Huizinga’s magic circle

In the fields of gaming concepts and game design there's a very important author for reference: I'm talking about Johan Huizinga and in this post I want to discuss a very important concept: the idea of the "magic circle".

Johan Huizinga (1872 – 1945) was a Dutch historian and one of the founders of modern cultural history. In his book "Homo Ludens" (1938) he discusses the possibility that playing is the primary formative element in human culture.

In this book, the author presents the idea of the "magic circle". As described by Adams and Rollings (2009, page 8), Huizinga did not use the term as a generic name for the concept: his text refers to the actual playground, or a physical space for playing.

Inside the magic circle, real-world events have special meanings, as in the example below (ADAMS & ROLLINGS, 2009, page 8):



The magic circle is a place of dreams and fantasy. It's an escape for everyday problems and chores. And the most important: everything inside the magic circle is, in some way, transformative. Each time a person leaves the magic circle they bring meaning and experience.

Huizinga (1955, page 10) wrote that all play moves and have their existance within a playground marked off beforehand, either materially or ideally, deliberately or as a matter of course. Just as there is no formal difference between play and ritual, so the ‘consecrated spot’ cannot be formally distinguished from the playground. The arena, the card-table, the magic circle, the temple, the stage, the screen, the tennis court, the court of justice, etc, are all in form and function playgrounds, i.e. forbidden spots, isolated, hedged round, hallowed, within which special rules obtain. They are all temporary worlds within the ordinary world, dedicated to the performance of an act apart.

In the image below I try to create a visual representation of the idea of the magic circle:



These ideas are essential to study and understand the gaming universe around the players and the impacts of the game culture in the mediatic scene and how important it can be for the contemporary world.

---

REFERENCES:

ADAMS, Ernest; ROLLINGS, Andrew. Fundamentals of Game Design. New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2009

HUIZINGA, Johan. Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture. Boston: The Beacon Press, 1955.

One year of Gaming Conceptz and a special interview with Gonzalo Frasca

By Vince (@vincevader)

One year ago I started posting here about gaming concepts, game design, gamification/ludification, games and many more aspects of the ludic universe.

And, 84 posts later, the blog is still alive and kicking.

I want to thank you all for the feedback, e-mailing and the great acquaintances I made through the blog during this year.

And to celebrate the year one of the Gaming Conceptz we have a great interview with Gonzalo Frasca. Enjoy! Go gamers!

---

Gonzalo Frasca (Montevideo, 1972) is a game designer and academic researcher focusing on serious and political videogames. Frasca is originally from Uruguay, where he established Powerful Robot Games, a videogame studio in Montevideo. In video game theory, Frasca belongs to the group of so called "ludologists", who consider video games to be simulations based on rules. They see video games as the first simulational media for the masses - which means a paradigm shift in media consumption and production.



1) How You've become a serious games researcher?

I'm interested in games. Serious games try to take games even further. So, anybody who's interested in pushing the envelope in games should be interested in serious games. Even if most serious games do not succeed, just thinking about the questions they raise is enough to make us better designers.

2) What would be the best definition for ludology? And narratology?

Ludology is just a word for game and play research. It's as simple as that. There are several definitions of narratology, but basically it's the discipline that studies stories and storytelling.

3) We can see a "wave" of studies about the use of game mechanics in a lot of areas of knowledge. What's your point on the buzzword "gamification"?

I've seen a lot of buzzwords come and go. I think it's positive people are interested in applying games on other fields. If gamification is here to stay or will fade, time will tell. In general, I generally try not to trust recipes and most of what I've seen about gamification looks like a magic recipe to me. But I could be wrong.

4) The use of serious games for political campaigns and education has improved in the last years?

Not really. And that is an interesting question. The simple answer is that they are not relevant. I believe we're still waiting for critical mass. Sooner or later it'll happen. Specially in education. That's my current obsession. I would actually say that these days I'm more interested in education than in games. Well, actually, it's hard to see one without considering the other.

5) The world is going more and more ludic with new digital interfaces and social media. That's a fact. Are the companies and advertising agencies ready for these changes?

I'm not sure. Videogames are still considered cool per se, not because of what they can do. Again, we're still in the very early ages of this genre. I know it doesn't seem like it. It's not because of technology: it's about social conventions. The more we incorporate play into our culture, the easier it'll be. I know this sounds totally hippie and new agey. But play is basically about not being afraid of doing. Play literally will make us free.

6) Send a final message to the new researchers of the gaming concepts and game design field.

Play my new iOS game: Space Holiday (LINK HERE). It's not serious at all, not political: it's a plain, full puzzle game. It was a challenge I set to myself: I always liked puzzle games and I always thought it was the kind of game I couldn't make myself. I worked really hard to prove myself wrong.
In any case, stay away from labels: researcher, designer, creator, player - those categories overlap all the time. You can't be good at one without being good at the others.

