fundamental rules game design

Chapter 32: Games as Cultural Resistance 9
< Day Day Up >

Friction on the Playground

The sidebar text on this page and the next is excerpted from sissyfightnews.com, a fan site devoted to the
game SiSSYFiGHT 2000. The text is a manifesto against cheating; it details how to identify and combat
rule-breaking in the game, and is directed toward resisting those who would bend the system too far out of
shape by conspiring to cheat. There are competing ideologies in the game (resist the game through cheating;
resist cheating by policing the cheaters) and the manifesto therefore represents an act of double-resistance. On
one hand, cheating exists as a form of friction against the authority of the game, resisting the public chat that
is a key game play element. On the other hand, there is resistance to this resistance, a vigilante group working
to raise the consciousness of the community and eliminate cheating. These double-movements become part of
the larger culture of the game.

from sissyfightnews.com

How do you know a cheater when you see one? Let's use a working definition. You can identify cheaters as:

Two or more allied characters who perform extremely coordinated attacks in succession, with
little or no communication within the SiSSYFiGHT word bubbles.

Let's take this apart piece by piece, to clarify. The important thing to remember is that all of these elements
together must be present to identify cheaters—otherwise, you might just be dealing with a perfectly legit
team.

Two or more allied characters: The first sign of cheaters is that they never attack each other. Usually cheaters
will work in pairs, although there are some who actually try to coordinate more. Please remember that there's
nothing wrong with having allies or teams alone! One of the main points of the game is to build up alliances.

Who perform extremely coordinated attacks: Coordinated attacks are a result of good strategy and
communication. In a two-person team, these combination moves can be mapped out like this:

If Character X performs this: Then Character Y performs this:

tease tease

grab scratch or lick lolly

tattle cower or lick lolly

scratch scratch

Again, please remember that if any two players perform these actions, that does not necessarily make them
cheaters…yet. Up to this point, we're still talking about fair gaming and good strategy.

In succession: This is the point where we start to draw the line between honest players and cheaters. If you
see two characters performing several coordinated attacks in a row, something is up.

With little or no communication within the SiSSYFiGHT word bubbles: This is the kicker, right here. The big
giveaway to pairs or groups of cheaters is that they never communicate their moves in the SiSSYFiGHT
window. This provides them with a distinct and unfair advantage over honest players, because there are no
signals (either direct or indirect) for other players to attempt to read. Note, sometimes cheaters will actually
talk smack in their word balloons, but they will never actually give any indication to each other as to what
their next moves will be.

There are two ways to cheat in SiSSYFiGHT: external communication and multiple sessions.

Chapter 32: Games as Cultural Resistance 9

10 Chapter 32: Games as Cultural Resistance

Cheaters who use external communication basically resort to some form of telegraphing their moves to each
other by any means outside of the SiSSYFiGHT window itself. This most often takes its form in either AOL
Instant Messaging or ICQ, but may also include phone conversation or two people sissyfighting at adjacent
workstations in a computer lab. Cheaters who use this method are so insecure in their strategic impotence,
they would rather subvert the integrity of the game than use what few brain cells they have left. If you're ever
beaten by one of these external communicators, you can rest assured that in real life, they're probably
overweight drooling idiots who still live with their parents and can't actually make any real friends.

Cheaters who use multiple sessions are even sadder creatures on the social pecking order. This kind of cheater
is a single person who runs SiSSYFiGHT from one workstation in two or more separate browsers. These
people are so socially inept that the mere thought of actually communicating and working with someone else
sends them into panicked spasms. They've never kissed anyone, and spend a lot of time breaking into
password-protected porn sites. Rest assured that if you're ever beaten by someone coordinated enough to run
multiple sessions, they've probably also developed the enviable talent of typing one-handed. (Oh, NOW you
get it.)

Breaking the Rules was a RULES schema—a formal way of understanding a game. What is rule-breaking in
the context of CULTURE, particularly in a schema on cultural resistance? The broken rules identified in the
SiSSYFiGHT manifesto are implicit rules, the violation of which most often represents unsportsmanlike
conduct. But the emotional force with which this manifesto was written implies that something deeper is at
work. Indeed, because of complaints about cheating, the game's developer Word.com, posted a "code of
ethics" on the game website which explicitly defined and banned cheating. As a result, the ability to chat in
private was recategorized as a true rule infraction: private chat became an operational rule breach. So-called
cheaters bending the rules led to this structural transformation, a process in which cheating players, vigilante
players, and game designers all took part.

In the complex case of the SiSSYFiGHT cheating manifesto, factors both internal and external to the game
drove resistance. The alleged cheating represents a form of resistance that seeks to undermine the experience
of play in undesirable ways, transgressing the magic circle from within. When this violation came to the
attention of a few astute and passionate players, a strategy of retaliation was formalized, an act of resistance
that came from outside the magic circle. The resulting solution is both elegant and inspiring: as a cultural
artifact created and disseminated by players of the game, the manifesto represents a wonderful example of
player-production; as a strategy of resistance, it demonstrates that meaningful play can be brought into the
game from contexts beyond its permeable edges. And in this instance, the story had a happy ending: the
designers intervened, reaching the entire community of players through the game's official website, revising
the rules of the game and raising the consciousness of the player community as a whole.

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Resist!

The resistant strategies taken by independent game designers such as the Counter-Strike team, dedicated
players such as the Sissyfightnews crew, and game artists such as Uri Tzaig suggest how games can be
designed or redesigned from a cultural perspective to support transformative play. Whether the approaches
taken are formal, aesthetic, or politically inspired, the cultural dimensions of these acts of resistance shape
ideology and interaction. If game designers were to embrace strategies of resistance more often, the potential
for games to affect culture in significant ways would surely increase.

10 Chapter 32: Games as Cultural Resistance

Chapter 32: Games as Cultural Resistance 11

Remember: games intrinsically support and encourage the movement of free play. It is always possible for
players to throw a monkey wrench into the system, bending it into a new shape. Game designers must
consider how this process can be enhanced or interrupted, modified or transformed, either by players or by the
design of the game itself. The Sissyfightnews manifesto, for instance, turned the practice of resistance into a
cautionary tale, tightening the borders of the magic circle just enough to remind players that the game, too,
could bite back.

Games clearly derive meaning from the contexts within which they are played. Consideration of these
contexts enables game designers to see potential lines of cultural engagement. The open dissemination of the
DOOM source code, for example, was visionary in its recognition of a hacker mentality already present in
communities of gamers. Given the right tools, players will transgress the magic circle in pursuit of alternate
forms of expression. These transgressions can shape and reshape the game so that the values of the "real"
world are made explicit within the artificiality of the game, values that might be reinforced, questioned,
inverted, or subverted through play.

What if game designers considered the possibility of working with this natural desire of players to bend the
shape of the game? In massively multiplayer games such as EverQuest or Ultima Online, vast resources are
spent trying to root out and punish cheating. But other scenarios are possible.What if players were allowed to
police each other, as a form of game play? Or what if players were encouraged to cheat? Or given the source
code and let loose in the field of play? Clearly we would have a very different kind of game, perhaps a game
that would radically reinvent the potential for culturally transformative play. The possibilities are out there.
But until you begin to resist the conventions of game design, we will never find out just how fun they are to
play. Fight the establishment! Down with the old rules! Vive la resistance!

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Further Reading

Cracking the Maze: Game Plug-ins and Patches as Hacker Art, Anne-Marie Schleiner, curator
<http://switch.sjsu.edu/CrackingtheMaze/ >

In 1999, Anne-Marie Schleiner curated an online exhibition of game patches, mods, and game plug-ins. Most
of the game modifications were produced by artists, and many had socio-political agendas. The online archive
has visual examples of a range of artist-produced patches, downloads of the patches, and several good
introductory essays on issues of cultural representation in games and the practice of tactical media
intervention.

Game Girl Advance, <www.gamegirladvance.com>

The Game Girl Advance website is a journalistic website addressing the culture of digital games. Resisting
content of standard commercial game sites, Game Girl Advance features short essays on topics such as the
gender politics of gaming conferences or how games personally impact the lives of players. Although there
are many grassroots alternative game news sites on the web, Game Girl Advance distinguishes itself with
smart writing that is both culturally critical and industry-savvy.

Subculture: The Meaning of Style, by Dick Hebdige

Hebdige investigates subcultures as systems of meaning, particularly subcultures like Punk and the Teddy
Boys, that resist larger cultural institutions. These systems, like games, create their own boundaries within
which forms, behaviors, and actions gain meaning separate from, but connected to the real world. He explores

Chapter 32: Games as Cultural Resistance 11

12 Chapter 32: Games as Cultural Resistance
style as a system of communication, a stylized, symbolic, and interactive language borne from the "rules" of
the system. Although Hebdige is speaking from a Marxist, structuralist, and semiotic perspective, his
approach is quite applicable to the study of games.

Recommended:

Introduction: Subculture and Style

Chapter 1: From Culture to Hegemony

Chapter 7: Style as Intentional Communication

Chapter 8: Style as Homology

Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture, by Henry Jenkins (see page 553)

Recommended:

Chapter 5: Scribbling in the Margins

Chapter 7:"Layers of Meaning": Fan Music Videos and the

Poetics of Poaching

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Summary

• Games as Cultural Resistance explores the tension between games and their cultural contexts. The
focus of the schema is exclusively on culturally transformative play.

• Resistance is the friction that occurs when two phenomena come into conflictual contact. Framed as
resistance, the free movement of play has intrinsic friction with the systems of rules that seek to
contain it. Through this process of resistance, the normally invisible edges of the magic circle become
visible.

• A DIY or Do-It-Yourself approach to cultural resistance appears in modifications, designed
strategies of resistance in a game. Game modifications or mods can be "official" utilitarian changes
enacted by game designers, or "unofficial" projects created and distributed by players.

• Game modifications fall into three overlapping categories: alteration, juxtaposition, and reinvention.

♦ Alterations change the representational or interactive structures of a game. Examples: SOD,
Sailor Moon Wad, SimCopter Hack

♦ Juxtapositions place unlikely elements together in the same game space. Examples: Frag
Queens, Blacklash, Los Disneys

♦ Reinventions more radically redesign the structure of a game. Examples: Universal Square,
Counter-Strike

• Resistance flows naturally from the intrinsic qualities of games. The free play of a game already
involves the friction of movement within a rigid structure. For this reason, games are rich with
possibilities for players or designers to intervene with strategies of resistance.

12 Chapter 32: Games as Cultural Resistance

Chapter 32: Games as Cultural Resistance 13

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Chapter 32: Games as Cultural Resistance 13

14 Chapter 32: Games as Cultural Resistance
14 Chapter 32: Games as Cultural Resistance

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

THIS IS NOT A GAME—A.I.: Artificial Intelligence movie trailer

Raise the Red Flag

A game is a system in which players engage in an artificial conflict, defined by rules, that results in a
quantifiable outcome.

With that single sentence, many, many pages ago, we offered a definiton of games. Since then, we have
proceeded on the assumption that this formulation does, in fact, accurately describe what games are and how
they operate. However, our final schema, Games as Cultural Environment, may force us to re-evaluate our
definition.

The definition is rooted in the formal properties of games. In general, during our long march across the varied
territory of game design schemas, it has served us well. But in the course of exploring games within a cultural
context, one element of the definition doesn't seem to do justice to the complexities of the phenomenon. It is
not the idea that games are systems, nor that they have rules and outcomes, nor that through games players
engage in a conflict. The element of the definition that seems increasingly suspect is the idea that games are
artificial, that they are removed from ordinary life.

How are games artificial? Even though we frame games as open culture systems, they remain systems with
defined elements and attributes. The way that games operate as systems implies some kind of separation from
the rest of culture. The meanings that games produce, while intertwined with larger cultural meanings, still
acquire their distinct identity as game meanings because they emerge out of the system of relations made
possible by the game itself. This system of relations is not something that naturally occurs out in the world. If
games weren't artificial in some way, they wouldn't be designed. Instead, they would be some kind of
"natural" phenomena bopping about the cultural ether.

But the wider our cultural frame grows in defining games as culture, the more their artificiality begins to
unravel. As culture, games are open systems. They are not isolated from their environment, but are
intrinsically part of it, participating in the ebb and flow of ideas and values that make up a larger cultural
set-ting. Framed contextually, the magic circle is not an impermeable curtain but is instead a border that can
be crossed. Cultural elements from outside the circle enter in and have an impact on the game;
simultaneously, cultural meanings ripple outward from the game to interact with numerous cultural contexts.
Given all of this play at and across the border, given the fact that games are not separate from but are part of
culture, what would happen if we questioned the artificiality of games? What if a schema specifically sought
to frame games as systems completely synchronous with their surroundings?

< Day Day Up > 1
Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

2 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

< Day Day Up >

Introducing Cultural Environment

This is the premise of Games as Cultural Environment, a chapter engaged with the question of the "reality"
of games, a schema that interrogates the relationship between the artificial world of games and the "real life"
contexts that they intersect. Rather than calling attention to the borders of the magic circle, as we did in earlier
CULTURE schemas, here we look at games in which the boundary is so completely erased that it is difficult
to distinguish the space of play from ordinary life. These kinds of games have a number of curious
characteristics. They create a heightened overlap between the artificial space of the game and the physical
spaces and lifestyles of their players. They blur the distinction between players and non-players, sometimes
involuntarily roping in unsuspecting participants. Perhaps most importantly, these sorts of games raise
fundamental questions about the artificiality of games and their relationship to real life.

The most familiar examples of games that bleed over into their cultural environment are designs such as
Assassin (also known as Killer), made popular on college campuses in the 1970s and 1980s, a game in which
players stalked, hunted, and evaded each other with dart guns over days or weeks of real time. Game play took
place not in a special, isolated game space, but in and among the activities of daily life. Recent digital games
have adopted similar design strategies, such as Majestic, a large-scale experimental game by Electronic Arts
that took place through fictitious web sites, faxes, and telephone voicemail. When a player's phone rang in the
middle of the night it might be a call from the pizza delivery service—or from a character in the game
whispering a secret code. Other games, such as the cell phone game Botfighters, tracks the physical location
of players at all times and lets them challenge one another to unexpected duels. This chapter will focus on
these kinds of games: play activities that overtly become part of their cultural environment.The idea that a
game can become so co-extensive with its context that it blurs the borders that facilitate its own artificiality is
a rarely taken but powerful approach to game design. And as we will see, it has important implications for the
design of all games.

Considering games as cultural environments raises a number of questions. How does the play of a game
change when the difference between the "inside" and the "outside" of the game is ambiguous? How permeable
is the boundary between the real world and the artificial world of the game? Are only certain games capable
of blurring these boundaries, or does it happen to some extent in all games? To answer these questions, we
revisit many of the fundamental elements of games. More so than in any other schema, we make generous use
of terms and concepts introduced in chapters leading up to this one. Part of the reason for doing so is that
these concepts genuinely inform an analysis of games as cultural environments. However, our hidden agenda
is to use these game analyses as an informal review of material covered previously. The review is not meant to
be comprehensive, but it does demonstrate how a framework of related ideas, connected through the concept
of meaningful play, is necessary for a truly sophisticated and integrated understanding of game design.

