لطفا منتظر باشید ...
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, 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. 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
[www.gamepuzzles.com/tlog/tlog2>. 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.
