\u00abA voluntary activity or occupation executed within certain fixed limits of time and place, according to rules freely accepted but absolutely binding, having its aim in itself and accompanied by a feeling of tension, joy, and the consciousness that it is different from ordinary life.\u00bb\u201c
\n\u2013 Johan Huizinga (1938), Homo Ludens.<\/p>\n
“Play is a subset of voluntary behaviour involving a selective mechanism which reverses the usual contingencies of power so as to permit the subject a controllable and dialectical simulation of the moderately unmastered arousals and regulations of everyday life, in a way that is alternatively vivifying and euphoric.”
\n\u2013 Brian Sutton-Smith: “Die Dialektik des Spiels”, 1977, S.64<\/p>\n
“Play is that voluntary action which has a dialectical structure and which potentiates reversible operations.”
\n\u2013 Brian Sutton-Smith: “Die Dialektik des Spiels”, 1977, S.98<\/p>\n
\u00abPlay can be recognized by the more or less large-scale change in the relation of equilibrium between the reality relation and the ego. One could thus say: if adaptive activity and thought produce an equilibrium between assimilation and accommodation, then play begins at the point at which assimilation begins to dominate accommodation. (…) Play is thus practically pure assimilation.\u00bb
\n\u2013 J. Piaget: Gesammelte Werke, Bd. 5: “Nachahmung, Spiel und Traum”, quoted in Claus Pias:”Action, Adventure, Desire”
\n[Accomodation: Changing your impression from the world according to new experiences. Assimilation: Interpreting the world according to your experiences and attitudes.]<\/p>\n
\u00abA game is a system in which players engage in an artificial conflict, defined by rules, that results in a quantifiable outcome.\u00bb
\n\u2013 Katie Salen and Eric Zimmerman (2004), \u201cRules of Play\u201d<\/p>\n
\u00abA game is a form of art in which participants, termed players, make decisions in order to manage resources through game tokens in the pursuit of a goal.\u00bb
\n\u2013 Greg Costikyan (1994), “I have no words & I must design”<\/p>\n
\u00abA game is a rule-based system with a variable and quantifiable outcome, where different outcomes are assigned different values, the player exerts effort in order to influence the outcome, the player feels attached to the outcome and the consequences of the activity are optional and negotiable.\u00bb
\n\u2013 Jesper Juul (2005), \u201cHalf-Real. Video Games between Real Rules and Fictional Worlds\u201d, p.37<\/p>\n
“When you strip away the genre differences and the technological complexities, all games share four defining traits: a goal, rules, a feedback system, and voluntary participation.”
\n\u2013 Jane McGonigal (2011), “Reality is Broken”, p. 29<\/p>\n
“Playing a game is the voluntary attempt to overcome unnecessary obstacles.”
\n\u2013 Bernhard Suits (2005), “The Grasshopper: Games, Life and Utopia”<\/p>\n
Spiel und \u00c4sthetik<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00abDer sinnliche Trieb will, da\u00df Ver\u00e4nderung sei, da\u00df die Zeit einen Inhalt habe; der Formtrieb will, da\u00df die Zeit aufgehoben, da\u00df keine Ver\u00e4nderung sei. Derjenige Trieb also, in welchem beide verbunden wirken (…), der Spieltrieb also w\u00fcrde dahin gerichtet sein, die Zeit in der Zeit aufzuheben, Werden mit absolutem Sein, Ver\u00e4nderung mit Identit\u00e4t zu vereinbaren.\u00bb \u00abMit einer Erweiterung gewinnt die Feststellung “Dies ist ein Spiel” etwa folgendes Aussehen: “Diese Handlungen, in die wir jetzt verwickelt sind, bezeich\u00adnen nicht, was jene Handlungen, fu\u0308r die sie stehen, bezeichnen wu\u0308rden.”\u00bb “Because all art entails posing questions and puzzles – tough ones, ethical ones even. And games will never be mature as long as designers create them with complete answers to their own puzzles in mind.” \u00abThe storyteller has direct creative control over his audience\u2019s experience; the game designer has indirect control; the toymaker has almost none.\u00bb \u201ePeter designs a game by starting with the emotional range and dilemmas he wants the player to face and then he backtracks and looks at themes or technologies to achieve that result, which is quite different from what other designers do.