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Back to Basics

A game creates a special place of play. Following Huizinga, these spaces define the game's magic circle, a
"temporary world within the ordinary world, dedicated to the performance of an act apart."[1] It is within the
magic circle that the authority of the rules hold sway. If you are visiting a casino equipment store, you might
give a Roulette wheel a test spin to see if it is in working order, but you would neither gain nor lose money as
a result of the spin. On the other hand, if you are playing a game of Roulette and your chips are on the table,

2 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 3

the outcome of the spin will have a real impact on the quantity of your betting chips. Only when a player has
entered into the magic circle of a game do game rules imbue game actions with meaning and consequence.

The rules of a game define its formal essence. Each game is composed of three kinds of rules: constituative,
operational, and implicit. Constituative rules are the logical, mathematical structures that gird the formal
system of a game. Operational rules are the practical "rules of play" that direct player action. Implicit rules
are the "unwritten rules" of play that players bring to every game, rules that are usually unstated in the official
"rules of play," making implicit rules something that players have to infer or intuit.

Implicit rules arise via cultural custom, tradition, and player experience. They directly link the formal and
cultural aspects of a game, creating a bridge between the forms of authority that exist inside and outside of a
game's space of play. The operation of implicit rules is usually invisible and incredibly subtle. Stephen
Sniderman, in his essay "Unwritten Rules," looks closely at what players must know and do in order to play
even the simplest game. Among other requirements, they must:

Consciously understand and follow the etiquette of the game—i.e., the unwritten but
sometimes stated traditions associated with the game that do not necessarily affect the play
itself (e.g., appropriateness of talking, gloating, taunting, celebrating, stalling, replaying a
point, giving advice to your opponent or teammates, letting players take back moves, etc.).

Intuitively understand and follow the ethos of that particular game—i.e., the unwritten and
rarely expressed assumptions about how to interpret and enforce the "written" rules (e.g.,
palming in basketball; the strike zone in American and National leagues; the footfault in
tennis).

Intuitively understand and follow the conventions of playing any game according to the
culture of the participants—i.e., the unwritten and generally unstatable customs related to
playing, competing, winning/losing, etc. (e.g. taking the game with the appropriate
seriousness, knowing what takes priority over winning and over playing, not faking injury or
personal obligation to avoid losing; playing "hard" regardless of the score; not claiming that
previous points didn't "count").

Intuitively understand and respond to the "real-life" context in which the game is being
played—i.e. the social, cultural, economic, political, and moral consequences of the result
(e.g., whether someone's livelihood or self-esteem depends on the outcome).[2]

A player's intuitive understanding of implicit rules is strikingly sophisticated. The constituative and
operational rules of a game might define its formal essence, but etiquette, ethos, convention, and context are
equally important in facilitating a game's play. These four categories are forms of cultural knowledge that
permit the magic circle to come into being. Without them, players might be able to understand and even
follow rules, but the social frameworks allowing the artificial conflict of a game to take place would break
down. If you were invited to join in a game but were concerned that your opponent might take the game too
seriously and injure you, or take advantage of superior knowledge of the rules, or just give up in the middle if
he or she was losing, it is highly unlikely that you would choose to play at all. The mechanisms that guide the
operation of implicit rules are a crucial part of any game's play. Implicit rules take place simultaneously on the
level of rules and on the level of culture, linking these two disparate dimensions of games in a distinctly
powerful way.

From a player's point of view, acceptance of the implicit rules (as well as the operational rules) of a game is
only made possible by the lusory attitude. A concept borrowed from philosopher Bernard Suits, the lusory
attitude is the state of mind whereby game players consciously take on the challenges and obstacles of a game
in order to experience the play of the game itself. Accepting the artificial authority of the magic circle,
submitting behavior to the constraints of rules in order to experience the free movement of play, is a
paradoxical state of mind. This state of mind is manifest in the lusory attitude.

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 3

4 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

In previous chapters, we considered the lusory attitude primarily in relationship to the formal rules of a game.
But taking on the lusory attitude doesn't just mean accepting the limitations of the operational rules. It also
entails following implicit rules. Playing a game means submitting to the authority of the magic circle, which
includes the cultural conventions expressed through implicit rules. In this sense, the magic circle of a game
extends beyond any individual game to include culture as a whole. To play a game, any game, is not just to
play within the rules of that particular game, but within the rules of a larger cultural context that define what it
means to play at all.

Consider the case of Japanese Sumo wrestling. As the national sport of Japan, Sumo wrestling is more than
mere sport; it is seen as the epitome of Japanese honor and ethos. The sport has spiritual ties to Shinto, the
Japanese religion, and is linked to politics as well. According to Brian Sutton-Smith, Japanese emperors over
the centuries have sometimes been selected to rule through a Sumo contest.[3] To take part in a Sumo
competition requires much more than simply adhering to the formal rules of the game. Engaging with the play
of Sumo wrestling only truly occurs when a player takes on the etiquette, ethos, context, and conventions of
the game as well.

[1]Johann Huizinga, Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play Element in Culture 4.Andrea Phillips,"Deep Water."
26th July 2001.Cloudmakers.org (Boston: Beacon Press, 1955), p. 10.5.Maria Bonasia,"MetaMystery." 30th
May 2001.Cloudmakers.org

[2]Stephen Sniderman, "Unwritten Rules." 6.Daniel Sieberg, "Reality Blurs, Hype Builds with Web 'A.I.'
Game." May <www.gamepuzzles.com/tlog/tlog2.htm>. 2001 CNN.com

[3]Brian Sutton Smith, The Ambiguity of Play (London: Harvard University 7.Daragh Sankey,"A.I. Game."
Joystick101.org Press, 1997), p. 77.

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Shall We Play a Game?

Upon first glance it might seem that only highly unconventional games like Assassin, Majestic, and
Botfighters genuinely blur the boundaries of the magic circle. However, implicit rules, the lusory attitude, and
the magic circle operate in such a way that we can consider any game, at least in part, as a cultural
environment. By the end of this schema we will return to this important proposition. Before doing so,
however, we will explore these concepts through particular examples, by looking at games designed to
explicitly blur the boundaries of the magic circle.

Our first example focuses on a game reportedly designed and operated by Microsoft as a viral marketing
campaign for the film A.I.: Artificial Intelligence. The web-based game, known by its players informally as
"The Beast," "The A.I. Game," or just "A.I.," had participants from all over the world collaboratively
deciphering cryptic puzzles and clues across a range of media. The game began with an enigmatic credit at the
end of the preview trailer for the film. Savvy viewers picked up on a mysterious listing for "Jeanine Salla,
Sentient Machine Therapist" and a set of mysterious symbols. When viewers (now players) entered the name
"Jeanine Salla" into an Internet search engine, they began a Wonderland-style journey through a series of
linked websites. The sites blended real-world information and information from the fictive world of A.I.'s
backstory, which concerned a dramatic struggle between humans and robots capable of human emotion.

Over the course of several months leading up to the film's premiere, thousands of players took part in the
game. Many expressed profound reactions to the distortion of the boundaries between game, film, life, and
reality. As one player wrote in an essay on cloudmakers.org, the most active community site developed by

4 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 5

players of the game,"Here we are, every one of us excited at blurring the lines between story and reality.The
game promises to become not just entertainment, but our lives. But where in the story is there room for the
too-mundane matters of our actual lives that must be attended?"[4] While players were intrigued by and often
obsessed with the game, there was a clear sense of uneasiness about the truth of what was actually going on.
The ambiguity surrounding the game's status (was it a game, a puzzle, a story, an evil marketing ploy?) made
the experience of play oddly compelling. Another player noted,

On the morning of the premiere, we'll know the plot, subplot, conflict, climax and dialogue
down to the last poignant pause. Surely the PMs [Puppet Masters, the game's developers]
know this; they also know that most of us will go anyway, to experience it for ourselves. So
something undiscovered still remains—the heart of this (and whatever that implies).[5]

Puzzles in the game had players reading Göedel, Escher, Bach, translating from German, Japanese, and an
obscure language called Kannada, decrypting Morse and Enigma code, and performing a range of operations
on sound and image files downloaded and swapped between players.[6] Sometimes players received actual
phone calls from unnamed parties to attend real-world events. At one "anti-robot" rally, for example,
attendees solved puzzles and phoned the answers to players at rallies being held simultaneously in other cities.
At every moment, A.I. played with the boundaries between the game's magic circle and the cultural spaces
outside of it. The play experience of most games can be framed as a closed system, in which the play of the
game is in some respects bounded by the magic circle. But because the space of play in A.I. was ambiguous, it
operated as an open system, defying implicit assumptions about the scope of the space of possibility. As a
result, A.I. mixed freely with its environment at a very deep level. Players were clearly affected by the play
such an approach afforded.

Although there is much to be said about this game from a marketing perspective, our interest lies
elsewhere—in how its play became meaningful, even as it erased and redefined traditional boundaries
separating fact from fiction. From a game design perspective, what elements of the game contributed to its
status as real-world interloper? Listed next are some of A.I.'s salient design features, incorporating
commentary from player Daragh Sankey's online analysis of the game.[7]

Web-based

Although the format of web-based games is not new, A.I. made wonderful use of the web's unique properties.
The story was built from an amalgamation of distributed sites. A core mechanic of the game play involved
searching and surfing the web, making the Internet fundamental to the game's structure.

Fictional game content disguised as reality

All of the information contained in the numerous sites created for the game was fabricated.There were not,
however, any pages that announced,"This is a work of fiction." In fact, many of the websites could easily have
been misconstrued as real, such as www.rational-hatter.com. This representational strategy helped reinforce
the illusion that the game was part of the real world, rather than part of an artificial game world.

Decentralized content

Unlike most web-based games, A.I. had no single gateway or homepage. Content was spread across many
websites, allowing for numerous points of entry. However, the distributed complexity of the game demanded
a need for a central information hub. As an emergent effect of player behavior, the website
www.cloudmakers.org was quickly adopted as the game's primary player-created portal.

Game events occurred outside the web

Although the bulk of the game was located on the web, the most dramatic events seemed to occur offline.

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 5

6 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

Email, faxes, and phones all played a part in the game. For example, the A.I. trailer included an encoded
phone number, which when called, played a mysterious voice message from "mother." Players were able to
enter characters' passwords into fictional voicemail accounts and uncover new information. Game associated
A.I.s even called players at home. Most dramatic, however, were three real-life "rallies" held by the
"Anti-Robot Militia"(www.unite-and-resist.org) in New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles. Players were given
a date and address, and attended what turned out to be clever theatre pieces. The rallies included puzzles that
required real-time collaboration between players at the events and those at home in front of their computers.

Episodic content

Game content was updated weekly, as elements were added, modified, and taken away. Emails were sent out
to players; increasingly, sites attached to the game were "hacked" by rampant A.I.s. With its complex,
ongoing narrative, the disadvantage of A.I.'s episodic release was that players who joined the game later had a
hard time catching up. The advantage was a heightened sense of urgency, because the game couldn't ever be
put on pause. As a narrative structure, the episodic release was a natural fit for a web-based game, because
most real sites do change over time. Additionally, because the game led chronologically to the launch of the
film, it made sense that it built to a single climax.

Distributed problem-solving

Many of the puzzles in the game were extremely difficult to solve (some of them remain unsolved today). For
example, messages were hidden in the html source code of certain web pages. Anyone could uncover this
information, but since the game had so many websites, solitary players could not possibly get it all. It is safe
to say that an isolated individual could never have played the entire game from start to finish. Thus, fan sites
served as a meeting ground for game players, who collaborated by sharing new developments and puzzle
answers, organizing and sharing problem-solving tasks. This was a bold design decision, because in designing
a game it is generally better to err on the side of simplicity and ease rather than complexity. However, with
A.I. the risk paid off—the design encouraged players to interact socially, and the collaborative play
heightened the satisfaction each time a puzzle was solved.

Interaction between authors and players

Players presumed from the moment the game began that there was a set story arc to the game, which would
end in the release of the film. The weekly updates generally involved puzzles that players had to solve before
they could access new story content. Many players speculated that because the size and effectiveness of the
groups solving the puzzles was an unpredictable variable, the design of new puzzles by the authors of the
game was based on past player performance. For example, if a puzzle turned out to be much too hard for the
players, the authors were forced to find an alternative means to provide the story update that the solution to
the unsolved puzzle would have granted. If the authors did not seek out alternate forms of dissemination, there
was a risk of the story never being completed.

Line blurred between players and game designers

It is worth noting that the game's creators deliberately blurred the lines between themselves and the players. In
a few cases, game pages linked to fan pages without breaking the dissimulation. Jeanine Salla's essay on
"Multiperson Social Problem-Solving Arrays Considered as a Form of 'Artificial Intelligence'" linked to the
cloudmakers page (www.cloudmakers.org); the Center for Robotic Freedom (www.inourimage.org) urged
players to help fight for A.I. rights by visiting the spherewatch page (www.spherewatch.net), another fan site.
In fact, one player noted that the easiest way for game authors to control the story delivery would have been
for them to surreptitiously join the ranks of the fans, posting solutions to puzzles when they saw that the real
players were having trouble.

Each of these design decisions contributed in distinct ways to blur the boundaries between the space of the

6 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 7

game and everyday life. All of the elements we listed share one thing in common: careful attention to the
creation of meaningful play. The web-based aspect of the game, for example, took good advantage of the
medium. Players were rewarded for careful web searches and source code sleuthing with meaningful
outcomes. Similarly, the social play of the game, from the collaborative puzzles to the real-world gatherings,
were also forms of meaningful play engendered by specific game design choices. Even the fine line separating
fact from fiction—a line made all the more porous by the game's distributed, improvisational format—was
only possible through successful design. Each of these game elements—use of the web, collaborative social
play, fiction disguised as fact—take advantage of the game as a cultural environment, intentionally blurring
the boundaries of the magic circle. The many play dimensions of A.I., from its play with pleasure to its social
and narrative play, all intentionally "play" with the border between the game and the surrounding world that it
infiltrates, infests, and inhabits.

A.I. takes the idea of game as cultural environment to extremes. But in one sense, all game experiences
involve playing with the distinction between the game world and the rest of the world. Gregory Bateson's
concept of metacommunication, first introduced in Games as the Play of Meaning, reminds us that to play a
game is not an act of naïve immersion, but an act of constant communication about the act of play itself. A
dog that nips another dog signifies a bite through its action, but also communicates the idea that the bite is not
a real bite; the dog is not actually attacking, but is instead just playing.

All games engender this quality of double-consciousness, but A.I. took it to new heights. Part of the brilliance
of the game's design is that it incorporated metacommunication itself as a form of play.By blurring the
boundaries of the magic circle as a key design choice, it made new forms of boundary-crossing possible,
intensifying the pleasure of metacommunication. As players moved through the designed structures of the
game, at every moment tensions between belief and skepticism, between playing a game and playing real life,
moved the game forward and created compelling forms of play.

[4]Andrea Phillips,“Deep Water.” 26th July 2001. Cloudmakers.org

[5]Maria Bonasia,“MetaMystery.” 30th May 2001. Cloudmakers.org

[6]Daniel Sieberg, “Reality Blurs, Hype Builds with Web ‘A.I.’ Game.” May 2001. CNN.com

[7]Daragh Sankey,“A.I.Game.” Joystick101.org

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

The Invisible Playground

From the electronically mediated spaces of A.I. we turn to another game that emphasizes the play of its
cultural environment: the LARP,or live-action role-playing game. LARPs also blur the boundaries between
the inside and outside of a game, but do so through very different means. Live-Action Role-Playing Games
are direct descendents of tabletop role-playing games such as Dungeons & Dragons. As in tabletop RPGs,
LARP players take on the persona of fictional characters, defined through formal game statistics as well as
through narrative backstory and an invented personality.

Live-Action Role-Playing Games, however, do not take place around a table. Instead, LARPs occur in real
physical spaces, as players walk about and interact with each other, dramatically acting out their characters'
actions in real-time. Although LARPs do have Game Masters that plan and referee the sessions, as well as
rules that handle combat and other complex player actions, most LARP activity consists of social interaction,
as players converse "in character" to make plans, pursue narrative threads, and scheme against each other.

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 7

8 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

Live-Action Role-Playing Games can take place in outdoor or indoor settings, in private or public spaces. The
location in which the LARP takes place, as well as the dress and interaction of the players, depends largely on
the narrative setting of the LARP.A Medie-val-themed LARP might occur in a wilderness environment or a
Renaissance Fair. A futuristic LARP might take place in a series of convention hall rooms or in the house of
one of the players.

Nick Fortugno, a game designer and LARP Game Master, ran a LARP for many years in New York City
based on Vampire: The Masquerade. His game, set in present day NYC, met regularly in public spaces that
ranged from Washington Square Park to Grand Central Station. The players all took the role of vampires,
ancient and powerful creatures that live secretly among humans. In typical Vampire: The Masquerade games,
emphasis is not on physical confrontation or on players hunting humans for blood. Instead, the interest of the
game comes from baroque power struggles waged between the aristocratic vampire clans. Fortugno's LARP,
titled Seasons of Darkness, was designed along these lines, and was a game of dense social politics and
intricate storytelling. Seasons of Darkness successfully engaged with its cultural environment in a variety of
ways.

Public Spaces

Although many LARPs take place exclusively in isolated settings, most Seasons of Darkness sessions were
held in public urban spaces. Through this design decision, Fortugno (and Tami Meyers, the game's
administrator) created a game that intrinsically blurred the boundaries of the magic circle. In most games,
even real-world physical games, the play takes place in a field, on a court, or someplace set aside specifically
for the game. Seasons of Darkness did not use an artificially designed space, but instead appropriated existing
ones. The players integrated their "found" context into the game play in many ways. A balcony overlooking
the World Trade Center's Winter Garden, for example, might be used to heighten dramatic effect for a player
delivering a speech to other players below; the same balcony might also be used strategically, as a vantage
point for spying.

The game-space of Seasons of Darkness was congruent not just with the material setting but also with the
cultural environment of New York City. Media, signage, and unknowing passersby were all fodder for the
game. A character on the run might duck into a throng of commuters, camouflaging herself among the passing
crowds in an attempt to evade her pursuers. Or two players might be inspired by a clothing store window
display to have a conversation about current fads in "human" culture. This use of public space as the space of
the game greatly increased options for narrative play. As we first introduced in Interactivity, a game's space of
possibility is the event-space of all possible game actions that might occur in the course of play. The space of
possibility even in a closed magic circle can be quite large. But chance events and a constant flow of people
and culture through a session of Seasons of Darkness made the game's space of possibility truly infinite. The
game was played nowhere and everywhere at once, as players continually improvised and invented new ways
to engage with their environment.

Real-World Interaction

As with most LARPs, Seasons of Darkness players played their game by moving, speaking, and gesturing "in
character." In contrast to most games, in which game actions are stylized, artificial gestures (move a plastic
token to a new space on the board when it is your turn; pass the ball to certain players in certain ways),
Seasons of Darkness players made use of naturalized behaviors. In Freeze Tag, touching another player on the
arm has formal ramifications for play. But in a LARP,touching another player on the arm usually has the same
communicative meaning it does in everyday life: perhaps it is a gesture of empathy, or a silent request for the
recipient to stop speaking. This is a significant departure from more typical games. The blurring and erasure
of the magic circle takes place not only in terms of the game's setting, but also on the level of the player's
interactions. The core mechanics of a game are basic game actions or set of actions that players repeat over
and over as they play. In the case of Seasons of Darkness, the game's core mechanics overlapped with the
behaviors of everyday life. Gestures, speech, dramatic skills: these tools for social interaction were part of the
cultural environment each player brought to the game. Although social communication occurs in most games,

8 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 9
in Seasons of Darkness these activities were themselves core game actions.

This is not to say that the game didn't have its own set of stylized play actions; it certainly did. Combat and
the use of supernatural powers required stylized behavior, which Fortungno designed as part of the game. It
might be the case, for example, that a tap on the arm did not denote an innocent communicative
speech-gesture, but instead signaled the use of a magical action. In Seasons of Darkness, a player that had
used a special power to turn invisible crossed his or her arms. This gesture signified invisibility, and other
players had to act as if the invisible player was not present.

There is an important distinction to make here. Although it is true that a LARP blurs the border of the magic
circle, the boundary is nowhere close to being completely eradicated. Despite its lamination with the actions
and events of daily life, the game remains capable of generating its own meanings.The meaning of the
crossed-arm gesture is artificial, not a part of our everyday lexicon of interaction. Yet this is entirely
consistent with what we already know about games. As we discussed in Games as the Play of Simulation, the
metacommunicative aspect of player consciousness creates what folklorist Gary Allen Fine calls "layers of
meaning" in which game character, game player, and real-world context exist together within a web of
interconnected cognitive frameworks.

Emergent Storytelling

Whereas some LARPs rely on pregenerated storylines and tightly scripted events, the narrative of Seasons of
Darkness was a largely emergent system. Fortugno encouraged bottom-up instead of top-down narratives:
many of the most significant story events were player-produced: the result of characters scheming and
plotting against one another. Each session was a complex system, with the characters bumping into each other
like narrative particles. Every interaction between characters built on previous ones, adding up to larger
patterns of narrative behavior. In managing these patterns from session to session, Fortugno had to balance
emergent with embedded narrative elements. The unexpected, emergent qualities of the game kept it moving
in lively, unpredictable directions. But over the course of the years that the game was played, Fortugno also
developed elaborately embedded plots that were only fully realized during the game's final climax.

Emergence takes place within a context, the environment of the system. In Seasons of Darkness, narrative
contexts were established out of the complex backstory of the game, which was derived from a host of
sources: vampire lore and legend; the mythos of the published game rules; a fictional history of NYC
vampires that Fortugno had written; established events of previous game sessions; consistent character
personalities and their allegiances and enmities; and the public setting and other elements of the cultural
environment. Any conversation or interaction between characters took place within a rich narrative context
brimming with story potential.

Meta-Narratives

Playing a game in a public space has its challenges, especially when the players are pretending to be vampires.
Large groups of players, milling about for hours late at night, could attract unwanted attention from police and
security guards. Part of the play of the game included negotiating the friction between the real-world settings
and the unusual way that players inhabited them. But remarkably enough, this very negotiation was a site of
meaningful play.

In the narrative universe of the game, vampires live in secret, pretending to be human (thus the "masquerade"
of Vampire: The Masquerade). The most severe crime a vampire can commit is to leak information to human
society about the existence of vampires. For this reason, players speaking about matters of vampire clan
politics or supernatural occult powers lower their voices when non-players walk nearby. Players manifest the
in-game narrative of secrecy by pretending that passersby need to be kept in the dark about the sinister truth.
At the same time, players maintain another form of secret information: the fact that they are playing a
game.The secret meanings of the game, like the fact that a player with crossed arms is "invisible," remain
unknown to the general public.

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 9

10 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

There is a beautiful double logic to the way these game elements play out. Just as vampires in the fictional
game-world keep their existence to themselves, players of the game secret away the very presence of the
magic circle. Games as Systems of Information explored the ways that games manipulate public and private
information in order to drive meaningful play. In Seasons of Darkness, the game itself was a kind of private
information, kept hidden from the public. This approach is in contrast to most games, where both players and
spectators acknowledge the presence of the magic circle, and the distinction between players and non-players
is immediately evident. The special information that Seasons of Darkness players have about the existence of
the game is more than the formal information about its rules: it is cultural information, information that
defines the play community and binds it together.

The private knowledge that players have about the game acts to exemplify the narrative itself. Players'
imaginative existence as non-human vampires is heightened by the secret status they hold within the public
cultural environment where the game takes place. Private knowledge about the game functions as a form of
procedural representation, a concept we introduced in Games as the Play of Simulation, in which
signification arises from a dynamic process. A crowd of hapless tourists parts to reveal the menacing
black-clad figure of an enemy vampire striding confidently toward you: this is a powerful moment of
procedural narrative that could only happen in a LARP.But unlike most forms of procedural representation,
where the closed set of rules and game interactions generate a depiction, here representation arises by layering
the game onto the real world. The blurring of the game with its cultural environment is itself an act of
representation.

Current Events

The Seasons of Darkness game was set in the real world, in the present day. As a result, political events
occurring locally, nationally, and globally could be incorporated into the game narrative. For example, in the
game narrative, Rudolph Giuliani, the mayor of New York City for the duration of the game, was a
mind-controlled stooge of one of the more powerful players. As the Game Master, Fortugno had free reign to
tie real-world events to the narrative play of the game; he freely encouraged players to do so as well. When
fashion designer Gianni Versace was murdered, the clan of vampires that influence and guide human art and
culture played their characters in full mourning for the entire game session following the news. Building on
this creative game action, Fortugno decided to make the death a vampiric assassination with larger political
implications.

In this way, Seasons of Darkness was a system of open culture, exchanging meaning with its cultural context
and transforming that meaning into game-specific narratives with integrated outcomes affecting future play.
Fortugno encouraged a player-as-producer paradigm, encouraging players to modify and transform the
game's meaning through independent acts of creation. Although Fortugno always had final approval of a
player's appropriation of a real-world event, the shared context of the game and its storyline meant that he
very rarely had to exercise censuring authority. The significance of player-production in Seasons of Darkness
lies in the fact that players were not simply inventing an isolated game object such as a Quake skin or a work
of fan fiction. Their act of creation consisted of locating an event in the real world and stretching the game
narrative to accommodate it. In Seasons of Darkness, the cultural environment of current events was the raw
material for player-production.

Each of these design elements, acting in concert, created an extremely meaningful experience, supporting a
play community of several dozen players for more than five years. Each game element was the result of
careful game design choices. The danger and difficulty of designing a game as fully integrated into its cultural
environment as Seasons of Darkness is that the game can run away with itself. Because of its intentional play
with the boundaries of the magic circle, the game has the potential to blend too well into its environment. If it
becomes too ambiguous, the shared safety and trust that allows a play community to persist can disappear.

Acknowledging this danger, Fortugno kept the game design tightly constrained in many respects. Treating the
published game as an open system, he re-wrote the rules, streamlining the formal game mechanics so players
could focus on role-playing and storytelling. Although the game existed in public spaces, there were always

10 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 11

constraints on where players could travel and what they could do during a game. The time of a game session
was also clearly marked: every session began and ended with a Peter Pan-inspired ritual in which Fortugno
blew imaginary pixie dust and pink smoke over the players. Even in a game with such permeable borders, the
time and space of the magic circle remained unambiguously demarcated.

As we have noted many times, game design is a second-order design process. Game designers create play
experiences, but only indirectly, by creating rules and structures which then give rise to play. As a game
designer, Fortugno skillfully manipulated the game's formal structures and their relationships to cultural
contexts, balancing tight constraint with an open-ended integration into the game's cultural environment.The
result was the passionate and refined play of Seasons of Darkness.

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Ideological Environment

For a third and final case study, we look at Suspicion, an unpublished card game designed for an office
environment, to be played over a week of real time. Eric created Suspicion while working at a game
development company in New York City in the mid-1990s and organized two full playtests of the game. As
with A.I. and Seasons of Darkness, the game's design makes explicit use of its surrounding cultural
environment. But it also engages in a form of cultural resistance not found in the other two case studies.

Each game of Suspicion began with an invitation. Everyone in the company received an email explaining that
a game would take place the following week; if they wanted to play, they needed to send a reply. Players were
instructed not to disclose to other employees whether or not they had decided to play. In a company of about a
hundred, each game involved approximately 20 players. The following week, when the game began, players
were given the game rules and a small collection of cards.

One of these cards contained the player's identity. Each player in the conspiracy-themed game belonged to
two groups, a sect and an institution. A player might, for example, belong to the Sect of the Turquoise Gear
and the Institution of the State. Every player's pair of group affiliations was unique, so no two players
belonged to the exact same pair of groups. Each player also began the game with six Stash Cards. Each Stash
Card had the color and insignia of one of the groups in the game. The goal of the game was to locate other
players in your groups and work with them to acquire Stash Cards with the color and insignia of the group
you shared. The first Sect and the first Institution that came to the referee (Eric) with all of their members and
a certain number of Stash Cards corresponding to the group won the game.To help players find each other,
each group was given a code word or code gesture to help identify other players in that group.

In order to acquire Stash Cards, a player had to use Accusation Cards to formally accuse another player of
being in a group. If your accusation was correct, you could use any of your Stash

Cards to "attack" the accused, an attack that played out as a simple dueling card game. If your accusation was
incorrect, the target could take a Stash Card from you. Players could also freely trade cards with each other,
but usually did so only with other members of their groups. The general trajectory of the game started with
players figuring out who was and was not playing, next using code words and gestures to identify others in
their groups, and eventually sharing knowledge and Stash Cards within a group in order to strategically attack
other players. The play of Suspicion engaged with its cultural environment in a variety of ways.

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 11

12 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

Lived Conflict

As with Seasons of Darkness, Suspicion took place in a physical space not designed for the artificial play of a
game: an office environment. Unlike the LARP,the game space was not a public space that players visited for
a limited time. It was the place where they worked, including their offices, lunchrooms, and conference
rooms. The game's cultural environment was a space players already knew intimately. For this reason, the
game truly colonized its environment. The workspace became synonymous with the magic circle; the time and
place of the workday became the time and place of the game. There were a few formal restrictions on where
the game could be played (a scheduled meeting with an outside client was out of bounds), but otherwise, when
a player arrived at work, he or she had to be ready to attack or be attacked. All games embody a conflict, and
tension arises in a game as players struggle to resolve the conflict. One of the roles that the magic circle plays
is to contain game conflict rather than allowing it to spill out into ordinary life. As with Assassin, in Suspicion
there was no escape from the game conflict; the play of the game had to be integrated into the rest of one's
life.

