6 ms·

> Errr..no. I only played video games because they were fun What is a game? I would say that a game is an abstract system used to understand our reality (or ex

> Errr..no. I only played video games because they were fun What is a game? I would say that a game is an abstract system used to understand our reality (or experiences in life), via a series of interactive actions that alter the system. Generally there is a set of goals (usually just to "win"). I develop software because it's a game. I do watch a lot of progress bars. Aside from that, it's one of my favorite games (to my wife's chagrin). It's fun for me and I'm not the only one. Why does it matter that other people don't enjoy what they do?

Nav_Panel 3y ago
Agreed 100%. A courtroom trial is also a sort of game, but it's not typically fun for those involved. Much the opposite...
digging 3y ago
That's not a bad or incorrect definition of game but it's... also not what people mean when they say "video game" or something like like a video game. The specific language in the article makes it clear that the person is referring to (basically) fantasy MMORPGs.
mym1990 3y ago
This seems like an extremely over complicated way of defining a game. If I play chess, or a video game, or tennis, I am not doing those things to 'understand my reality'. I am doing them because it is usually fun and gives me some kind of dopamine(ymmv), you might even say I play games to get away from reality. Some people use games to learn, some use them to accomplish an otherwise mundane task. Some people split games into 'finite and infinite' but typically they are a form of play, governed by a set of rules, that lead to some outcome. Games can be zero sum, or not.
- Supermancho 3y ago
  > If I play chess, or a video game, or tennis > I am not doing those things to 'understand my reality'. Not to be argumentative, but I am sure you are. You are attempting to control state and then optimizing for a goal. There are constraints on your ability to manage your own mental and physical capabilities (knowledge, limitations, etc).
  - mym1990 3y ago
    You are deeply overthinking things, or best case scenario you are being too philosophical. Playing games with you must be a hoot. "My reality" is almost an incomprehensible array of things that are going on, some of which are in my control, and others which are not. A game of chess, or even one move within that game has little to no meaning in regards to "my reality". A board state can certainly be in 'attacking', 'neutral', or 'defensive' configuration, but that is not "my reality".
gryn 3y ago
yes, technically well kinda, but not the most common definition of it. when defining something it's also pertinent to ask yourself what isn't included in that set. what isn't a game in this case ? almost any dynamical system would kinda fit your definition. including turing machines. to go the absurd length. If I identify as a vegetarian but mostly eat meat then what is that word even supposed to mean ? words value in communication come from their discriminatory nature helping the listener filter the state of possible valid answers to smaller subset that what they started with. the more a word is stretched to includes the closer it comes to becoming a filler expression.
- Supermancho 3y ago
  > almost any dynamical system would kinda fit your definition I've thought about it a lot. It's a definition that came from a psychology book and various definitions I've encountered over the years. Games teach us about reality, using an abstract set of rules. Anything you can interact with, to see what happens, in pursuit of a goal. When there's a finite set of outcomes, you can optimize, but for complicated systems that do not offer any amount of control, the game loses something necessary.
  - gryn 3y ago
    personally I think what's missing from your definition is that most games have an intentional lack of stakes/costs that are associated with the original process they were mean to abstractly simulate. (and the focus on entertainment, at the expense of accuracy) - when a lion play with its cub the danger of heavy injury and death is minimized. - when you play chess there's no danger of you being beheaded due to a failed military strategy. - when you lose at monopoly due to failure to grasp the nature of the game or your social skills you don't end up old and destitute as a result. etc...

Nav_Panel 3y ago

Agreed 100%. A courtroom trial is also a sort of game, but it's not typically fun for those involved. Much the opposite...

digging 3y ago

That's not a bad or incorrect definition of game but it's... also not what people mean when they say "video game" or something like like a video game. The specific language in the article makes it clear that the person is referring to (basically) fantasy MMORPGs.

mym1990 3y ago

This seems like an extremely over complicated way of defining a game. If I play chess, or a video game, or tennis, I am not doing those things to 'understand my reality'. I am doing them because it is usually fun and gives me some kind of dopamine(ymmv), you might even say I play games to get away from reality. Some people use games to learn, some use them to accomplish an otherwise mundane task. Some people split games into 'finite and infinite' but typically they are a form of play, governed by a set of rules, that lead to some outcome. Games can be zero sum, or not.

Supermancho 3y ago
> If I play chess, or a video game, or tennis > I am not doing those things to 'understand my reality'. Not to be argumentative, but I am sure you are. You are attempting to control state and then optimizing for a goal. There are constraints on your ability to manage your own mental and physical capabilities (knowledge, limitations, etc).
- mym1990 3y ago
  You are deeply overthinking things, or best case scenario you are being too philosophical. Playing games with you must be a hoot. "My reality" is almost an incomprehensible array of things that are going on, some of which are in my control, and others which are not. A game of chess, or even one move within that game has little to no meaning in regards to "my reality". A board state can certainly be in 'attacking', 'neutral', or 'defensive' configuration, but that is not "my reality".

gryn 3y ago

yes, technically well kinda, but not the most common definition of it. when defining something it's also pertinent to ask yourself what isn't included in that set. what isn't a game in this case ? almost any dynamical system would kinda fit your definition. including turing machines. to go the absurd length. If I identify as a vegetarian but mostly eat meat then what is that word even supposed to mean ? words value in communication come from their discriminatory nature helping the listener filter the state of possible valid answers to smaller subset that what they started with. the more a word is stretched to includes the closer it comes to becoming a filler expression.

Supermancho 3y ago
> almost any dynamical system would kinda fit your definition I've thought about it a lot. It's a definition that came from a psychology book and various definitions I've encountered over the years. Games teach us about reality, using an abstract set of rules. Anything you can interact with, to see what happens, in pursuit of a goal. When there's a finite set of outcomes, you can optimize, but for complicated systems that do not offer any amount of control, the game loses something necessary.
- gryn 3y ago
  personally I think what's missing from your definition is that most games have an intentional lack of stakes/costs that are associated with the original process they were mean to abstractly simulate. (and the focus on entertainment, at the expense of accuracy) - when a lion play with its cub the danger of heavy injury and death is minimized. - when you play chess there's no danger of you being beheaded due to a failed military strategy. - when you lose at monopoly due to failure to grasp the nature of the game or your social skills you don't end up old and destitute as a result. etc...