Game On...

topic of the day: game on!

alrighty then. today's post is about *cue scary music* ASSIGNMENT 1!!!! egads! so early on in the sem and we've already hit the first assignment. oh well *shrug*. in other news, the NM3216 checking-if-a-game-really-qualifies-as-a-game committee will convene for a meeting to discuss whether the new sport called CALVINBALL meets the requirements to be considered a game. and awaaaaaay we go...

1. the case for calvinball as a game...

the checking-if-a-game-really-qualifies-as-a-game committee has convened to discuss the fate of calvinball, a 'game' created by calvin of 'calvin and hobbes'.

to determine if such an activity can be considered a game, the committee has been asked to compare the activity against a checklist of criterias set forth by gaming expert Eric Zimmerman. we now go live to our gamer on the scene...

here's your friendly neighbourhood gamer reporting live from the NM3216 checking-if-a-game-really-qualifies-as-a-game committee meeting. apparently there has been much discussion about whether the activity called 'calvinball' can pass the criterion to be considered a game.

this gamer understands that calvinball will be judged on the following criteria:

a) whether it is voluntary
b) whether it is interactive
c) whether there are players
d) whether these players follow rules that constrain their behaviour
e) whether conflict exists
f) whether there is a quantifiable outcome

based on the description and basics of calvinball, the committee apparently has accepted that calvinball indeed is a voluntary interactive activity between players (hence meeting criterion a to c). however the committee has reached some disagreement regarding the very questionable criteria d. according to the official calvinball rulebook, one of the major clauses reads as such:

"IMPORTANT -- The following rules are subject to be changed, amended, or dismissed by any player(s) involved."

in interpreting this clause, the committee has agreed on the 2 possible meanings:

1) calvinball has rules that are not entirely binding (owing to the fact that most - if not all - are subject to change based on players' whims)

2) by saying that rules can be changed / discarded or created, the implication that the only rule is that no rules are fixed (thus possibly saying that calvinball has NO rules). if the committee were to take this stand, then calvinball would be possibly marked down for failing to meet one of the major requirements of what constitutes a game.

another rule of calvinball which has caused some disagreement among committee members is the one which states that: "Any rule above that is carried out during the course of the game may never be used again in the event that it causes the same result as a previous game. Calvinball games may never be played the same way twice"

this rule effectively states that the activity 'calvinball' when played multiple times may not be indentical in any way. however this gamer understands that such a condition may cause confusion among players of calvinball, since no one can readily agree on the basis of how it should be played.

calvinball has also been failed on criteria f), on the basis that scorekeeping is optional. this gamer understands that the option of not keeping score in a game of calvinball makes the possibility of it having a quantifiable outcome questionable. this gamer also understands that the absence of a quantifiable outcome (and thus implications of the 'game' being without purpose), essentially calvinball can be parallelled to "people running around like headless chickens" as quoted from a committee member. this would make the presence of meaningful play in such an activity questionable.

this is your friendly neighbourhood gamer signing out.

GAME OVER...

Games People Play...

topic of the day: playing around...

Here's some things to think about:
1. what is a game?
2. what makes a good game?

so maybe these are things that most of us (gamers or otherwise) take very much for granted. to us, games are just, well, games. and most of the time all we do is play 'em. but after this IS gaming culture. so we need to know about games, what makes them what they are and why we like them so much. so without further ado, let's get to the questions... and awaaaaay we go...

1. what is a game?

we never really think what games are. games are what people play. for fun, for enjoyment, for a challenge. but games are, according to some experts, interactive systems where the element of play is conducted within boundaries. think about it - games have rules, restrictions and other such things. yet at the same time, there is spontaneity, room for people to do different things within the rules. and that's why (most of the time) games sre different every time you play them (of course that doesn't happen in lousy games, but we'll get to that later).

and of course there's the interactive element to games. where there is a communication relationship between either people and computers or people and other people. and that's what makes games interesting and varied. the interactive element.

so let's recap: games have rules. games are spontaneous. and games are interactive.

and with that, we move on to question 2: what makes a good game?

there are good games and bad games, fun games and boring games. games that you can't stop playing even when you've completed it, or games that suck so bad that you don't bother trying to complete them. having said all that... what IS a good game made of? what makes DoTA (or even old-school games like snake or pong) so addictive?

i guess one way of assesing how good a game is using the above definition i've provided.

rules / boundaries / restrictions

a good game has clear rules and is challenging (but not too challenging). these are the boundaries that exist in games. they restrict what users can do and provide players obstacles to overcome. games like tetris have rules (like how your bricks can only disappear when you make a complete row) that restrict the player, forcing him to work within the boundaries that the game gives.

spontaneity

good games have an element of spontaneity. which basically would mean the player has the ability to manouvre within the set boundaries of the game. players like to experiment. they like games that give them opportunities to do things, not have to completely follow the preferrred path set out by game designers (its like how in DoTA though you will by destroying the other teams ancient you can do it after destroying the defence towers, or alternativelyjust bypassing them and charging blindly into the base to attack the ancient).

interactivity

in the case of games, interactivity and spontaneity overlap. because interactivity indicates that there is some semblance of spontaneity. good games are highly intearactive, in the sense that they promote inteaction among players, or have AI good enough to cponvince players that there is a high level of interactivity present.

that's why many MMORPGs and multiplayer games are such hits. because they allow interactivity among users (like in WOW or DoTA). these kind of games pit human players against one another (creating an element of spontaneity and unpredictability - much better than playing against an artificial intelligence someone programmed). so even in single-player games, the element of interactivity has to exist at a high level for it to be considered a 'good game'.

other elements to consider

though the above 3 criteria may be a means of judging what makes a good game, there are some other criteria to consider. one of the most important being replay value - an important aspect in single player games especially. games that you just play once and never pick up ever again after completing them rarely are considered to be good. replay value means you can play those games over and over and not get sick of them at all.

so that' s it. the definition of what a game is, and what makes a game good.

GAME OVER...

INSERT COIN (to continue)...

NEW sem. NEW module. but same old style *groan*

so yes for this sem, i'm being cheap and re-using this blog (formerly for 2217) for my NM3216: GAMING CULTURE 1 (wooohooo!!!)

anyone who's seen my postings last sem ought to understand my style - lame and crappy. but what the heck. makes life interesting, no?

so anyway... enjoy what you read...

and awwwaaaaaaaaaay we go!!!