Interventions Shaking It Up

Because Suspicion operated in and among ordinary work activities, the play of the game took over and
transformed the workplace. For example, in Suspicion each group has a code word or code gesture that it can
use to identify other members of the same group. This communicative game mechanic leads to strangely
strategic conversations. Each player attempts to reveal his own code word or gesture to find allies, but does so
in a very surreptitious manner, so that another group won't notice and acquire the information.

As a result of this mechanic, players became very self-conscious about how they interacted with one another.
The game added a new layer of meaning to every in-office speech-act, turning it into a complex action that
could be used to identify allies or to foil rivals. As we explored in Games as the Play of Meaning, part of the
play of any game is making sense of its meanings and representations. By invading and appropriating ordinary
communication, Suspicion brings this sense-making aspect of games center stage. Is the person you're talking
to about a work task playing the game? Are they trying to tell you something? Have you unintentionally let
your code word slip? The sense of altered consciousness was so pervasive that even workers not playing the
game joined in, pretending that they too, had a secret identity. From the player reports that followed each
playtest, it was clear that these extra layers of meaning were somewhat uncomfortable to inhabit, but
nevertheless intensely pleasurable as play.

In Defining Play, we established that play is free movement within a more rigid structure. When the rigid
structures themselves change as a result of play's movement, the result is transformative play. Through the
play of Suspicion, the social spaces of work were altered. Even when players were not talking about the game,
the distrust and self-consciousness of Suspicion inflected their interactions.

Suspicion was designed to undercut the existing power relationships at work. In any company, an institutional
structure defines control and authority: who makes the decisions, who is paid more, who is the boss of whom.
When Suspicion players are randomly assigned to sects and institutions at the start of the game, the makeup of
these groups has nothing to do with the existing departmental, spatial, economic, or authoritative relationships
among players. Suspicion reshuffled and thereby transformed these power relations, changing in some way
each player's relationships to the other participants.

The structure of player identity in Suspicion (each player is assigned a unique combination of group
allegiances), ensures that you cannot completely trust anyone else. You might have found the members of
your Sect, but each of them belongs to a different Institution that is opposed to your own. One of your Sect
members might suggest that you pool your Stash Cards with his, so that your Sect's valuable cards are more
properly protected—but he might simply be planning to selfishly use the cards for his Institution. This sense
of constant uncertainty and distrust created a tense game atmosphere. The game rewarded deception and play
involved much trickery and backstabbing. Not only were existing power relationships undermined, but they
were never given the chance to settle into a stable hierarchy. Suspicion revealed some of the cultural

12 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 13

rhetorics, or ideologies, that help constitute the workplace. But because the game transformed power
relationships, it also served as a site of cultural resistance. By undermining the company's existing patterns of
authority, it highlighted the typically invisible ways that power usually operated.

Games sometimes exhibit forbidden play, forms of nongame interaction not permitted in ordinary life. In
Suspicion, a worker might drop in on his boss, accuse her of being an enemy, and attack her mercilessly with
his Stash Cards. By recasting company authority as a tangled web of deception, relationships among company
workers were radically transformed. Through its play, Suspicion operated as a cultural critique. It succeeded
only because of the way it blurred the edges of the magic circle. A softball game at a company picnic might
act temporarily to reframe company authority, but it is not taking place in the participants' actual workplace.
The subversive potential for cultural resistance in Suspicion emerges directly from its literal appropriation of
the cultural environment.

As with our other examples, Suspicion achieves its distinctive play through specific design decisions. Of the
three games, Suspicion in some ways plays most radically with its cultural context. Seasons of Darkness, as a
role-playing game, did not involve explicit competition between players. A.I. was a huge project, but its
puzzle structure, in which the game designers held the solutions, kept the structures of authority clear.
Through the contextual ambiguities that it created, Suspicion was truly culturally transgressive.

In a typical game, the magic circle acts to contain inter-player conflict. Suspicion was not only designed to
create mistrust and deception, but had players acting against each other in their usual place of work. The
magic circle enframed the office; there was no escape from other players after the game if things went wrong.
During the climax of the second game, one player made an offer to pay another cash for her Stash Cards. The
exchange of money never took place, but its mere possibility caused intense emotions to erupt. The game was
in danger of imploding, leading the designer to implement a rule outlawing the use of real-world money in the
game.

This anecdote points out the power and challenge of designing games as cultural environments. As a
transformative political statement about the power of the corporate workplace, Suspicion was a success,
seducing players with its genuinely pleasurable game play even while the game play itself engaged in a
cultural critique of the players' work context. At the same time, the mischievous resistance of the game was
balanced by the need for a sense of responsibility toward the players. Cultural environments are always home
to someone and even a game that embodies a radical critique needs to maintain a spirit of fair play to those it
impacts.

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Game Design Fundamentals

Games as Cultural Environment is the final schema in Rules of Play. In some ways, this chapter has brought
us full circle. In the course of analyzing A.I., Seasons of Darkness, and Suspicion, we revisited many of the
concepts that form the conceptual basis of the book as a whole. Below is a partial list of the game design
concepts mentioned in this schema, in the order that they appear and the chapters where they were first
introduced:

definition of games Defining Games
magic circle The Magic Circle
three kinds of rules Rules on Three Levels
lusory attitude The Magic Circle

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 13

14 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

open and closed systems Systems

metacommunication Games as the Play of Meaning

space of possibility Interactivity

core mechanics Games as the Play of Experience

emergent system Games as Emergent Systems

embedded narratives Games as Narrative Play

emergent narratives Games as Narrative Play

system environment Systems

the play community Games as Social Play

public and private information Games as Systems of Information

procedural representation Games as the Play of Simulation

open culture Games as Open Culture

player-as-producer paradigm Games as Open Culture

safety and trust Games as Social Play

second-order design Games as the Play of Experience

conflict Games as Systems of Conflict

making sense of meaning Games as the Play of Meaning

free play | transformative play Defining Play

cultural rhetorics Games as Cultural Rhetoric

cultural resistance Games as Cultural Resistance

forbidden play Games as Social Play

There are many concepts we didn't mention in the course of these analyses. But a comprehensive overview
was not the intention of our review. Our purpose was to demonstrate how a suite of fundamental game design
concepts work together to build a full understanding of the operation of a complex game. Comprehending a
game requires more than simply selecting a schema and applying it in isolation to a game design problem. The
intricate operation of a game can only be fully appreciated when you take a multifaceted approach, combining
many points of view, strategically constructing your analysis in order to solve the problem at hand. In this
chapter, we were specifically looking at games as cultural environments. But in order to do so, it was
necessary to make extensive use of ideas from the RULES, PLAY, and CULTURE of games.

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

The Artificial Question

We now return to the question posed at the beginning of this chapter. The premise of the schema asserts that
games can be framed as cultural environments, as phenomena that co-exist with real-world contexts. If this
framing is carried to its logical extreme, the magic circle disappears altogether, and the game becomes
synonymous with its surroundings. If this is the case, even for some games, this schema would force a
fundamental reevaluation of our basic assumptions about what games are and how they function.

In the course of this chapter, we took a detailed look at three games that explicitly blurred the boundaries of
the magic circle. In very different ways, A.I., Seasons of Darkness, and Suspicion played with their cultural
environments, effacing the boundaries of the magic circle to a more extreme degree than more conventional
games. Yet in each case, although the magic circle blurred, shifted, and blended in with its environment, it
still in some way remained intact. In A.I., the players never forgot that the game was really a promotion for a

14 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 15

Hollywood film. In Seasons of Darkness, the game sessions took place within strictly delimited physical and
temporal boundaries. And in Suspicion, play boundaries, such as the restriction on using money, nudged the
game in the direction of being a closed, rather than a more open system. In these three games, the magic circle
never entirely vanished. If it had, we probably would not be able to call them games.

So the magic circle did not disappear after all. But each game, in its own way, played with its possible
disappearance. The rigid structure among which the play of the games took place was in fact the conventions
of games themselves. A game framed as a cultural environment plays with the very definition of what a game
is. But some part of that defining game structure remains intact, even as it is transformed through play. A
game that plays with the possibility of its own existence offers game designers potentially rich approaches. As
a design strategy, understanding a game as a cultural environment can create entirely new forms of game
experiences.

Designing a game as a cultural environment is also an effective way to mount a powerful cultural critique.
During the twentieth century, most forms of art and entertainment have engaged critically with their cultural
contexts, from Marcel Duchamp's readymades to Hip-Hop's sampled tracks. As a new century dawns, it is
time for games to recognize their role within larger cultural environments, in order to celebrate their complex
relationships with the rest of culture.

Yet the question of the artificiality of games remains. If we are calling for a more culture-centric approach to
games, why would we still maintain the idea that they are artificial? Don't cultural framings of
games—framings that acknowledge their status as open systems—call the artificiality of games into question?
If games are not separate from the rest of culture, are they still really artificial? Yes. Calling games artificial
does not mean that they are wholly distinct from culture. No matter how integrated into culture games might
be, there will always be some aspect of a game's operation that relies on its own system, rather than that of
culture, to create meanings for players.

For example, Scrabble makes use of language, letters, and words borrowed from its cultural environment, but
that does not mean it can't also designate its own set of meanings as well. The letter "Q" and the letter "E"
both appear on this page. But in the context of reading this book, the Q is not worth more points than the letter
E. In fact, neither one of them is worth any points. Only in the highly specialized context of a Scrabble game
do we assign Scrabble points to letters. Scrabble is certainly not a wholly artificial system. But neither does it
disappear entirely into its cultural environment. However we frame it, Scrabble will always maintain its
artificial status in some measure.That is simply part of what makes it a game.

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Final Framings

One last note about the importance of game design fundamentals. There is a widespread impulse among those
who study games to want to leapfrog over the basics, immediately break all of the rules, violate the magic
circle, turn players into designers, and radically reinvent the phenomenon of games. This is not an inherently
bad instinct for game designers or game scholars to possess. As the games studied in this schema demonstrate,
blurring the magic circle to question the fundamental properties of games can lead to new kinds of play
experiences. However, radical innovation and the design of meaningful play can only be accomplished by
paying attention to the fundamental design principles that apply to all games. Even when you dissect or design
breakthrough games that bend, break, and transform traditional gaming structures, the fundamentals of game
design remain. For every A.I., Seasons of Darkness, or Suspicion, there are hundreds or thousands of
unsuccessful game designs: online/real-world scavenger hunts that never found an audience, LARPs that
fizzled out before they got off the ground, and game experiments that were just no fun at all to play.

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 15

16 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment
Games as Cultural Environments takes us to the edge of the void: it lets us consider a game that undermines
its own existence by creating the means for its erasure. It is ironic perhaps that the abstraction and complexity
of this phenomenon was best deciphered by a return to the game design fundamentals, to the core language of
meaningful play, to the concepts that constitute the Rules of Play.

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Further Reading

The Fantasy Role-Playing Game: A New Performing Art, by Daniel Mackay

This book is about role-playing as a performance art. Of particular interest to game designers is the discussion
of the performance aesthetics and collaborative narrative creation of role-playing games, including
relationship of players in the game to social and cultural structures.

Recommended:

Introduction: The Role-Playing Game: Defined, Described, and

Systematized From Part One: A New Category of Popular Entertainments and a New Kind of
Sandbox: Playing in Imaginary Entertainment Environments

From Part Four:The Theater of Events: Narrative as Aesthetic Object

www.cloudmakers.org

Cloudmakers.org was founded as a discussion group for the web game centered around the film A.I.:
Artificial Intelligence. The site houses an archive of the game,including an approximate reproduction of the
game from July 23, 2001, the day before the game was officially "solved," as well as essays and editorials
written by players, links to media coverage, and a moderated discussion board. It is an excellent document of
the play of a game from the perspective of a community of its players.

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Summary

• The schema Games as Cultural Environment explores the following aspects of games:

♦ Blurring the spaces inside and outside the magic circle
♦ Ambiguity between players and non-players
♦ Overlap between game and real life
• It is only within the magic circle that the authority of formal rules holds sway; at the same time, the
implicit rules of games are based not in the magic circle, but within culture at large.

16 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 17

• Etiquette, ethos, convention, and context are among the forms that implicit rules can take. As
manifestations of cultural authority, they link the artificiality of games to the real-world contexts they
inhabit.

• The lusory attitude applies not just to the formal rules of a game, but to the implicit rules as well.
When a player submits to the authority of a game, he or she is accepting its formal as well as its
cultural authority. In this sense, the magic circle of a game extends to embrace larger cultural
domains.

• A.I., Seasons of Darkness, and Suspicion are all games that explicitly operate as cultural
environments. In each case, meaningful play arises because careful game design maintains the magic
circle in some way.

• Considered as a cultural environment, a game plays with the possible erasure of the magic circle and
therefore plays with the possibility of its own existence. However, some semblance of the magic
circle always remains.

• The premise that the boundaries of the magic circle can be blurred or erased calls into question
whether or not games can be considered artificial. Games are always in some way artificial and
capable of producing internal game meanings, even when they are framed as culture; games are
artificial because they are designed.

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment 17

18 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment
18 Chapter 33: Games as Cultural Environment

Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star

James Ernest

A game for 2 players

Overview

Welcome aboard the Caribbean Star, Caribe Cruise Lines' most luxurious cruise ship. It's chock to the gills
with newlyweds and nearlydeads who have ventured to the Caribbean to float into the Panama Canal, buy
knickknacks in Jamaican straw markets, and drink Piña Coladas from the source. And you have been brought
here to entertain them.You and your opponent are magicians with, more or less, the same act. The Caribe
Line's Miami office accidentally booked both of you on the same ship, and now you've got exactly one week
to prove who's the better magician.

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Rules

Equipment

You need a deck of playing cards, a score pad, and a pencil.

How to Begin

First, determine which player will be Red, and which will be Black. Each player "owns" one color of cards.
There is no difference between the two colors. Next, shuffle the deck and deal a hand of five cards to each
player. Turns will be simultaneous, so there is no need to determine who goes first.

On Each Turn

Both players choose one card from their hand and play it face down. After both cards are played, turn them
over to reveal each player's action for the turn. After all actions have been resolved, both players draw a card.

Card Functions

Each card has a unique function, described below. Although they are played at the same time, cards always
take effect from lowest to highest. Deuces are low, and Kings are high. (Aces are played differently, as
explained later). If both cards are the same rank, then suit determines the order. Clubs are first, followed by
Diamonds, Hearts, and Spades (alphabetical order).

