{"id":4383,"date":"2018-03-26T10:18:52","date_gmt":"2018-03-26T07:18:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/playlab.uta.fi\/?p=4383"},"modified":"2018-03-26T10:18:52","modified_gmt":"2018-03-26T07:18:52","slug":"considering-play-from-method-to-analysis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/considering-play-from-method-to-analysis\/","title":{"rendered":"Considering play:  From method to analysis"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>As the field of game studies has evolved, so has its methodology. There are different approaches to analyzing a game that a ludologist can employ, which are discussed in an article by <strong>Jasper van Vught<\/strong> and <strong>Ren\u00e9 Glas <\/strong>titled <em>Considering play:\u00a0 From method to analysis<\/em>. Elaborating and building on prior theories, the authors highlight different ways of playing games analytically.<\/p>\n<h3><strong>Games as objects vs games as a process<\/strong><\/h3>\n<p>There exist two different schools of thought within ludologists. Those who treat a game as an object and those who treat it as a process. The former assume that a game provides a core structure that encourages or enforces certain play actions to be performed, which then form the \u201cgame text\u201d that is discussed and analyzed. Those who treat games as a process factor in the subjectivity of the play experience, meaning that they focus more on how players actually choose to play the game. Scholars who use this methodology might discuss how \u201ca game of Counter Strike\u201d might be amazing by analyzing what happens during an individual round or play session.\u00a0 These varying approaches are also called <strong>formalism <\/strong>and <strong>situationism<\/strong>, formalism focusing on the formal aspects of the game while situationists study concrete gaming practices and sometimes argue that gaming can\u2019t be studied in the abstract.<\/p>\n<p>Focusing only on the structural elements of a game puts the researcher in the risk of ignoring the fact that play does not always abide by the rules set by a game\u2019s design, while focusing too much on play practices can ignore the meanings embedded in the game by its designers.<\/p>\n<h2><a href=\"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/cs.jpg\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone size-full wp-image-4384\" src=\"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/cs.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"640\" height=\"400\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/cs.jpg 640w, https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/cs-300x188.jpg 300w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 640px) 100vw, 640px\" \/><\/a><\/h2>\n<p><em>A game of Counter Strike. <\/em><\/p>\n<h3>Instrumental vs free play<\/h3>\n<p>Players can let their in-game actions be informed by two different approaches. Following the game\u2019s formal components (such as tutorials) and playing the game as intended is called <strong>instrumental play<\/strong>, whilst more unstructured and anarchic player behavior is called <strong>free play<\/strong>. Instrumentalism is more aligned with formalism, while free play is with situationism. There exist different subsets within both play types.<\/p>\n<p>One form of instrumental play is exhaustive playing strategy, which means that one should perform all the different actions that a game makes available before making claims about a game as a whole. According to the authors, this strategy is inherently limited to small games and specific research questions.<\/p>\n<h2>Heuristic analytical strategies<\/h2>\n<p>For instrumentalists seeking to perform actions that lead to success (completion) in a game, the authors specify three different heuristic strategies:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><strong>Gameplay condition<\/strong>: Success can be defined by the ability to keep playing the game, thus every subsequent choice the player makes is based on the desire the keep playing. Works mainly in linear games of progression.<\/li>\n<li><strong>The rational player<\/strong>: As long as every move is informed by the desire to achieve the game\u2019s objective, one can focus on the way that game structures player behavior to positive and negative reinforcement.<\/li>\n<li><strong>The cooperative player<\/strong>: Here cooperation occurs between the player and the game, if the player follows the game\u2019s cues to play in \u201cappropriate\u201d manner. It\u2019s argued that unlike the aforementioned two methods, this one lets the player to distinguish between more and less important elements of the game\u2019s narrative and progress (such as between side and main quests).<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<h3>Free play<\/h3>\n<p>Free play, or transgressive play, is intentional rebelling against the \u201cintended way\u201d of playing the game. There exist myriad of different transgressive approaches a researcher can take, but the authors highlights two above all else: cheating and \u201cgoing native\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Cheating \u201callows us to reflect upon the presuppositions that we bring to games\u201d. Going native is a sociological term used to describe concerns with losing objectivity as a result of becoming too involved with a research subject. The authors argue that from a humanities perspective, a more subjective experience \u201cis not just acceptable, but unavoidable\u201d.<\/p>\n<h3>Considering context<\/h3>\n<p>An important part of ludoliteracy is understanding context. Being ludoliterate means being able to place a game in the context of human culture (including the relation with other media); in the context of other games (including genre); and the context of the technological platform on which games run.