cambridge, MA, London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  11. Gershenfeld, N. (2012). How to make almost anything: the digital fabrication revolution. Foreign Affairs, 91, 43–57.Google Scholar
  12. Greer, B. (2004). Taking back the knit: Creating communities via needlecraft, in culture, globalisation and the city. M.A. thesis, Goldsmiths College, London, UK.Google Scholar
  13. Huizinga, J. (1949). Homo Ludens: A study of the play-element in culture. London, Boston, MA, Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  14. Juul, J. (2002). The open and the closed: Games of emergence and games of progression. In F. Mäyrä (Ed.), Computer game and digital cultures (pp. 323–329). Tampere, FI: Tampere University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Juul, J. (2003). The game, the player, the world: Looking for a heart of gameness. In M. Copier, & J. Raessens, (Eds.), Level Up: Digital Games Research Conference (pp. 30–45). Utrecht, NL: Utrecht University.Google Scholar
  16. Kelland, M., Morris, D., & Lloyd, D. (2005). Machinima. Boston, MA: Thomson.Google Scholar
  17. Khatib, F., et al. (2011). Crystal structure of a monomeric retroviral protease solved by protein folding game players. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, 18, 1175–1177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lastowka, G. (2009). Rules of Play. Games and Culture, 4(4), 379–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lindtner, S., et al. (2009). Situating productive play: Online gaming practices and Guanxi in China. In INTERACT (pp. 328–341). Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  20. Lowood, H. (2008). Found technology: players as innovators in the making of machinima. In T. McPherson (Ed.), Digital youth, innovation, and the unexpected (pp. 165–196). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Lowood, H., & Nitsche, M. (Eds.). (2011). The machinima reader. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  22. Marino, P. (2004). 3D game-based filmmaking: the art of machinima. Scottsdale, AZ: Paraglyph Press.Google Scholar
  23. Masterton, D. (2007). Deconstructing the digital. Presented at: New Craft-Future Voices (pp. 7–24). Dundee University.Google Scholar
  24. McCullough, M. (1998). Abstracting craft: The practiced digital hand. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  25. Oakeshott, M. (1962). Rationalism in politics and other essays. London, New York: Methuen/ Barnes & Noble Books.Google Scholar
  26. Pearce, C. (2006). Productive play. game culture from the bottom up. Games and Culture, 1(1), 17–24.Google Scholar
  27. Ratto, M. (2011). Critical making: Conceptual and material studies in technology and social life. The Information Society: An International Journal, 27(4), 252–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Risatti, H. (2007). A theory of craft. Function and aesthetic expression. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina.Google Scholar
  29. Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2004). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  30. Shiner, L. (2010). The fate of craft. In S. Alfoldy (Ed.), NeoCraft: Modernity and the crafts (pp. 33–47). Halifax: The Press of the Nova Scotia College of Art and Design.Google Scholar
  31. Taylor, T. L. (2006). Play between Worlds. Exploring online game culture. Cambridge, MA, London: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Georgia Institute of Technology/Digital MediaAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations