5 ms·

It is unfortunate that you're downvoted. At one point, there was an article on HN discussing games, including what made a "game" a "game" — and one of the artic

It is unfortunate that you're downvoted. At one point, there was an article on HN discussing games, including what made a "game" a "game" — and one of the article's requirements was that there must exist some risk of losing. Otherwise, you're just messing around or following predefined steps towards an end, but there is no challenge. Not that that can't entertain, but plenty of things entertain that aren't games. (E.g., a movie.) The article also discussed some weird things that existed outside of the definition that the article arrived at, such as ClickerHeros and similar "grinding" "games". (I wish I could find a link to it. Perhaps someone else here remembers and can find it…)

deedree 8y ago
You might mean “family resemblance” that Wittgenstein talks about.
dwaltrip 8y ago
There can be a challenge even without an explicit win condition or chance of losing. It is the challenge of discovery.
- hyperpallium 8y ago
  Is a discovery a "win"? Sure, it's user-defined. "Challenge" implies an objective or purpose.
  - dwaltrip 8y ago
    There is purpose in discovery.
    - hyperpallium 8y ago
      That's my point: discovery is a win-condition.
      - dwaltrip 8y ago
        Fair enough :)
mlindner 8y ago
Many games don't have win states or shouldn't have win states. More people need to listen to what Sid Meier has said on this. That HN article was written by someone who did not know what they were talking about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtzCLd93SyU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtzCLd93SyU
fenomas 8y ago
Not unfortunate at all; arguing definitions is rarely useful or interesting, and "game" has dozens of worthy contenders that disagree with GP and with the article you read. E g.: Sid Meier's famous definition: "a series of interesting decisions". (But what would he know?)
- hyperpallium 8y ago
  Says "arguing definitions is rarely useful"; argues a definition usefully. :-) FWIW I asked the question because I'm designing a simulation "game" without explicit win-conditions, but I'm concerned it won't be very engaging without them. e.g. Minecraft added monsters (to survive the night), and the enderverse.
  - fenomas 8y ago
    Don't get me wrong, the question of whether this or that game is better with or without win conditions is perfectly interesting. It's just the raw "is it a game or not?" that's not useful. It's like asking whether comic books are books - the answer is "yes under some definitions, no under others", simple as that. For the case of your game[0] specifically, one option is to expose game stats that the player can form their own challenges around. E.g. if the game UI shows how many times you've jumped, that implicitly lets the player form "do X without jumping more than Y times" sorts of challenges, etc. Or the more formal way to do it is like e.g. Minecraft achievements - there's no "win condition" for putting a saddle on a pig or whatever, but the mere fact that there's a piece of UI tracking whether you've done it or not, creates a challenge by itself. [0] yeah I said it! ;)
    - hyperpallium 8y ago
      I've thought about that - and it's not that big a jump to have a GUI that allows a user to specify a win condition (and locations to traverse, other conditions etc). Then, the user can share it online. I haven't played GTA V online, but I think it does something like that. But actually, I don't want those sort of win-conditions for this particular game, not even DIY stats. It's just an immersive simulation. Guess I'm just not too sure it WILL be immersive or engaging - even for me to play! Just have to see, I guess. Taking your lead, I suppose if a movie can be immersive, why not a "game" which has no win-condition? But the moment I say that, I immediately realize that movies do have "win-conditions" - just of the protagonist, not the viewer/player. Goals, stakes, motivation, obstacles are all important narrative components. Can you have an immersive movie without narrative? Sort of maybe, some experimental/arthouse, but they aren't very popular (and arguably do have some kind of narrative). You're probably right about definitions, but they do inevitably lead to the components of a game/non-game, and whether they are engaging, and what makes them engaging... and they're easy to ask.

deedree 8y ago

You might mean “family resemblance” that Wittgenstein talks about.

dwaltrip 8y ago

There can be a challenge even without an explicit win condition or chance of losing. It is the challenge of discovery.

hyperpallium 8y ago
Is a discovery a "win"? Sure, it's user-defined. "Challenge" implies an objective or purpose.
- dwaltrip 8y ago
  There is purpose in discovery.
  - hyperpallium 8y ago
    That's my point: discovery is a win-condition.
    - dwaltrip 8y ago
      Fair enough :)

mlindner 8y ago

Many games don't have win states or shouldn't have win states. More people need to listen to what Sid Meier has said on this. That HN article was written by someone who did not know what they were talking about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtzCLd93SyU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtzCLd93SyU

fenomas 8y ago

Not unfortunate at all; arguing definitions is rarely useful or interesting, and "game" has dozens of worthy contenders that disagree with GP and with the article you read. E g.: Sid Meier's famous definition: "a series of interesting decisions". (But what would he know?)

hyperpallium 8y ago
Says "arguing definitions is rarely useful"; argues a definition usefully. :-) FWIW I asked the question because I'm designing a simulation "game" without explicit win-conditions, but I'm concerned it won't be very engaging without them. e.g. Minecraft added monsters (to survive the night), and the enderverse.
- fenomas 8y ago
  Don't get me wrong, the question of whether this or that game is better with or without win conditions is perfectly interesting. It's just the raw "is it a game or not?" that's not useful. It's like asking whether comic books are books - the answer is "yes under some definitions, no under others", simple as that. For the case of your game[0] specifically, one option is to expose game stats that the player can form their own challenges around. E.g. if the game UI shows how many times you've jumped, that implicitly lets the player form "do X without jumping more than Y times" sorts of challenges, etc. Or the more formal way to do it is like e.g. Minecraft achievements - there's no "win condition" for putting a saddle on a pig or whatever, but the mere fact that there's a piece of UI tracking whether you've done it or not, creates a challenge by itself. [0] yeah I said it! ;)
  - hyperpallium 8y ago
    I've thought about that - and it's not that big a jump to have a GUI that allows a user to specify a win condition (and locations to traverse, other conditions etc). Then, the user can share it online. I haven't played GTA V online, but I think it does something like that. But actually, I don't want those sort of win-conditions for this particular game, not even DIY stats. It's just an immersive simulation. Guess I'm just not too sure it WILL be immersive or engaging - even for me to play! Just have to see, I guess. Taking your lead, I suppose if a movie can be immersive, why not a "game" which has no win-condition? But the moment I say that, I immediately realize that movies do have "win-conditions" - just of the protagonist, not the viewer/player. Goals, stakes, motivation, obstacles are all important narrative components. Can you have an immersive movie without narrative? Sort of maybe, some experimental/arthouse, but they aren't very popular (and arguably do have some kind of narrative). You're probably right about definitions, but they do inevitably lead to the components of a game/non-game, and whether they are engaging, and what makes them engaging... and they're easy to ask.