\u201d “I know it by the definition of the vast majority of games. They tend to involve (1) point and shoot in many variations and plotlines, (2) treasure or scavenger hunts, as in “Myst,” and (3) player control of the outcome. I don’t think these attributes have much to do with art; they have more in common with sports.” W\u00fcnschenswerte Spieleigenschaften und Spieldesign \u201cDesigners of games have occasionally expressed concern that “professional standards” be maintained by games to uphold the professional honor of this growing subdiscipline. Perhaps they mean that only “qualified” persons should design simulations and games. That may be, but one might just as well insist that only qualified persons write poetry, drama, and novels. I personally have confidence in the ability of games players, particularly those absolutely tough-minded subteenagers, to reject superficial, dull, and spurious games. Furthermore, games are even more effective as a learning mode when designing them than when \u201cSimplification is the vital difference between a game and a simulation. The object of a computer simulation is to model a real system as closely as possible in order to study its behavior under different conditions. The object of a computer game is to entertain, and other considerations are secondary. Reality is complex and difficult. Games are supposed to be easy and fun. To get from one to the other, you have to simplify.\u201d \u00ab(…) it can seem that games contain a built-in contradiction: Since play is normally assumed to be a free-form activity devoid of constraints, it appears illogical that we would choose to limit our options by playing games with fixed rules. Why be limited when we can be free? The answer to this is basically that games provide context for actions (…)\u00bb “A simulation bears the same relationship to a game that a technical drawing bears to a painting.” “…the point at which a player chooses to repeatedly play a game they have already mastered completely, just because they like to feel powerful, is the point at which the game is betraying its own purpose. Games need to encourage you to move on. They are not there to fulfill power fantasies.” “We ended up with a game that I didn\u00b4t know how to win. I didn\u00b4t know which were the best strategies or tactics, even though I designed all the game\u00b4s systems. That is what makes a good strategy game.” \u201cA good game is one that you can win be doing the unexpected and making it work.\u201d \u201cRemember: The serious games wants real life; the casual gamer wants it to be like the movies.\u201d \u00abNo serious game can be successful if the players do not understand its rules, their objectives in the game, the consequences of their action, and the reasons for these consequences. In this sense, serious games should differ from more conventional games. They should respond more to the conscious decisions of the players than to an outside element of chance.\u00bb “There is a well known saying among designers in the educational games business: ‘If you want to take all of the fun out of it, get a bunch of educators involved.'” \u00abIn strongly opposing the world of play to that of reality, and in stressing that play is essentially a side activity, the interference is drawn that any contamination by ordinary life runs the risk of corrupting and destroying its very nature.\u00bb Ethische Fragen:<\/strong><\/p>\n \u00abThe ideology of a game is in its rules, its invisible mechanism, and not only in its narrative parts. Thus a global innovation of this medium will be very difficult.\u00bb \u201cIs the difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist simply that the person using the terms believes, in one case, the cause is right and not in the other? In these games, such thoughtful questions are not abstractions, they are part and parcel of the fun and interaction of playing.\u201d \u00abInteractivity is one of the core features that differentiate games from passive media like film. In a game we play a role. Most of the time, the roles we play in games are roles of power. Space marine, world-class footballer or hero plumber. Isn’t it about time we played the role of the weak, the misunderstood, even the evil? If videogames remain places where we only exercise juvenile power fantasies, I’m not sure there will be a meaningful future for the medium.\u00bb \u00abGames are perhaps the only medium which allows us to experience guilt over the actions of fictional characters.\u00bb \u00abThe gap between those who want games to entertain and those who want games to be art does not exist. Because both entail posing questions – tough ones even, ethical ones, even. And games will never mature as long as the designers create them with complete answers to their own puzzles in mind.\u00bb “With ‘Fable’ something fantastic happened: One administration official in some european country got one copy of the game to rate it, and it came back as ‘Of moral value for all ages’ – and I thought to myself, that couldn\u2019t be, they\u2019re chopping off people\u2019s heads in the game! We sent it in again and it turned out that this man had played the game well behaved and good, he never came to see these gruesome things! He just saved people and was nice!” (translated from German) \u201cIf your only tool is a hammer, all problems will look like nails.