Magic Tricks, 10–K

Tens and face cards are Magic Tricks. When you play a Magic Trick, it means you are
practicing it for your next performance. If you play your opponent's color, he practices that
trick. When you play a Magic Trick in your color, put it in your "Practice" pile, which is a set
of cards face up on the table in front of you, spread out so that every card in the pile is visible.
If you play a Magic Trick in your opponent's color, you put that card in your opponent's

Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star 1

2 Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star
Practice pile.

Point Values and Times

A perfect show is 15 minutes long. Face cards add 5 minutes to your show. Jacks are worth 2 points, Queens
are worth 4 points, and Kings are worth 6 points. Tens add 10 minutes to your show, and are worth 10 points.

Showtimes, 7:00pm and 9:00pm

Sevens and Nines are Showtimes. When you play a Showtime in your own color, you will perform your act,
which means you discard your Practice pile and convert it into points. If you play a Showtime in your
opponent's color, they perform their act. Obviously, you want to convert your own Practice pile when it is
worth maximum points, and convert your opponent's pile when it is worthless. The exact scoring of the
Practice pile is described later. After you perform, all the cards from your Practice pile and the Showtime card
go into the discard pile.

Dinner Buffet, 8:00pm

Eights are Dinner Buffet cards. When you play an Eight in your color, you may perform (i.e., discard) one of
the Magic Tricks in your Practice pile for half its value. For example, if you use an Eight to convert a King,
you would score 3 points. You don't have to use your Dinner Buffet. You might play an Eight and then, seeing
what your opponent has played, decide to ignore the buffet. Whether you use it or not, the Eight is discarded.
If you play an opponent's Eight, he may convert one of his Magic Tricks or he may ignore it. You can't force
your opponent to perform at the Dinner Buffet.

Rehearsal, 6:00pm

Sixes are Rehearsal cards. You can "rehearse" your act before performing it and double its final value. When
you play a Six in your color, you add it to your Practice pile. If you play a Six in your opponent's color, it goes
into his Practice pile. If you have two Sixes in your Practice pile, your show will be worth quadruple points!

Afternoon Nap, 5:00pm

Fives are "Afternoon Nap" cards.When you play a Five of any color, you will swap hands with your
opponent. Discard the Five after you swap hands.

Mistakes, 2 through 4

Twos through Fours are Mistakes. These are a little like Magic Tricks but they are worth negative points. If
you play a Mistake of your own color it will go into your Practice pile. If you play a Mistake of your
opponent's color, it will go into his Practice pile. Mistakes don't always hurt you: if you perform a show
composed entirely of Mistakes, it's called a "Comedy Act" and is worth nothing—which is better than
negative points!

How to Score Your Shows

Now that we've described all the possible contents of a Practice pile (Magic Tricks, Rehearsals, and Mistakes)
here is how to score the show.

First, evaluate the Magic Tricks by the length of the show. The perfect show is 15 minutes
long. Face Cards add 5 minutes each and Tens add 10 minutes. If your show is the perfect
length, you will score full value for all your Magic Tricks. If you run long or short by 5
minutes, you must cut the value of your biggest Trick (or one of your biggest Tricks, if you
have two big Tricks of the same size) by half. If you run short or long by 10 minutes, you

2 Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star

Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star 3

must cut all your Tricks by half. If you run 30 minutes or longer, you get no points at all for
your Magic Tricks. However, if you run 0 minutes (you have no Magic Tricks at all) you are
doing a Comedy Show, which is scored differently.

Second, subtract the values of your Mistakes. Twos are worth –2, Threes are worth –3, and
Fours are worth –4. Mistakes do not add time to your act, and you always score full value for
these cards unless you are doing a Comedy Show. Mistakes can easily result in a negative
value for your show.

Last, apply the Rehearsal cards. If you have a Six in your Practice pile, double the value. If
you have two Sixes, you double it twice.

Comedy Show

If your act has no Magic Tricks in it, it is always worth exactly 0 points. This is true regardless of the number
of Mistakes and Rehearsals in your pile.

An Example of Scoring a Show

A Practice Pile has the following cards in it: King, King, Ten, Six, Four, Three, Two. The
Show is 5 minutes too long (5 + 5 + 10 = 20), so the highest Magic Trick, the Ten, will be
worth only half value. The base value of the show is therefore 6 + 6 + 5, or 17 points. The
Mistakes are worth 4 + 3 + 2, or 9. These are deducted from 17, leaving 8 points. Finally, the
show is doubled, making for a final value of 16 points.

Stop Cards, the Aces

Aces are not played like other cards. They are not color-specific and they always work for the player who uses
them. You can play an Ace from your hand to cancel the effect of any other card immediately before it is
resolved. In other words, once the cards are revealed, and just before executing a particular card, either player
may use an Ace to stop that card from happening. When you play the Ace, you pick up the card you canceled
and put it in your hand. You also discard the Ace. You cannot use one Ace to cancel another.

An Example of Playing an Ace

Red has played a Red Five, and Black has played a Red Ten. Black holds an Ace. Before the
Five swaps both players' hands, Black has the opportunity to play his Ace, but he chooses not
to. The Five is discarded, and the players swap hands. Now Red holds the Ace, and he can
play it to cancel the Red Ten. He discards the Ace, and puts the Red Ten into his hand. (Red
has canceled the Ten because it would have made his act too long. He plans to use the Ten in
his next act.)

Ending the Turn

At the end of the turn, each player draws one card.Once there are no more cards to draw, players still continue
to play cards until their hands are empty, or until one player can no longer play cards because he holds
nothing but Aces.

Ending the Game

The game ends when both players' hands are empty, or when one player holds nothing but Aces. At this point,
each player gets one "Farewell Show" in which he scores the cards remaining in his Practice pile. The
Farewell Show is not optional: you can lose a lot of points in this show if you're not careful. After the farewell
show, the player with the most points wins.

Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star 3

4 Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Design Notes

James Ernest

Caribbean Star

Stage 1: General Constraints
Usually when I create a new game, all the notes, variations, and failed attempts wind up in the garbage. This
article chronicles the development of a new card game, including all the decisions and dead ends involved.
June 18, 2001
My wife and I are cruising to Alaska aboard the Norwegian Sky, on our first full day at sea. A vacation seems
like a good environment for creating this new game. Considering that the only available playtester is my wife
Carol, I think I'll write a two-player game.
I have no means to make custom components, even custom cards (which I usually use for inventing new
games) so I'm going to write this game with the "bare essentials." Those materials include: two packs of
playing cards, several 6-sided dice including ten dice in each of two colors, and one each of 4, 8, 10, 12, and
20-sided dice. I also have four Pawns, one Poker Chip, blank paper, pens, and pencils. Certainly this is enough
material to develop a new two-player game.
Whereas some game designers prefer to create a game mechanic first and then adapt that mechanic to an
appropriate theme, I prefer to start with a theme wherever possible. This gives me more creative ideas when
trying to invent the game mechanics, and it makes for a game whose mechanics seem better to suit the theme.
When a storyline gets added after the game is designed, you can really tell, especially when a play that seems
reasonable in the storyline is not allowed in the game. When I invent a game for sale I must consider the
marketability of the theme, but I'm not so constrained here, because this will be a free game. In this case, I can
come up with a very basic premise and move forward, rather than agonizing too much over the story.
I have an extensive list of "good ideas" that I have compiled over many years. I usually go to this list when
choosing a new game design project for Cheapass Games. A good game idea should not only be entertaining,
it should also provide the basis of a good system. Some good jokes make terrible games.
Here is a short brainstorm of possible themes for my game, inspired by my vacation:

4 Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star

Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star 5

• Bellhops angling for tips.
• Cruise directors booking acts for their ships.
• Passengers collecting raffle tickets.
• Travel Agents booking trips.

Let's examine the game possibilities of each of these storylines. You will notice that in each story I name a
type of character (the players) and some sort of competitive activity (the game).

Bellhops Angling for Tips: Who are the players in the Bellhop game, and what is their goal?
Are they the bellhops, competing with one another for the best tip? Are they the hotel guests,
trying to tip as little as possible while still getting their bags? Or, if this is a two-player game,
can we create an imbalanced game in which one player is the Bellhop, the other is the Guest,
and each has his own objective?

These aren't the only options. In a game involving bellhops and bags, there's nothing that says
the players can't be the bags. Maybe the Bags have a game objective that's almost completely
unrelated to the goals of the Bellhops and the Customers. For instance, maybe they get
satisfaction from being moved around. Or from staying packed as long as possible. Or even
from sitting in the dark. Perhaps the players manage the hotel. Perhaps they manage hotel
chains. This could go on forever. But let's move on to our next scenario.

Cruise Directors Booking Acts: Who are the players in this game? Are they cruise directors
working on multiple ships? Are they multiple acts working on a single ship? Are they trying
to get a job, or keep the job they have?

If we wanted to use the Cruise Director scenario, but think further outside the box, where
would we go? The players might be passengers trying to get the most entertainment on a
one-week cruise; they might be land-based talent agents trying to make the most money
booking the best acts on the longest cruises. They might be jokes trying to propagate through
the acts of Cruise Ship comedians, whose acts are really basically all the same.

Passengers Collecting Raffle Tickets: On our cruise ship, a variety of activities earn you a
raffle ticket. The players in this scenario would probably be Passengers, and there would be a
whole game of collecting tickets followed by a raffle at the end. This isn't the only way to
present this story, though. The players could represent the cruise staff whose job is to give out
the raffle tickets. The story could revolve around fixing the raffle, or stealing tickets from
other players. Or there could be several raffles, and this could be a game about trading tickets
in one raffle for tickets in another.

Travel Agents Booking Cruises: In this game, players would probably try to make the most
money by booking the best trips at the most competitive prices. If you charge more money for
a trip, you will make more when you sell it, but you might not sell as many. If you were a
travel agent in this game, you might be trying to make the most money at the end of the game.
Or, you might be trying to make the most people happy, with the money being less important.
Or you could be trying to book the most trips to a particular destination to win a trip there
yourself, and so on.

Racing Games vs.Fighting Games

Most games can be sorted into two categories, based on their scoring system: racing games and fighting
games. The distinction makes the most sense with multiplayer games, because in a two-player game the two
types are essentially interchangeable. In a racing game, players are trying to get the most points, and can't
directly interfere with other players. Scrabble is a good example of a racing game. Everyone acquires points,
and the object is to have the highest score at the end. Golf is actually this type of game also. Even though the

Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star 5

6 Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star

object is to score the least, the players are still collecting their own points with no influence on the scores of
the others.

In fighting games, the object is to take away the other player's points, or to do him as much damage as
possible. Chess is a fighting game, with both players bent on capturing their opponent's pieces, especially the
King. Hearts is also a fighting game, though the scoring is inverted. In Hearts, points are bad for you, and
when one player breaks 100 points, the player with the fewest points wins. This is functionally equivalent to
starting everyone with 100 points, and deducting from that score until someone reaches zero.The difference
between Hearts and Golf is that in Hearts your actions affect your opponents' scores.

The salient difference between racing and fighting games is that fighting games make great two-player games,
but aren't always good with more than two players. When you can decide whom to hit, the game becomes
political, and often the most strategic move is to hurt the player who's closest to being eliminated. That player
can be driven out of the game early, and will have to sit out the rest of the game.

The last two scenarios, the Raffle Ticket and Travel Agent games, seem like racing games. So are some
versions of the first scenario, the Bellhop game. These might be good multiplayer games. But because I'm
interested in writing a two-player game, I'm inclined to look first at the game that allows me to do damage to
my opponent. This looks like a good argument for Scenario 2, the Cruise Directors and Acts. Let's look again
at the story of acts trying not to get thrown off cruise ships.

First Rules Draft

When I have a half-baked game idea, I will usually just start writing down the rules. This helps me work out
some of the more mundane aspects of the game, such as the mechanics of card drawing, piece moving, turn
sequence, and so on. If I haven't settled on game mechanics by this point, the exercise of writing a rulebook
tends to force me into something. I can always change it later, but I need something to change. Here is the first
draft of the rules for our new card game, with notes in italic explaining what's going on in my head.

Caribbean Star

A Card Game for Two Players

Almost every cruise line has a "Star," such as the Star Princess and the Regent Star, which are both ships I've
worked on. Before I became a game publisher, I was a professional juggler for about seven years, so I have a
bit of experience with this subject. I like the idea of calling the game "Caribbean Star" because it has a double
meaning, with "Star" referring to the performers.

For our story, imagine a cruise ship on which the cruise director has accidentally hired too many acts. Player
One is the ventriloquist, Player Two is the magician. One of these two acts is superfluous, and will have to go
home at the end of the week. It will depend on how well each player performs his act, and his other shipboard
duties. And of course, interfering with your opponent will be the key to winning.

I'm currently thinking of this as a card game, played with a standard deck. The Magician's
cards are the black ones; the Ventriloquist's cards are the red ones. After one pass through
the deck, the player who has given more good performances while destroying his oppo-nent's
credibility wins, and keeps his job on the Caribbean Star.

Equipment: You need a deck of playing cards.

Story: Welcome aboard the Caribbean Star, Caribe Cruise Lines' most luxurious cruise ship. It's chock to the
gills with newlyweds and nearlydeads who have ventured to the Caribbean to see the Panama Canal and drink
Piña Coladas from the source. And you are here to entertain them.

6 Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star

Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star 7

You and your opponent are performers aboard the Caribbean Star, two acts doing the work of one. The line
has accidentally booked both a Magician and a Ventriloquist on the same boat, and…

At this point, I'm already thinking it's funnier if you are just two magicians, rather than a
magician and a ventriloquist. Writing the intro from scratch like this always gives me good
insight into the main joke of the game.

The Caribe line has accidentally booked two magicians on the same ship, and you've got exactly one week to
prove that you're better than the other guy. You both have the same bag of tricks, so it's up to your cunning
and skill to get your opponent thrown off the boat before he does the same to you. Happy sailing!

The idea that you have only a week ties in with my plan to make this game end after one pass
through the deck. Incorporating a time limit and a sense of urgency on this contest should
make it more fun. At this point in the first pass of the rules, I really have no other mechanics
in mind other than the idea that one player will "own" the red cards, while the other player
owns the black cards.

Dividing ownership of the cards makes the same cards do different things for each player,
which in turn leads to more variety in the games. Because this is a two-player game, it's easy
to divide the deck fairly. When I see a chance like this, I jump at it!

How to Begin: Shuffle the deck and determine randomly which player will be the Red Magician, and which
player will be Black. After shuffling, deal a hand of five cards to each player. Determine randomly who will
go first.

After writing "determine randomly who goes first," I'm starting to think of the card functions,
and also wondering if I can make this game a simultaneous-play game rather than a
turn-based game. A game this simple can sometimes be significantly better for the player who
goes first, or second, depending on the mechanics. Simultaneous play solves this problem, but
presents some others. Let's try simultaneous play.

After shuffling, deal a hand of five cards to each player. Turns will be simultaneous.

On each turn: Players choose one card from their hand and play it face down on the table. This card will
determine their action for the round.

