Week 1 - Defining 'Game'

A tricky one indeed! How should one define the word or concept of game? On Wikipedia (I know...not the most reliable source! But an excellent definition) the term 'Game' has been declared as:



'A recreational activity involving one or more players. This can be defined by A) a goal that the players try to reach, B) some set of rules that determines what the players can or can not do. Games are played primarily for entertainment or enjoyment, but may also serve an educational or simulational role.'







I believe this definition can be related to digital gaming, not just to games played outdoors such as 'It' or 'Bulldog'. Indeed, over the years in my life that computers have arrived on the scene I have played many a digital game, from games like Super Mario Brothers on the game boy or SNES to Championship Manager (one of my favourite games, extremely addictive!) on the PC. I believe that a game may not have a certain goal, but by not having a goal it creates the opportunity for the player themselves to create their own personal goals. This is true, for myself anyway, in the game of Civilization II (one of the most addictive games - be warned!!) where you control your tribe from ancient times to the future, but in the end your goals are your own, you can be a friendly nation and be at peace with all others, or you can be a bloodthirsty warlord intent on World domination. However, most games do have obvious goals - get past the boss at the end of the level etc. as was the way in Super Mario Brothers on the game boy or SNES, or the game has a specific outcome - either win or lose, as is the case in games such as FIFA Soccer or Pro Evolution Soccer.

On reflection, another attribute could be added to the definition of 'Game' - Addictive. To be a successful game surely there must be a certain amount of addictiveness for the player to continue wanting to play their chosen game, perhaps joining with the effect of having goals for each game. Indeed, Wittgenstein reflected on overlapping similarities that games have by giving these examples:
1. chess - involves skill, no luck and is competitive.
2. the lottery - involves no skill, all luck and is not competitive.
3. frisbee - involves skill, involves luck and is not competitive.

Of course there are flaws in this above assumption, for example, at an amateur level chess can involve luck - the opposite player may not see an opening to pounce on your piece. Although the lottery is definitely luck, some players do use statistics to see what is likely to come up soon (although this probably does not help at all!). Frisbee could be argued as being a competitive sport, there is even a frisbee team at Brookes University who play other universities which would definitely constitute competitiveness.





Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1968). Philosophical Investigations. 3rd edition. Oxford: Blackwell
Wikipedia - Game [online] - retrieved on 20/02/07 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game