<br \/>\nThe importance of acknowledge one\u2019s own context as a researcher is stressed as well in the article. As a game\u2019s scholar is \u201cinherently caught up in the object of study\u201d, it is argued that downplaying or obscuring oneself in the context of the study is problematic. Formalists might be more inclined to try and appear objective in their readings of games, while situationists prefer personal tellings of games over the notion that game criticism should be a pursuit of objectivity.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/taulukko.png\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignnone size-full wp-image-4385\" src=\"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/taulukko.png\" alt=\"\" width=\"664\" height=\"316\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/taulukko.png 664w, https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/02\/taulukko-300x143.png 300w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 664px) 100vw, 664px\" \/><\/a><br \/>\n<em>A visualisation from the article<\/em><\/p>\n<h3>In summary<\/h3>\n<p>A fundamental research question in game studies is to choose from what angle to approach a game. Knowing which theoretical framework suits your research question is important in making the play process a more effective and well considered part of one\u2019s research.<\/p>\n<p>Original article: http:\/\/digra2017.com\/static\/Full%20Papers\/56_DIGRA2017_FP_Vught_Considering_Play.pdf<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The methods of gamestudy: formalism vs situationism and more<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":159,"featured_media":4385,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"ocean_post_layout":"","ocean_both_sidebars_style":"","ocean_both_sidebars_content_width":0,"ocean_both_sidebars_sidebars_width":0,"ocean_sidebar":"","ocean_second_sidebar":"","ocean_disable_margins":"enable","ocean_add_body_class":"","ocean_shortcode_before_top_bar":"","ocean_shortcode_after_top_bar":"","ocean_shortcode_before_header":"","ocean_shortcode_after_header":"","ocean_has_shortcode":"","ocean_shortcode_after_title":"","ocean_shortcode_before_footer_widgets":"","ocean_shortcode_after_footer_widgets":"","ocean_shortcode_before_footer_bottom":"","ocean_shortcode_after_footer_bottom":"","ocean_display_top_bar":"default","ocean_display_header":"default","ocean_header_style":"","ocean_center_header_left_menu":"","ocean_custom_header_template":"","ocean_custom_logo":0,"ocean_custom_retina_logo":0,"ocean_custom_logo_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_tablet_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_mobile_max_width":0,"ocean_custom_logo_max_height":0,"ocean_custom_logo_tablet_max_height":0,"ocean_custom_logo_mobile_max_height":0,"ocean_header_custom_menu":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_family":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_subset":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_size":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_font_size_unit":"px","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight_tablet":"","ocean_menu_typo_font_weight_mobile":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform_tablet":"","ocean_menu_typo_transform_mobile":"","ocean_menu_typo_line_height":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_line_height_unit":"","ocean_menu_typo_spacing":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_tablet":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_mobile":0,"ocean_menu_typo_spacing_unit":"","ocean_menu_link_color":"","ocean_menu_link_color_hover":"","ocean_menu_link_color_active":"","ocean_menu_link_background":"","ocean_menu_link_hover_background":"","ocean_menu_link_active_background":"","ocean_menu_social_links_bg":"","ocean_menu_social_hover_links_bg":"","ocean_menu_social_links_color":"","ocean_menu_social_hover_links_color":"","ocean_disable_title":"default","ocean_disable_heading":"default","ocean_post_title":"","ocean_post_subheading":"","ocean_post_title_style":"","ocean_post_title_background_color":"","ocean_post_title_background":0,"ocean_post_title_bg_image_position":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_attachment":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_repeat":"","ocean_post_title_bg_image_size":"","ocean_post_title_height":0,"ocean_post_title_bg_overlay":0.5,"ocean_post_title_bg_overlay_color":"","ocean_disable_breadcrumbs":"default","ocean_breadcrumbs_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_separator_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_links_color":"","ocean_breadcrumbs_links_hover_color":"","ocean_display_footer_widgets":"default","ocean_display_footer_bottom":"default","ocean_custom_footer_template":"","ocean_post_oembed":"","ocean_post_self_hosted_media":"","ocean_post_video_embed":"","ocean_link_format":"","ocean_link_format_target":"self","ocean_quote_format":"","ocean_quote_format_link":"post","ocean_gallery_link_images":"on","ocean_gallery_id":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[237],"tags":[345,934,935],"class_list":["post-4383","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-game-research-highlights","tag-game-research","tag-ludology","tag-methods","entry","has-media"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4383","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/159"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4383"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4383\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/4385"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4383"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4383"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.tuni.fi\/playlab\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4383"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}