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

[cruise]

Thus spake Sean Howard...
> That's my theory and I'm sticking to it. "Game" is, in my opinion, and
> ultimately worthless classification that exists more to differentiate a
> game from a movie or book than to actually say anything significant about
> the medium(s) it covers. Just like we have more limited definitions for
> books, using the grander term "book" as an umbrella rather than a medium,
> I think we should do the same thing with games - though FPS vs RTS doesn't
> seem to be a particularly helpful distinction. However, serious game vs
> learning game vs competitive game vs exploration game, etc... might be.

Agreed. Perhaps the question shouldn't be "what is a game?" but, "what 
makes an enjoyable interactive experience?" At the risk of makign 
"interactive experience" as meaninglessly genric as "game" is currently :P

> It's only competitive if losing is a viable alternative to winning. In
> most games, failure is at best a minor setback, if a setback at all. There
> are some decisions which have permanent effects that are far more
> influential than losing. And I'm sure that if you thought about it, you'll
> think of dozens, if not hundreds, of games that cannot be lost - failure
> to make the right decision simply loops you back to make it again.

At which point you may stop playing because of time constraints, 
frustration, boredom, etc. and therefore not reaching the goal. Failure 
doesn't have to be specifically defined in the explicit game rules to exist.


> Um... no. That's just... well, that's kind of a shallow way to think of
> decisions. For instance, if you are creating a character in City of
> Heroes, what color will his outfit be? You gotta think about that, but
> it's not a challenge. And it most definitively is a choice. Not only that,
> but it can greatly affect how the other players online treat you (male or
> female, dressed like Spider-man or a unique character, dressed in magenta
> and cyan or like a oompa-loompa).

It's a challenge I've set myself - find a colour, pattern or costume 
piece I like, and that conveys the image or ideal my character embodies. 
Again, the challenge doesn't have to be inherent in the game system itself.

> I would not simply it that far. Not all games are a system. For instance,
> a choose your own adventure book is a multilinear path that never changes.
> Your decisions decide which path you make. Some gamebooks do have internal
> states (modeled through a piece of paper and pencil), but that shouldn't
> be the definition of whather or not one gamebook is a game and another is
> not.

The gamestate is in your head, and it changes as you read each section 
of story.

> Thinking of games as ultimately competitive is, I believe, a huge mistake
> that is extremely limiting. I think it has it's origins in game theory,
> which is actually the study of competitive decision making and not
> actually games at all.

Indeed, it's basically psychology. But so is "fun", which I think is 
generally something we want to generate in players. Understanding how 
and why people make decisions, and feel about those decisions, is an 
important part of understanding what produces "fun."