Card functions: Each card has a unique function, as described below. Both players have the same bag of
tricks, but the order in which you play them can make a big difference. Also, each player "owns" half of the
deck. Playing your own cards has a different effect than playing the same cards for your opponent.

This section is not really very clear, but it is mostly there to help me remember what I'm
thinking. It will probably be trimmed up or removed in the final rules.

Card precedence: Although they are played at the same time, cards always take effect in order from lowest to
highest. Aces are low, and Kings are high. Furthermore, the order of suits from lowest to highest is: Clubs,
Diamonds, Hearts, Spades (alphabetical order).

You can tell I haven't figured out what Aces do yet; in the final draft Aces don't figure into the
play order at all. The general purpose of giving each card a priority is so that resolving the
simultaneous play is always easy. It also allows me to fine-tune the functions of each card
based on the order it falls in the series.

Face cards: Face cards are "rehearsal" cards. When you play a face card, you are practicing tricks for your
next performance. Each player will have a maximum of four performances during the game, and the point

Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star 7

8 Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star
value of those performances determines your score.

When you play a face card, set it aside in your Practice pile, a set of face up face cards that denote your set for
the next show. A perfect set is 30 minutes, which means three cards. If scored for full value, a Jack is worth 2
points, a Queen is worth 4, and a King is worth 6 points.

I have picked the values of 2, 4, and 6 because I'm planning to make rules that sometimes cut
these values in half. This means that for simplicity's sake I want them to be even numbers. At
this point, I'm working with the idea that a perfect show is three cards, and running longer or
shorter than that will penalize you.

If you play a rehearsal card that is not your color, you put it in your opponent's Practice pile instead of your
own.

Here is why the perfect show length is the critical mechanic: If you play a Rehearsal card for
your opponent, you will be able to lengthen his show beyond the perfect length. So, if he's
practiced a three-card show but can't convert it to points until you make it longer, he'll suffer
a penalty. This makes the same cards better or worse at different points in the game, which is
a great way to get a complex game out of a simple set of cards.

Tens: Tens are Big Tricks. They count as two cards when measuring the length of a show, and are worth 10
points when scored for full value.

Nine and Seven are Showtimes: If you play a Showtime, you discard your Practice Pile and convert it to
points. Conversion of the Practice Pile works as follows:

Now I'm formalizing the show-length penalties I was thinking about when I wrote the
Rehearsal cards.

If you have three cards (Tens count as two) you get full value for your entire act. If you run long or short, you
lose points. If you have two or four cards, score half points for your largest card. If you have one or five cards,
score half points for your entire act. If you have no cards or more than five, you score no points when you
play a Showtime.

If you play a Showtime for your opponent, he must perform his act right now. This is true even if he just
performed, and even if he has no cards in his Practice Pile.

Eight: Dinner Buffet. You can do an additional show at a dinner buffet. When you play an Eight, you can
perform (discard) one of the cards in your Practice pile for half value. You don't have to, however. You might
play an Eight and then, seeing what your opponent has played, decide to skip the buffet. If you play an
opponent's Eight, he may convert one of his Practice cards or he may do nothing about it.

Eights are added to give you the opportunity to fine-tune your show if it is running long.

Six: Rehearsal. You can "rehearse" your act before you perform, and double its value. When you play a Six,
add it to your Practice pile.You will score double points the next time you play a Showtime. If you have two
Sixes in your Practice Pile, the show will be worth quadruple points.

This is a language problem: I'm unknowingly using "rehearsal" to describe both the
FaceCards and Tens, and the Sixes. This is fixed in the final draft.

Five: Afternoon Nap: When you play a Five you must discard your hand and draw four new cards. If you play
your opponent's Five, he must do the same.

8 Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star

Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star 9

Fives will be the spoiler cards. I want people to be able to discard their hands in order
toclear out cards that are especially bad for them. The aspect of killing your opponent's
handturns out to be unbalanced, and I will later revise the function of the Fives.

Four through Two: These cards are mistakes. They are like practice cards but they are worth negative points,
4 through 2 respectively. If you play a mistake of your own color it will go into your Practice Pile. If you play
a card of your opponent's color, it will go into his. The negative points are doubled by Sixes but are not halved
by going long or short. They do not count as cards for the length of your act, and you cannot perform them to
get rid of them at the dinner buffet.

The exact order of resolving points, negative points, and doublers, needs some work here.But
this is a first pass. It becomes evident on playing this game that this math, while critical to the
game, needs to be presented in the simplest possible manner. In general, whenmath gets too
hard in a game it doesn't just slow down the execution of the game. It also makes forecasting,
or strategic play, much harder. So good math needs to be obvious and transparent. The
show-length penalty is pretty important here, so I'm not going to let it go. But I will, as I said,
try to make it easy to understand.

Aces (Cancel Cards): Aces are not played face down like other cards. They are not color-spe-cific and they
always belong to the player who plays them. You can play an Ace from your hand to cancel the effect of any
other card immediately before it goes off. When you play an Ace, you draw a card to replace it.

At the end of your turn, draw one card, or however many it takes to get your hand up to five. When there are
no cards left to draw, the cruise is over and the player with the most points wins.

There, that's the first pass on the rules. Now I'll write up a cheat sheet and play the game.

Playtest Notes

I was lucky enough to have Carol on hand while working on this rules draft, so we immediately played a few
rounds and determined the following:

Card Functions: In general the cards work well and are easy to remember. Because many of the card
functions are based loosely on times of day, and others are grouped pretty logically, the whole set seems to
make sense. One should easily be able to play this game without a cheat sheet.

Scoring: The order in which scoring functions are carried out isn't really clear in the first pass, so we decided
to define more exactly how you score a show:

First, you count the Face Cards and Tens. If you think of a perfect show as 30 minutes, then
Jacks through Kings are 10 minutes each, and Tens are 20 minutes. Based on the length of the
show, you apply your scoring penalty (if any) by halving the appropriate cards. Next, add the
negative cards at full value. Last, apply the doublers. So if a show contains a Jack, King, and
Ten, as well as a Four and a Six, then it's long by 10 minutes, which means chopping the Ten.
The cards sum to 13, minus 4 is 9, doubled is 18. Don't let this confuse you if you've read the
final draft: I later cut all the showtimes in half to make Tens last 10 minutes.

Score Tracking: It's possible to track your score by the way you stack your tricks, but it's probably much
cleaner to use a score pad and write down each show as you finish it. That will also make it more obvious who
is winning, of which I'm a big fan.

Endgame: It's a little unsatisfying to finish with cards left in your hand, so I want players to
play out their hands. I'm not sure what to do in the case where one player has more cards,
such as when exactly one Ace is left to play. This problem is solved later.

Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star 9

10 Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star

Spoiler Cards: Fives have been changed to swap the players' hands, not discard them. If you
play a Five, players swap hands. The reason for this is that otherwise the deck is burned far
too quickly. I don't like being able to avoid playing the really bad cards by discarding them.
But most of all, I don't like the effect of saving up a really good hand only to have it burned
down by a Five.

The Comedy Show: We decided to add one completely new rule, based on the abject
frustration of being hit with a big show that's all mistakes. This rule is called the Comedy
Show. If your Practice pile contains nothing but mistakes, you can clear it with a Showtime
for 0 points. This is a great way to get rid of a bunch of mistakes.

The timing rules are very useful in this instance. If you have a Comedy Show and you play a
Showtime, you can be sure that your opponent can't add a trick to it. This is because the
Showtimes happen before the tricks. The best your opponent can do is play an Ace to foil
your Showtime, but this is significantly more expensive to him.

All in all, this game worked fairly well with a few tweaks. It's definitely good enough to pursue, because
it was fun to play and we found ourselves wanting to play again. Now we'll play it a few more times
with these revisions, and see if any more refinements are required.

Final Revisions: Friday June 22, 2001

We played more of this game and learned that aggressive play is critical. I like this aspect. Because
every card will be played sooner or later, deciding when to play your cards is the key. We made one
more change. Because Aces screwed up the card drawing pattern by causing one player to discard more
than one card in the same turn, we decided that instead of discarding the card they stopped, Aces scoop
that card into your hand instead. This means that there will always be the same number of rounds in
the game, and that all the cards will eventually get played.

One change I'm considering after a rather lackluster couple of endgames is to introduce a "farewell
show" rule. Whatever is left in your Practice pile at the end of the game is scored like a normal show.
This means every show card eventually gets scored as well.

After three days of playtesting and revision, and a second rules edit some weeks later, I arrived at the
final version of the game. You'll notice I changed some terminology and numbers to make the game
easier to explain. Most obviously, I've made the perfect show 15 minutes long so that Tens can be 10
minutes long. This deviates pretty strongly from real life (A magician would actually be doing 45 to 60
minutes, but verisimilitude of that degree isn't really necessary in this simple of a game). I also finally
noticed that I was using "rehearsal" to mean two different things, so I changed the term for point cards
to "Magic Tricks."

Caribbean Star was designed by James Ernest, playtested by Carol Monahan. If you enjoyed Caribbean Star,
James encourages you to try more of his free games online at www.cheap-ass.com.

James Ernest

James Ernest is the president and lead designer for Cheapass Games, a small but prolific game company in
Seattle, Washington. His award-win-ning titles include Kill Doctor Lucky, Give Me the Brain, BRAWL, and
Button Men. Ernest is known for his quirky humor and innovative game mechanics, and he writes about 30
new games every year.

10 Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star

Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star 11

ADDITIONAL READING AND RESOURCES

Although suggested readings accompany most of this book's chapters, here we list a number of more
general references that didn't fit neatly into any particular chapter. These additional readings and
resources range from academic websites to visual histories of digital gaming. Obviously, there are
innumerable websites and books that we had to leave off of this short list, but our hope is that these
sources and the others we list throughout this book can be starting points for your own research
investigations.

Computer Game Graphics, by Liz Faber and State Design

Originally published under the title Re:Play in the U.K., Computer Game Graphics showcases the art and
visual culture of computer games. The book's strong visual design lends itself to the subject matter, with many
of the spreads functioning as essays in picture form. The writing takes a backseat to the presentation of
graphics, and the primary value of the book is in its documentation of the games' visual design.

Digital Games Research Association (DiGRA)

At the time of this book's publication, this fledgling academic organization was still getting off the ground.
However, DiGRA promises to be the first professional association devoted to the interdisciplinary study of
digital games. Its members range from play historians and media theorists to design educators and game
developers. The association's website can be found at: <www.digra.org>.

Electronic Plastic, by Jaro Gielens, Büro Destruct, Uwe Schütte

Electronic Plastic is a visual survey of over 400 old-school computer games, including portable handhelds
and cocktail table arcade games. The book offers a terrific overview of the visual design of games from the
1970s and 1980s, including retro-typography, period branding and packaging, and colorful cast plastic cases.

The 400 Rules Project

Located at <http://www.theinspiracy.com/400_project.htm>, The 400 Rules Project is a collaborative game
design project headed by veteran computer game designers Noah Falstein and Hal Barwood. Inspired by a talk
Barwood gave at the 2001 Game Developers Conference, Falstein has continued the project through a column
in Game Developer Magazine. The premise of the 400 Rules Project is that there are a limited number of
"rules," or design guidelines, that apply to all games, and the goal of the project is to uncover them. While
quite formal in scope, the Project represents a wonderfully collaborative game design initiative.

International Game Developers Association

This professional organization serves the digital game development industry. The website, located at
<www.igda.org>, is rich with resources for the aspiring and established game developer, from listings of local
IGDA chapters to regular columns on a variety of subjects to extensive educational resources.

Joystick Nation: How Video Games Ate Our Quarters, Won Our Hearts, and Rewired Our Minds, by J.C.
Herz

Written in 1997, Joystick Nation was one of the first comprehensive, popular reports on the cultural
phenomenon of video games. A straightforward journalistic account, the book offers a good overview of the
pop culture flavor of games and traces some of the factors affecting the rise of video games as a cultural form.

Ludology.org

Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star 11

12 Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star

This website, maintained by game theorist Gonzalo Frasca, is one of the better clearinghouses for events and
issues related to the academic study of games. It includes extensive lists of game studies blogs, conferences
and calls for papers, and supports a healthy discussion community.

Phoenix: The Fall and Rise of Videogames, by Leonard Herman

Phoenix takes a detailed look at the history of home videogame consoles. The emphasis is technological and
the focus is not on games, but on the design of the consoles themselves. While the reading can be dense, the
book offers an important overview of the history of the console industry and is an invaluable reference work.

Sirlin.net

An endearingly quirky website, www.sirlin.net is the work of David Sirlin, a former mathematician and
sometime game designer. The site contains a large number of short articles about game design, most of them
taking a formal approach to understanding phenomena like rule design, narrative, and competition. While
there are many homegrown game design sites on the web, Serlin.net contains a surprising amount of
thoughtful commentary and analysis.

Supercade: A Visual History of the Videogame Age 1971–1984, by Van Burnham

Supercade is both a visual history and a technological timeline of videogame development during one of the
industry's most important periods. The book offers informative summaries of almost every videogame
produced between 1971–1984, along with well-researched documentation of the games' visual design.

Trigger Happy: Videogames and the Entertainment Revolution, by Steven Poole

Trigger Happy posits that games are a cultural form to be reckoned with, not only because of their growing
economic dominance within the entertainment industry, but because of their status as an art form. Poole
examines games from a variety of perspectives, and applies a literary, philosophical, and semiotic analysis to
them. He also traces the development of the form from early 8-bit games into the complex technological and
cultural systems they are today.

Recommended:

Chapter 3. Unreal Cities

Chapter 8. The Player of Games

CONCLUSION

Once you know where you can go and where it's worth going, getting there's no sweat. Just caring and
nerves.—David Sudnow, Pilgrim in the Microworld

Caring and nerves. That's what it took to complete this book.

Certainly a big part of our process was learning how to see: seeing where we were coming from, where
we were going, and how to move forward. Like a devilishly intricate puzzle, each step resolved another
piece of the pattern, even while opening up whole new vistas to navigate. Everything, we found, hinged
on seeing the hinges, and the patterns in the pattern. When we learned to see them we realized they had
been there all along, waiting patiently to be discovered.

Having built the system, played it through, and exited out the other side, we find ourselves transformed.
We spent so many months (years even) inside the system, playing with it, resisting it, at times breaking
it. It was easy to forget that we too were being played, resisted, and at times, broken. (But this is not as

12 Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star

Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star 13

bad as it sounds.) And to be honest, the transformation caught us by surprise. Although this book grew
out of our experiences teaching game design, designing games, and—especially—playing them, it was
not until we began writing that our endeavor found a soul. This soul is filled to bursting with the joy of
play: filled with kids dueling Magic on a Brooklyn stoop, a lone runner sweating along a blistering cross
country track, a pair of grandmothers trading Canasta tricks for hard cash, a LAN party up past 4
a.m. playing just one more round of Quake. The soul is colored by the passion of game designers who
spend untold hours tuning a game to make play by the alchemy of rules, by level designers who invent
fabulous new worlds of possibility for us to inhabit, by programmers who build game engines so elegant
even the code appears pleased. It is in this soul of play that we discovered ourselves.

