لطفا منتظر باشید ...
Open and Closed Systems
There are two types of systems, open and closed. In fact, the concept of open and closed systems forms the basis of much of our discussion concerning the formal properties of games and their social and cultural dimensions. This concept speaks not only to games themselves, but also to the relationships games have to players and their contexts. What distinguishes the two types of systems? Littlejohn writes, "One of the most common distinctions [in systems theory] is between closed and open systems. A closed system has no interchange with its environment. An open system receives matter and energy from its environment and passes matter and energy to its environment." [4]
What makes a system open or closed is the relationship between the system and the context, or environment, that surrounds it. The "matter and energy" that passes between a system and its environment can take a number of forms, from pure data (a thermometer measuring temperature and passing the information to the system of a computer program that tries to predict the weather), to human interaction (a person operating and interacting with the system of a car in order to drive down a highway). In both examples the system is open because there is some kind of transfer between the system and its environment. The software system passes temperature information from the outside climate. The car system exchanges input and output with the driver in a variety of ways (speedometer, gas pedal, steering wheel, etc.). When we frame a game as a system it is useful to recognize whether it is being treated as an open or closed system. If we look at our three framings of Chess, which framings were open and which were closed?
Formal system: As a formal system of rules, Chess is a closed, self-contained system.
Cultural system: As a cultural system,Chess is clearly an open system, as we are essentially considering the way that the game intersects with other contexts such as society, language, history, etc.
Experiential system: As an experiential system of play, things get tricky. Framing Chess as an experiential system could lead to understanding the game as either open or closed. If we only consider the players and their strategicgame actions, we could say that once the game starts, the only relevant events are internal to the game. In this sense, the game is a closed system. On the other hand, we could emphasize the emotional and social baggage that players bring into the game, the distractions of the environment,the reputations that are gained or lost after the game is over. In this sense, the play of Chess would be an open system. Framed as play, games can be either open or closed.
In defining and understanding key concepts like design and systems, our aim is to better understand the particular challenges of game design and meaningful play. Game designers do practice design, and they do so by creating systems. But other kinds of designers create systems as well-so what is so special about games? The systems that game designers create have many peculiar qualities, but one of the most prominent is that they are interactive, that they require direct participation in the form of play. In the next chapter, we build directly on our understanding of systems and design to tackle this confounding but crucial concept: the enigmatic interactivity.
[4]Littlejohn, Theories of Human Communication, p. 41
