Classic Game Defn 01092006

8/13/2019 Classic Game Defn 01092006

1/16

Classic Game Definition

CMPS 80K Winter 2006

Prof. Jim WhiteheadJanuary 9, 2006


2/16

Goal for this Lecture

Describe Juuls classic game definition

Poke at this definition by examiningseveral borderline games

Why bother?

By understanding what is generallyconsidered to be a game, it points in thedirection of how to make new kinds of games.

Provides a framework for analyzing games That is, it gives you interesting questions you can

ask about games


3/16

Play

Children often play, a free-form activitythat is mostly not rule-based

A child playing with dolls, trains, trucks,blocks, running around with friends

Often some rules: that baby is sleeping (sodont wake it)

Sometimes fixed goals: building a specific

structure (fire station for a fire truck) But, mostly marked by fluidity of rules and

goals (little minds are fickle)


4/16

Games vs Play

Games are distinguished from play

Play is free-form

Games are rule-based

The rules structure the activity, and make

it possible to repeat it


5/16


Jesper Juuls Classic Game Definition, Half-real,2005, pp. 36.

1. Rules

Games are rule-based.

2. Variable, quantifiable outcome Games have variable, quantifiable outcomes.

3. Valorization of outcome

The different potential outcomes of the game areassigned different values, some positive and somenegative


6/16


4. Player effort The player exerts effort in order to influence the

outcome (games are challenging).

5. Player attached to outcome The player is emotionally attached to the outcome

of the game in the sense that a player will bewinner and happy in case of a positive outcome,but a loser and unhappy in case of a negative

outcome.6. Negotiable consequences

The same game [set of rules] can be played with orwithout real-life consequences


7/16

Rules

Well defined / unambiguous

So they can be programmed on a computer

So that players do not have to argue about them

every time they play

Tendency for non-computer games to trend

towards decreased ambiguity

Over time, misunderstandings about rules are raised,

discussed, then eliminated Unambiguous game rules makes them a natural for

implementation on a computer


8/16

Rules (contd)

Rules require that players submit to therules

Players agree to abide by the rules, because

it makes the game activity possible.

In computer games, this is a given thegame just doesnt work any other way

For non-computer games, the players are

executing the rules of the games, and mustdo so faithfully That is, people are the hardware, and the rules

are the software


9/16

Variable, Quantifiable Outcome

Quantifiable outcome:

Game has different end states

Tic-tac-toe: can end up with three-in-a-row, or a mixed board

Super Mario Bros: many ways to lose a life, or can make itthrough to the end

Outcome of the game is designed to be beyond

discussion

Goal of Pac-Man is to get a high score, not move in a pretty

way Specification of outcomes tends towards preciseness and

away from ambiguity over time (like rules)


10/16

Variable, Quantifiable Outcome

Variable outcome: the end state for a givenplayer is in doubt Tic-tac-toe with expert players does not have a

variable outcome An expert player vs a beginning player in Chess or

Go does not have a variable outcome (need ahandicapping scheme)

But, what about a player that has solved a

game like Adventure for the Atari 2600? Juul: It is still a game, but no longer qualifies as a

game activity


11/16

Valorization of Outcome

Valorize: to give or assign a value to

Some of the possible outcomes of a game are betterthan others Tic-tac-toe: 3-in-a-row is better than all other outcomes, and is

the winning state

Super Mario Bros: going all the way to the end is much betterthan losing a life

Players are generally assigned conflicting positiveoutcomes Tic-tac-toe: one player must have 3 X in a row, the other must

have 3 O in a row

Positive outcomes generally harder to achieve thannegative outcomes This is what makes a game challenging

If losing a life in Super Mario Bros was a good thing, the gamewould be pretty easy


12/16

Valorization vs Quantifiable

Outcomes Quantifiable outcome: the various

outcomes can be precisely enumerated

Super Mario Bros: you get to the end, or you

lose a life But, no values given to the outcomes. They

are all just outcomes.

Valorized outcome: each of the outcomes

is given a value, good or bad. Now, some outcomes are better than others.


13/16

Player Effort

Games are challenging, or games contain

a conflict

Players actions can influence the state of thegame, and the games outcome

A player needs to work to win a game


14/16

Player attached to outcome

The player is emotionally attached to the

outcome of the game

A player feels genuinely happy if they win, unhappy

or angry if they lose

Seems to not be related to effort

Players are still happy winning games of chance

A player is considered to be a spoilsport if they

refuse to seek enjoyment in winning, or refuseto be unhappy when they lose


15/16

Negotiable Consequences

Games can optionallyhave real-worldconsequences Poker: Can play this game without betting real

money. Once money is bet, the game has real-worldconsequences.

Can negotiate consequences: Play-by-play (bet on each play of a game)

Location-by-location (entering a casino means the

games are for money) Person-to-person (playing golf with Fred is always for

money, but with Jack is always for fun)


16/16

Negotiable consequences

Border case: games that use weapons

Example: fencing, boxing

In this case, the conventions of the game areto avoid serious injury

Still, hard to argue that boxing would ever have

any non-negotiable real-world consequences

For video games, at least, real-worldconsequences are negotiable

No self-destruct joysticks yet

Documents

Classic Game Defn 01092006