What we discovered is no big secret, as it is written on nearly every page. Game designers create
meaningful play. Truly meaningful play. The kind that players talk about years after the match has
ended, the kind that rallies loyal fans and wakes us up in the middle of the night longing to play again,
the kind of play that teaches us what it means to play. And perhaps the deepest meaning for play to
effect is its ability to transform. Transformative play is a moment of transcendence, in which those
structures we took for granted suddenly find themselves cast as players. Grammar tells a joke. The
ballroom floor gets up to dance. The rigid Rule become supple and limber and jumps into the arms of
Play. Transformative play can metamorphosize the players of a game, the culture of which the game is
a part, even the game itself. As the authors of this book, we were also taken hold by transformative
play, altered by the hinges and patterns uncovered. It is our hope that you too have been transformed
by your experience with these pages, by an ancient and sublime body of knowledge, by the newness of
the questions raised, by the beautiful nature of play.

Which really brings us back to caring and nerves. What will it take to alter the face of game design? At
what moment will the system be transformed by the play of designers working within it? Do you care
enough to take the risk? Do you? This is an important moment, for the field is poised for change and
the outcome is uncertain. We honestly don't know what kind of change a transformation might bring.
But we nevertheless are unapologetic activists for a radical transformation in game design.

We know what constitutes a game; we know how they work, why they matter, and the kinds of
experiences they are capable of producing. But we have barely tested the limits of what they have the
potential to become. It is our challenge to you to test those limits, to find your own game design soul,
and to muster all of the caring and nerves you've got to transform and discover what it means to play.

Finally: Special thanks to the teachers and students we have had the pleasure and honor of being
challenged by in the course of our own evolution as students of the game. And to each other…the end,
at last.

Thanks for a great game.

Shall we play again?

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star 13

14 Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star
14 Commissioned Game 4 — Caribbean Star

Bibliography

Aarseth, Espen J. Cybertext: Perspectives on Ergodic Literature. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press,
1997.

Abrams, Janet. "Other Victories." In If/Then, ed. Janet Abrams. Amsterdam: Netherlands Design Institute,
1999, p. 245–47.

Abt, Clark C. Serious Games. New York: Viking Press, 1970.

Alexander, Christopher. Notes on the Synthesis of Form. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1964.

Ambasz, Emilio. Emilio Ambasz: The Poetics of the Pragmatic. New York: Rizzoli International Publications,
1988.

Apter, Michael J. "A Structural-Phenomenology of Play." In Adult Play: A Reversal Theory Approach, ed. J.
H. Kerr and Michael J. Apter. Amsterdam: Swets and Zeitlinger, 1991, p. 192–201.

Atari, Inc., Super Breakout. Atari Game Program Instructions. Sunnyvale, CA: Atari, Inc., 1981 (archived at
<www.atariage.com>).

Avedon, E. M. "The Structural Elements of Games." In The Study of Games, ed. E.M. Avedon and Brian
Sutton-Smith. New York: John Wiley, 1971, p. 419–426.

Avedon, E.M., and Brian Sutton-Smith. The Study of Games. New York: John Wiley, 1971.

Bak, Per. How Nature Works: The Science of Self Organized Criticality. New York: Copernicus Books, 1996.

Bartle, Richard. "Hearts, Clubs, Diamonds, Spades: Players Who Suit MUDs." <http://
www.mud.co.uk/richard/hcds.htm>.

Barwood, Hal and Noah Falstein. The 400 Rules Project. http://www.theinspiracy.com/400_project.htm.

Bates, Bob, and Andre LaMothe, eds. Game Design: The Art and Business of Creating Games. Boston:
Premier Press, 2001.

Bateson, Gregory. "A Theory of Play and Fantasy." In Steps to an Ecology of Mind. Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press, 1972, p. 191–222.

Beach Frank A. "Current Concepts of Play in Animals." In Child's Play, ed. R.E. Herron and Brian
Sutton-Smith. New York: John Wiley, 1971, p. 196–211.

Berman, Joshua, and Amy Bruckman. "The Turing Game: Exploring Identity in an Online Environment."
Convergence 7(3): 83–102, 2001.

Bodley, John H. Cultural Anthropology: Tribes, States, and the Global System. New York: McGraw-Hill
Higher Education, 1994.

Bolter, Jay David, and Richard Grusin. Remediation: Understanding New Media. Boston: MIT Press, 1999.

Bonasia, Maria. "MetaMystery," May 30, 2001, <www.cloudmakers.org>.

Boria, Eric, Paul Breidenbach, and Talmadge Wright. "Player Talk and the Social Mediation of Virtual
Violence." Unpublished paper, 2002.

Bibliography 1

2 Bibliography
Buchanan, Richard. "Wicked Problems in Design Thinking." In The Idea of Design: A Design Issues Reader,
ed. Victor Margolin and Richard Buchanan. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995, p. 3–20.

Buchanan, Richard. "Branzi's Dilemma: Design in Contemporary Culture." In Design: Pleasure or
Responsibility? ed. P. Takhokallio and S. Vihma. Helsinki: University of Art and Design Helsinki, 1995, p.
15–27.

Burnham, Van. Supercade: A Visual History of the Videogame Age 1971–1984. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,
2001.

Caillois, Roger. Man, Play, and Games. London: Thames and Hudson, 1962.

Cameron, Andy. "Dissimulations: Illusions of Interactivity." MFJ No. 28: Spring, 1995.
<http://infotyte.rmit.edu.au/rebecca/html/dissimulations.html>.

Campbell, Jeremy. Grammatical Man: Information, Entropy, Language, and Life. New York: Simon and
Schuster, 1982.

Carroll, Lewis. Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass. New York: Signet Classic,
2000.

Cassell, Justine, and Henry Jenkins, eds. From Barbie to Mortal Kombat: Gender and Computer Games.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1998.

Casti, John. Complexification: Explaining a Paradoxical World Through the Science of Surprise. New York:
HarperCollins Publishers, 1994.

Chandler, Daniel. Semiotics for Beginners. <www.aber.ac.uk/~dgc/semiotic.html>.

Church, Doug. "Formal Abstract Design Tools," <www.gamasutra.com>.

Cloudmakers.org. <www.cloudmakers.org>.

Cohen, Scott. Zap: The Rise and Fall of Atari. Philadelphia, PA: XlibrisCorporation, 1964.

Costikyan, Greg. "Don't be a Vidiot: What Computer Game Designers Can Learnfrom Non-Electronic
Games." Speech given at the 1998 Game Developer's Conference (archived at
<www.costik.com/vidiot.hmtl>).

Costikyan, Greg. "I Have No Words and I Must Design." In Interactive Fantasy "_top" class="url"
href="http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Bay/2535/nowords.html">www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Bay/2535/nowords.

Cowen, George, and David Pines. Complexity: Metaphors, Models and Reality.Santa Fe: Addison Wesley
Longman, 1994.

Crawford, Chris. The Art of Computer Game Design.<www.vancouver.wsu.edu/fac/peabody/
game-book/Coverpage.html>.

Crawford, Chris. The Art of Interactive Design: A Euphorious and Illuminating Guide to Building Successful
Software. San Francisco: No Starch Press, 2002.

Crawford, Chris. Understanding Interactivity. San Francisco: No Starch Press, 2002.

Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: HarperCollins

2 Bibliography

Bibliography 3
Publishers, 1991.

Davis, Morton D. Game Theory: A Nontechnical Introduction. Mineola: DoverPublications, 1970.

DeKoven, Bernard. "Creating the Play Community." In The New Games Book,ed. Andrew Fluegelman and
Shoshana Tembeck. New York: Doubleday, 1976, p. 41–42.

DeKoven, Bernard. The Well-Played Game. New York: Doubleday, 1978.

de Saussure, Ferdinand. Course in General Linguistics. London: Peter Owen, 1960.

Dilnot, Clive. The Science of Uncertainty: The Potential Contribution of Design Knowledge. Proceedings of
the Ohio Conference, Doctoral Education in Design. Pittsburgh School of Design, Carnegie Mellon
University, October 9, 1998.

Dunnigan, James F. Wargames Handbook: How to Play and Design Commercial and Professional
Wargames, 3rd ed. San Jose: Writers Club Press, 2000.

Edwards, Paul N. The Closed World. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996.

Ekeland, Ivar. The Broken Dice: And Other Mathematical Tales of Chance.Chicago: University of Chicago
Press, 1993.

Ellington, Henry, Eric Addinall, and Fred Percival. A Handbook of Game Design. London: Kogan Page
Limited, 1982.

Epstein, Richard. The Theory of Gambling and Statistical Logic. San Diego: Academic Press, 1977.

Faber, Liz. Computer Game Graphics. New York: Watson-Guptill Publications,1998.

Fatsis, Stefan. Word Freak: Heartbreak, Triumph, Genius, and Obsession in the World of Competitive
Scrabble Players. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2001.

Feed Magazine. "Brave New Worlds: A Special Issue on Video Games."<www.feedmag.com>.

Findeli, Alain. "Moholy-Nagy's Design Pedagogy in Chicago, 1937–46." In TheIdea of Design: A Design
Issues Reader, ed. by Victor Margolin, and Richard Buchanan, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995, p. 29–38.

Fine, Gary Alan. Shared Fantasy. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1983.

Fluegelman, Andrew, and Shoshana Tembeck. The New Games Book. New York:Doubleday, 1976.

Frasca, Gonzalo. Ludology.org. <www.ludology.org>.

Gamasutra.com.The Art and Science of Making Games. <www.gamasutra.com>.

Gamestudies.org. The International Journal of Computer Game Research, eds.Espen Aarseth, Markku
Eskelinen, Marie-Laure Ryan, Susana Tosca.

Garfield, Richard. "Metagames," In Horsemen of the Apocalypse: Essays on Roleplaying, ed. Jim Dietz. Sigel,
IL: Jolly Rogers Games, 2000, p. 16–22.

Geertz, Clifford. The Interpretation of Cultures. New York: Basic Books, 1977.

Bibliography 3

4 Bibliography
Gielens, Jaro. Electronic Plastic. Berlin: Die Gestalten Verlag, 2000.

Game Girl Advance. <www.gamegirladvance.com>.

Gleitman, Henry. Psychology, 2nd ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc .1986.

Goldstein, Kenneth. "Strategies in Counting Out." In The Study of Games, ed.Elliott Avedon and Brian
Sutton-Smith. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 1971,p. 172–77.

Gonzalez, Jesus M. "A Brief History of Open Source Software." <http://eu.conec-ta.it/paper/
brief_history_open_source.html>.

Gygax, Gary. Advanced Dungeons and Dragons Players Handbook. Lake Geneva: TRS Hobbies, 1978.

Hale-Evans, Ron. "Game Systems Part 1." <www.thegamesjournal.com/articles/Game Systems1.shtml>.

Hall, Justin. "Brave New Worlds: A Special Issue on Video Games." Feed Magazine. <www.feedmag.com>.

Hallford, Neal and Jana Hallford. Swords and Circuitry: A Designer's Guide to Computer Role Playing
Games. Boston: Premier Press, Incorporated, 2001.

Hancock, Hugh. "Better Game Design Through Cut-Scenes." Gamasutra.com. <www.gamasutra.com>.

Hans, James S. Play of the World. Boston: University of Massachusetts Press, 1981.

Harris, Tricia "Kazi Wren." "Mod World." In Gamespy.com, August 22, 2002.
<http://www.gamespy.com/modworld/August02/modworld12/>.

Hayles, Katherine. How We Became Post-Human. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.

Hebdige, Dick. Subculture: The Meaning of Style. London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1988.

Herman, Leonard. Phoenix: The Fall and Rise of Videogames. Springfield, NJ: Rolenta Press, 1994.

Herron, R. E. "A Syntax for Play and Games." In Child's Play, ed. Brian Sutton-Smith and R. E. Herron. New
York: John Wiley and Sons, 1971, p. 298–307.

Heskett, John. Industrial Design. New York: Oxford University Press, 1980.

Herz, J. C. "Gaming the System: Multi-player Worlds Online," In Game On: The History and Culture of
Video Games, ed. Lucien King. London: Laurence King Publishing Ltd., 2002, p. 86–97.

Herz, J. C. Joystick Nation: How Videogames Ate Our Quarters, Won Our Hearts, and Rewired Our Minds.
New York: Little, Brown & Company, 1997.

Heskett, John. Industrial Design. New York: Oxford University Press, 1980.

Hickey, Dave. Air Guitar: Essays on Art and Democracy. San Francisco: Foundation for Advanced Critical
Studies, Incorporated, 1997.

Holland, John. Emergence. Reading: Helix Books, 1998.

Hughes, Linda. "Beyond the Rules of the Game: Why Are Rooie Rules Nice?" In The World of Play, ed.
Frank E. Manning. Proceedings of the 7th Annual Meeting of the Association of the Anthropological Study of

4 Bibliography

Bibliography 5
Play. New York: Leisure Press, 1983, p. 188–199.

Hughes, Linda. "Children's Games and Gaming." In Children's Folklore: A Source Book. ed. Brian
Sutton-Smith, Jay Mechling, Thomas W. Johnson, and Felicia R. McMahon. Logan, UT: Utah State
University Press, 1999, p. 93–120.

Huhtamo, Eric. "Game Patch: the Son of Scratch?" In Cracking the Maze. Curator Anne-Marie Schleiner. July
16, 1999. <www.switch.sjsu.edu/CrackingtheMaze>.

Huizinga, Johann. Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play Element in Culture. Boston: Beacon Press, 1955.

Ikekeonwu and Nwokah. "Nigerian and American Children's Games." In The Study of Play, Vol 1. Diversions
and Divergences in Fields of Play, ed. Margaret C. Duncan, Garry Chick, and Alan Aycock. New York:
Ablex/Greenwood Publishing Company, 1998, p. 61–75.

International Game Developers Association, <www.igda.org>.

Jenkins, Henry. "Complete Freedom of Movement: Video Games as Gendered Play Spaces." In From Barbie
to Mortal Kombat: Gender and Computer Games, ed. Justine Cassell and Henry Jenkins. Cambridge, MA:
MIT Press, 1998, p. 262–297.

Jenkins, Henry. "Testimony Before the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee, May 4, 1999."
<www.senate.gov/~commerce/hearings/0504jen.pdf>.

Jenkins, Henry. Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture. New York: Routledge, 1992.

Jenkins, Henry and Kurt Squire. "The Art of Contested Spaces." In Game On: The History and Culture of
Video Games, ed. Lucien King. London: Laurence King Publishing Ltd., 2002, p. 64–75.

Johnson, Steven. Emergence: The Connected Lives of Ants, Brains, Cities, and Software. New York: Scribner,
2001.