Experience – part II

By Vince Vader

I really enjoyed writing my last post (link here) about experience of players inside the games. So I've decided to write a little bit more about this fascinating subject. In this post I want to highlight some ideas to complete this thought.

I think there are three great aspects that help us understand the involvement of the players with the game universe: the idea of a labyrinth, the concept of virtual presence and the concept of flow.

I like to use the idea of a labyrinth of games as a metaphor. I think it's important to offer the player a chance to get lost inside the game world. But it's very important to offer this as a challenge to be completed and not as a bad sensation that leads the player to nowhere. As Kerényi wrote, the concept of a labyrinth is possibly a cultural good of all humanity whose origins date back to the Stone Age (page 66) and possibly all the ludic activities results in a kind of maze (page 72). So we can conclude that the idea of a labyrinth is - in some way - a mythological heritage of us all.

Continuing the thought, it's important to study the concept of "presence" inside the game world. Offer the player a labyrinthine environment is easy but the great challenge is to put a virtual presence of the player into the game (using narrative resources, coherent game mechanics, good graphics, etc.).

Nitsche (page 203) in reference to Slater (1993) talks about forms of presence and argues that “presence” is understood as the mental state where a user subjectively feels present within a video game space as the result of an immersion into the content of the fictional world. It is a mental phenomenon based on a perceptual illusion. In reference to Lombard and Diltron (1997) Nitsche (page 203) says that a great number of researchers have concentrated on the idea that a state of presence should be connected to the illusion of a nonmediated experience. In this case, players do not see the interface anymore because they feel present in the world beyond the screen.

The last concept I want to discuss is “flow”. I’ll go back again to the author Michael Nitsche to complete this thought. Nitsche (page 204) citing Csikszentmihalyi (1991) says that “flow” has been introduced as a state in which a person is fully immersed in an action and highly focused to the extent that one can experience, for example,

a loss in the feeling of self-consciousness and time experience. A player who reaches this level is clearly immersed in the game but not necessarily “present” in the virtual space.

All these features help us to create good experiences involving games.

In a future post I want to discuss some ways to generate the idea of a labyrinth and the concepts of presence and flow. Szia!

---

References:

CSIKSENTMIHALYI, Mihaly. Flow: the psychology of optimal experience. New York: Perennial (HarperCollins), 1991.

KERÉNYI, Karl. En El laberinto. Madrid: Ediciones Siruela, 2006.

LOMBARD, Matthew & DITTON Theresa. At the heart of it all: the concept of telepresence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 3, no. 2 (1997): 1-39.

NITSCHE, Michael. VIDEO GAME SPACES - image, play and structure in 3Dnworlds. Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2008

A quote from Reiner Knizia

I really like the work of this guy. Knizia is one of my favorites game designers. Born in Germany, he developed his first game at the age of eight (!). He has a PhD in mathematics, and has been a full-time game designer since 1997, when he quit his job from the board of a large international bank. Knizia has been living in England since 1993.

This quote below has a good concept about game design:

“When playing a game, the goal is to win, but it is the goal that is important, not the winning.” ― Reiner Knizia

Think about it.

Szia!

Ludologists love stories, too: notes from a debate that never took place

By Gonzalo Frasca (Thanks for share the text in my blog!)

ABSTRACT
During the last few years, a debate took place within the game scholars community. A debate that, it seems, opposed two groups: ludologists and narratologists. Ludologists are supposed to focus on game mechanics and reject any room in the field for analyzing games as narrative, while narratologists argue that games are closely connected to stories. This article aims at showing that this description of the participants is erroneous. What is more, this debate as presented never really took place because it was cluttered with a series of misunderstandings and misconceptions that need to be clarified if we want to seriously discuss the role of narrative in videogames.

Keywords
Ludology, narratology, ludologist, narratologist, narrativism, narrativist.

INTRODUCTION
This is an unusual article. My original intention was writing a paper on the role of narrative in videogames (through cutscenes and instructions) for conveying simulation rules. When I mentioned this to a colleague, he was shocked: he thought that, since I amknown as a ludologist, there was no way I could accept any role for narrative in games. Of course, I told him he was wrong and that such idea of ludology is totally erroneous. That misconception is, I think, a direct consequence of the so-called narratology versus ludology debate. I believe that this debate has been fueled by misunderstandings and that generated a series of inaccurate beliefs on the role of ludology, including that they radically reject any use of narrative theory in game studies.

Since I guess that I have been in a privileged position to witness the development of this debate over the last four years, I decided to write down a list of the most common misconceptions that it generated. It is not my main intention in this paper to support ludology but rather making explicit all the contradictions that prevented this debate from taking place. However, I do not pretend to be totally objective neither: I do not favor narrative as a privileged means for understanding videogames for reasons that have been previously exposed by several authors and are beyond the scope of this article. Finally, I would like to make clear that I will be speaking only for myself and I am the only responsible for all the opinions expressed in this article.

CLICK HERE to download the complete document.