\u201d Spielzeuge vs. Regelspiele in diesem Seminar<\/strong><\/p>\n Eine kurze Kl\u00e4rung: Es geht in diesem Seminar haupts\u00e4chlich um Regelspiele (“Ludus”), weniger um ‘freies’ Spielen bzw. die nicht-regelgebundene Verwendung von Spielzeug (“Paidia”, s. Roger Caillois (1961): “Man, Play and Games”) – obwohl es einen Augenblick der Regellosigkeit und des Rausches, des Experimentierens und Explorierens geben muss, wenn ein neues, mit-teilbares Regelspiel erschaffen wird:<\/p>\n “Playing is a complex sequence of anarchistic toying, innovative game creation and rule-complying gaming, of turning aspects of reality into virtuality.”<\/p>\n “Playing is about choices and the communication of these choices: What I choose to do within a game \u2013 and that I choose to be in a game in the first place.”<\/p>\n “Games themselves consist of two layers: a static regulative-narrative frame as a result of game creation, and the course of individual games performed within, as result of players playing the game.”<\/p>\n “If a given game represent a simplified version of a medium \u2013 including an (artificial) cultural background in the form of background story or base “While classic media deliver structured information, games provide a structure for the experimental formation of structured information.”<\/p>\n \u2013 Wey-Han Tan (2009): “Playing (with) Educational Games: First and Second Order Gaming.”<\/a><\/p>\n Frage:<\/strong><\/p>\n Anbei ein paar Zitate, die eine Ann\u00e4herung an das erlauben sollen, was wir als Spiel (Freies Spielen und Regelspiele) wahrnehmen. Wie bei Heinz von Foerster bereits anklingt: Die Definition mag genau so viel \u00fcber den Definierenden, seine Kultur und Profession … Weiterlesen
\n\u2013 Friedrich Schiller (1795), \u201e\u00dcber die \u00e4sthetische Erziehung des Menschen\u201c, 14.Brief<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Gregory Bateson, “Eine Theorie des Spiels und der Phantasie” in Bsteson (1982): “\u00d6kologie des Geistes”, S.244<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Raph Koster, “Theory of Fun”<\/p>\n
\nChris Crawford (1982), \u201cThe Art of Computer Game Design\u201d<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Will Wright \u00fcber Peter Molyneux<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Roger Ebert (2007), “Games vs. Art: Ebert vs. Barker”<\/a><\/p>\n
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n
\nplaying them, so we should not deny even the least qualified student this learning experience because of fanciful ideas about expertise. Let gaming be pervasive, let it flourish in good forms
\nand ill, and the best will emerge. This is no art of the experts but a universal language common to all cultures, ages and conditions.\u201d
\n\u2013 Clark C. Abt (1987): \u201dSerious Games.\u201d University Press of America, p.114<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Ernest Adams, Electronic Arts<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Jesper Juul (2005), \u201cHalf-Real. Video Games between Real Rules and Fictional Worlds\u201d, p.18<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Chris Crawford, “The Art of Computer Game Design”<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Raph Koster<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Julian Gallop \u00fcber “X-Com”<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Andrew Rollings<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Bob Bates<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Clark C. Abt, “Serious Games”, 1987, quoted in Michael and Chen (2005) \u201eSerious Games\u201c<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Kurt Squire, \u201eGame Based Learning\u201c, p.36<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Roger Caillois, “Men, Play and Games”, chapter “The Corruption of Games”, p. 43<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Paolo Pedercini from Molleindustria (translated from German)<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 J.P.Gee (2004) in Simon Egenfeldt-Nielsen (2005): “Beyond Edutainment. Exploring the Educational Potential of Computer Games.<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Ian Bogost, Watercooler Games<\/p>\n
\n– Will Wright (“The Sims”), quoted in Henry Jenkins (2003), “Meaningful Violence”<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Raph Koster, “Theory of Fun”<\/p>\n
\n\u2013 Game designer Peter Molyneux on ‘Fable’<\/p>\n
\nDijkstra, Maslow etc.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/edublog.me\/spieleseminar\/files\/2011\/04\/ThingsToysAndGames.png\" "\\"ThingsToysAndGames\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n
\nmetaphors \u2013 then a played game represents a unique expressive exchange within this medium: the rules may limit the choices available, but cannot foretell which trail of decisions will be made by the player, while narratives motivate the player and justify certain directions of this course.”<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/edublog.me\/spieleseminar\/files\/2011\/04\/VirtualityExpressiveChoiceRepeatability.png\" "\\"VirtualityExpressiveChoiceRepeatability\\"")
<\/a><\/p>\n\n