Jonas, Wolfgang. "On the Foundations of a 'Science of the Artificial.'" Breman, Germany: Hochschule fur
Kunst und Design Halle, 1999. <http://home.snafu.de/jonasw/JONAS4-49.html>.

Juul, Jesper. "Games Telling Stories? A Brief Note on Games and Narratives." Gamestudies.org.
<www.gamestudies.org>.

Kim, Scott. "What is a Puzzle?" <www.scottkim.com/articles.html>.

Kinder, Marsha. Playing with Power in Movies, Television, and Video Games: From Muppet Babies to
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1993.

King, Geogg and Tanya Krzywinska. "Computer Games | Cinema | Interfaces." In Computer Games and
Digital Cultures, Conference Proceedings, ed. Frans Mäyrä. Tampere, Finland: Tampere University Press,
2002, 89–107.

King, Lucien, ed. Game On: The History and Culture of Video Games. London: Laurence King Publishing
Ltd., 2002.

Klevjer, Rune. "In Defense of Cut-Scenes." In Computer Games and Digital Cultures, Conference
Proceedings, ed. Frans Mäyrä. Tampere, Finland: Tampere University Press, 2002, p. 191–2002.

Knizia, Reiner. Dice Games Properly Explained. Tadworth, Surrey: Elliot Right Way Books, 2001.

Bibliography 5

6 Bibliography
Krippendorff, Klaus. "On the Essential Contexts of Artifacts or On the Proposition that 'Design is Making
Sense (of Things).'" In The Idea of Design: A Design Issues Reader, ed. Victor Margolin and Richard
Buchanan. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995, p.156–86.

Kuper, Simon. "The World's Game Is Not Just A Game." In The New York Times Sunday Magazine, May 26,
2002.

Langton, Christopher. Artificial Life: An Overview. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995.

Laramée, François Dominic, ed. Game Design Perspectives. Hingham, MA: Charles River Media, 2002.

Lantz, Frank and Eric Zimmerman. "Rules, Play, and Culture: Checkmate!" Merge Magazine, 1999, p. 41–43.

Laurel, Brenda. Computers as Theater. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1993.

LeBlanc, Marc. "Feedback Systems and the Dramatic Structure of Competition." Game Developers
Conference, 1999.

Littlejohn, Stephen. Theories of Human Communication, 3rd ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing
Company, 1989.

Lupton, Ellen and J. Abbott Miller "Laws of the Letter." In Design, Writing, Research: Writing on Graphic
Design. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1996.

Mackay, Daniel. The Fantasy Role-Playing Game: A New Performing Art. London: McFarland & Company,
Inc., 2001.

Manning, Frank E., ed. The World of Play. Proceedings of the 7th Annual Meeting of the Association of the
Anthropological Study of Play. New York: Leisure Press, 1983.

Marcus, Greil. Lipstick Traces: A Secret History of the Twentieth Century. Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1989.

Manovich, Lev. The Language of New Media. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2001.

Martin, Ben. "The Schema." In Complexity: Metaphors, Models, and Reality, ed. George Cowan and David
Pines. Santa Fe: Addison Wesley Longman, 1994, p. 263–286.

Mäyrä, Frans. ed. Computer Games and Digital Cultures Conference Proceedings. Tampere, Finland:
Tampere University Press, 2002.

Miller, J. Hillis. "Narrative." In Critical Terms for Literary Study, ed. Frank Lentricchia and Thomas
McLaughlin. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1990, p. 66–79.

Morganstern, Oscar, and John Von Neumann. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1944.

Murray, Janet. Hamlet on the Holodeck. New York: The Free Press, 1997.

Norman, Donald. The Design of Everyday Things. New York: Doubleday, 1988.

Nwokah and Ikekeonwu. "Nigerian and American Children's Games." In The Study of Play Vol. 1. Diversions
and Divergences in Fields of Play, ed. Margaret C. Duncan, Gary Chick, and Alan Aycock. New York:
Ablex/Greenwood Publishing Company, 1998, p147–153.

6 Bibliography

Bibliography 7
Parlett, David. The Oxford Dictionary of Card Games. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.

Parlett, David. The Oxford History of Board Games. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Pearce, Celia. The Interactive Book: A Guide to the Interactive Revolution. Toronto: Macmillan Technical
Publishing/New Riders, 1997.

Peirce, Charles Saunders. Charles S. Peirce: Selected Writings, ed. P. O. Wiener. New York: Dover, 1958.

Peterson, Ivars. The Jungles of Randomness: A Mathematical Safari. New York: John Wiley, 1997.

Phillips, Andrea. "Deep Water." 26th July 2001. Cloudmakers.org. <www.cloud-makers.org>.

Piaget, Jean. The Moral Judgment of the Child. New York: Free Press, 1997.

Poole, Steven. Trigger Happy: Videogames and the Entertainment Revolution. New York: Arcade Publishing,
2000.

Poundstone, William. Prisoner's Dilemma. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Prensky, Marc. Digital Game-Based Learning. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2001.

Reider, Norman. "Chess, Oedipus, and the Mater Dolorosa." In The Study of Games, ed. E.M. Avedon and
Brian Sutton-Smith. New York: John Wiley, 1971, p. 440–464.

Resnick, Mitchell. Turtles, Termites, and Traffic Jams. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1997.

Robinett, Warren. Inventing the Adventure Game. Unpublished manuscript.

Rollings, Andrew and Dave Morris. Game Architecture and Design. Scottsdale, AZ: Coriolis Group, 1999.

Rouse, Richard III. Game Design: Theory and Practice. Plano, TX: Wordware Publishing, 2001.

Rumelhart, David E. and Andrew Ortony. "The Representation of Knowledge in Memory." In Schooling and
the Acquisition of Knowledge, ed. R. C. Anderson, R. J. Spiro, and W. E. Montague. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum,
1977, p. 99–135.

Ryan, Marie-Laure. Narrative as Virtual Reality: Immersion and Interactivity in Literature and Electronic
Media. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 2000.

Salen, Katie. "Lock, Stock, and Barrel: Sexing the Digital Siren," In Sex Appeal: The Art of Allure in Graphic
and Advertising Design, ed. Steven Heller. New York: Allworth Press, 2000, p. 148–51.

Salen, Katie. "Telefragging Monster Movies." In Game On: The History and Culture of Video Games, ed.
Lucien King. London: Laurence Ling Publishing Ltd., 2002, p. 98–111.

Sankey, Daragh. "A.I. Game," 2001. Joystick101.org. <www.joystick.org>.

Schell, Jesse, and Joe Schochet. "Designing Interactive Theme Park Rides: Lessons From Disney's Battle for
the Buccaneer Gold." <www.gamasutra.com/fea-tures/20010706/ schell_01.htm>.

Schleiner, Anne-Marie. "Game Plug-ins and Patches as Hacker Art." Cracking the Maze. July 16, 1999.
<switch.sjsu.edu/CrackingtheMaze>.

Bibliography 7

8 Bibliography
Schmittberger, R. Wayne. New Rules for Classic Games. New York: John Wiley, 1992.

Schon, Donald. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books,
1983.

Shannon, Claude and Weaver, Warren. Mathematical Theory of Communication.Champaign: University of
Illinois Press, 1963.

Sieberg, Daniel. "Reality Blurs, Hype Builds with Web 'A.I.' Game." May 2001,CNN.com.

Simon, Herbert. The Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1968.

Sirlin, David. Sirlin.net. <www.sirlin.net>.

Smith, Harvey. "The Future of Game Design." <www.gamasutra.com>.

Sniderman, Stephen. "Unwritten Rules." <www.gamepuzzles.com/tlog/tlog2.htm>.

Stewart, Susan. Nonsense. Aspects of Intertextuality in Folklore and Literature.Baltimore: The John Hopkins
University Press, 1978.

Sudnow, David. Pilgrim in the Microworld. New York: Warner Books, 1983.

Suits, Bernard. Grasshopper: Games, Life, and Utopia. Boston: David R. Godine,1990.

Sutton-Smith, Brian. The Ambiguity of Play. Boston: Harvard University Press,2001.

Sutton-Smith, Brian."Boundaries." In Child's Play, ed. Brian Sutton-Smith and R. E. Herron. Malabar, FL:
Warrior Books, 1971, p. 173–92.

Sutton-Smith, Brian, Jay Mechling, Thomas W. Johnson, and Felicia R. McMahon, eds. Children's Folklore:
A Source Book. Logan, UT: Utah State University Press, 1999.

Sutton-Smith, Brian. "The Kissing Games of Adolescents of Ohio." In The Study of Games, ed. Elliott
Avedon and Brian Sutton-Smith. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1971, p.213–16.

Sutton-Smith, Brian. Toys as Culture. New York: Gardner Press, Incorporated, 1986.

Thompson, J. Mark. "Defining the Abstract." <http://www.flash.net/~markthom/ html/game_thoughts.html>.

Underwood, Mick. CCMS. <http://www.cultsock.ndirect.co.uk/MUHome/cshtml/semiomean/semio1.html>.

Von Bertalanffy, Ludwig. General Systems Theory Foundations. New York: George Braziller, 1968.

Von Neumann, John and Oscar Morganstern. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton: Princeton
University Press, 1944.

Vygotsky, L. S. "Play and Its Role in the Mental Development of the Child." In Play and Its Role in Evolution
and Development, ed. J. S. Bruner, A. Jolly, and

K. Sylva. New York: Penguin, 1976, p. 548–63.

Wolf, Mark J.P. "Space in the Video Game." In The Medium of the Video Game, Austin: University of Texas
Press, 2002, p. 53–70.

8 Bibliography

Bibliography 9

Wolfe, Burton H. "The Monopolization of Monopoly: The Story of Lizzie Magie." In The San Francisco Bay
Guardian, 1976.

< Day Day Up >
< Day Day Up >

Bibliography 9

10 Bibliography
10 Bibliography

List of Games Cited

The following index contains all of the games mentioned in Rules of Play. Each game is listed
alphabetically by title, including date of release, medium in which it is played, and developer or
designer of the game.

A great many of the games we cite do not have an identifiable author or group of authors—or the exact
origin of the game is in dispute by game historians. In these cases, the game is listed as "Traditional"
and the approximate dates of origin are indicated, if known. Oftentimes, such games have rich
historical evolutions, such as the board game Chutes and Ladders, which has striking similarities to
games played in ancient Egypt, as well as to traditional games from India, Nepal, and Tibet. In these
cases, we chose as the date of origin the first historical instance of a game that is recognizably similar to
the game we cite. (In the case of Chutes and Ladders, for example, we use the date 1892: this is the
publication date of F.H. Ayre's Snakes and Ladders, a game virtually identical to present-day Chutes
and Ladders).

In deference to the typically collaborative process of game creation, individual designers are listed as
the creator of a game only when a single designer or pair of designers created the entire game by
themselves, or when a single designer is commercially credited with sole authorship, as is the case with
many contemporary board games.

We often cite more than one version of a digital game that was produced in a series, such as Virtua
Fighter and Virtual Fighter 4. In these cases, we list the game as a series but include only the date and
creator of the first game in the series. Also, when important versions of a game appear in more than one
medium (such as an arcade game that later became a console game), we list all of the relevant forms,
with the original medium listed first.

In organizing the games by medium, we opted for very "broad stroke" categories, such as "Arcade
game" or "Physical game." Some of the categories do overlap, but we grouped the games into clusters
that seemed most conceptually useful for the sake of comparison. Our intention here is not to provide a
detailed accounting or taxonomy of these games, but instead to give a general indication of the rich
range of games that we mention and analyze in the course of our investigations. If you are inclined to
research any of these games further, a list of references used in putting together the information in this
index is included at the end.

Arcade game: Games in this category are digital games played on dedicated machines that only play a single
game. This includes typical arcade games like Pac-Man and Space Invaders as well as location-based
entertainment games like the Disneyworld attraction Battle for the Buccaneer Gold.

Board game: In addition to games like Chess and Go—games that are literally played on a board—we
include in this category games played on some kind of board-like structure, such as Battleship and Connect
Four.

Book-based game: The book-based flying simulation Ace of Aces didn't fit into any other category, so we
gave it its own. Other book-based games do exist, but are not mentioned in Rules of Play.

Card game: Some games in this category, such as Poker and Bridge, use a standard set of playing cards.
Others, such as Magic: The Gathering, use specialized cards designed specifically for one game.

Computer game: This group includes games designed to be played on personal computers, from the
venerable PDP-1 to present-day Macintosh and Windows machines. These games are played primarily on a
single machine by a single player.

List of Games Cited 1

2 List of Games Cited

Console game: These games are played on game console machines that attach to a television, ranging from
the Atari 2600 to today's Xbox, GameCube, and Playstation2.

Dice game: Games in this group are played primarily or exclusively with dice. They include gambling games
like Craps and traditional family games like Pig and Yatzee. Additionally, we included the game of Roulette
in this category, as it is a game based entirely on chance.

Handheld game: This category includes games played on a portable digital device such as a Game Boy or
Palm Pilot. Electronic handheld devices that only play a single game, such as P.O.X., are also grouped here.

Icehouse game: Icehouse is a game system that uses colored plastic pyramids as the pieces for a great many
different games. There were enough Icehouse games mentioned in Rules of Play that we included it as its own
category.

Mobile game: Games in this group are played primarily by using a cell phone, whether sin-gle-player or
multiplayer.

Online game: This is a special type of digital game that emphasizes web-based social interaction as the
primary form of play. Included in this category are trans-media games like Majestic that take place over the
Internet, through fax machines, and over the telephone.

Physical game: This category includes games like Tag or Marbles in which the play of the game primarily
involves physical movement and interaction. These games are less regulated than games included in the
category Sport.

Puzzle: As described in Defining Games, puzzles are games with a single correct answer or set of answers.
Puzzles can take a wide variety of forms, but the ones we cite are single-player games that use simple
materials such as pencil and paper.

Role-playing game: These games are highly narrative experiences where the primary form of play involves
players taking on imaginative personas. The classic Dungeons & Dragons is the prototypical example of this
category of game. Live-action role-playing games such as Vampire: The Masquerade are also included here.

Social game: Social games are games in which the play consists primarily of social interaction between
participants. Typically, these games have little or no material components, and include party games as diverse
as Charades, Mafia, and Spin the Bottle.

Sport: The games in this category are physical games that are typically played as an organized, regulated
sport—usually with very specialized equipment in a special space set aside for the game. In some cases,
games listed as Sports can also constitute a leisure activity, such as Skiing.

Television game show: These games exist as televised experiences, and include shows like Survivor,
Jeopardy, and Who Wants to be a Millionaire.

Tile game: Games in this group are played with some form of modular tiles, and include games like
Dominoes and Mah Jongg.

1000 Blank White Cards Assassin
Nathan McQuillen, 1994 Traditional, 1966
Social game Role-playing game

20 Questions Asteroids

Traditional Atari, 1979
Social game Arcade game; Console game

2 List of Games Cited