[MUD-Dev2] [DESIGN] What is a game?(again)was:[Excellentcommentary on Vanguard's diplomacy system]

[Sean Howard]

"Raph Koster" <raph at areae.net> wrote:
> Joust is a software program which is designed solely as a game. Games
> are models; there may be preferred ways to poke and prod at the model
> (ways with "rewards" -- heh) but it still remains a model.

Games are built on top of two things. The first is a complex system of
behavior. The world "rules", I guess you could say. Hit the button in this
state, this action is taken. On top of these rules are placed a purpose. A
system of goals, rewards, punishments, moral declarations, and
philosophical statements that define "right" and "wrong".

There is no wrong to the physical model. If it is possible, it can happen.
The philosophical model is different. There is only right and wrong. Every
game consists of an amoral side and a moral side.

Most people make the mistake of thinking that the moral side is what is
clearly the most dominant part of a game, but I disagree. You can change
the moral side and the game remains the same. If you play Joust one way
instead of the other, it is still Joust. An argument can be made that it
is a "different" Joust, but the programming hasn't changed. The physical
aspects of morality haven't changed. They are just ignored. But if you
change the physical side of game - the gameplay - you are in a position
where it is a completely different game.

You can have the same moral rules (same goals, same rewards, same
philosophy of right and wrong) on two moderately different gameplay
systems (like PacMan versus Ms. PacMan) and it really is a different game.

> Similarly, a virtual world is a platform, not a game. This is clearly
> evident when you see virtual worlds with no games in them, virtual
> worlds embodying multiple games, virtual worlds with e-commerce, virtual
> worlds for education, and so on. The game bit is entirely optional.

A virtual world is the systematic physical aspect of the world. The games
played within it are the moral rule systems. We use the two
interchangeably because most of the time, they aren't separate. But in a
virtual world, even something as simple as World of Warcraft, there may be
dozens, even hundreds, or moral rule systems. How you SHOULD play an
instance dungeon differs from how you SHOULD participate in the auction
house.

You want to define the physical world as a platform, and I understand why.
But you can't do that with World of Warcraft and NOT Joust. I'm not
against making the distinction. I'm against singling out "virtual worlds"
as somehow unique in that regard. The only difference is that SOME virtual
world designers are willing to give possibilities to the world to
encourage additional rule systems to be added on top. I know you follow
that philosophy, but in the landscape of MMORPGs, that's not even a
dominant philosophy. And, I should point out, there are plenty of single
player games that exhibit that philosophy, again cancelling any
distinction MMORPGs may have.

> I think it's a mistake to regard the platform as the game, and I also
> think it's a mistake to regard any game as being monolithic. Games are
> made out of smaller games, and MMO-based games show this in spades.

I do not think that games are made out of smaller games (well, not most
games). They are made up of states, and most of the time, these states
interact in some way. For example, you could say that combat is a game,
but it is a state. The effect of combat affects the next state. If you
used too many healing potions, you may need to go back to town. If you
died you may need to go find your corpse. If you went up a level, you may
need to mess with your equipment. If you killed all the enemies in this
zone, you'll have to move to another one.

It's easy to think of these things as their own games, but I'm not
convinced that's the best way to compartmentalize them.

> I think you have not been paying attention to the last few years of game
> studies and game design theory. :) There's now quite a lot of this
> stuff, and it has been proving to work across the board for all sorts of
> games.

I must confess that after I left the game industry, my interest in game
design took a major hit. Could you desribe some of these theories or point
me in their direction?

-- 
Sean Howard