(Pdf) Games And The Art Of Agency

What is a game? What are we doing when we play a game? What is the value of playing games? Several different philosophical subdisciplines have attempted to lớn answer these questions using very distinctive frameworks.

Bạn đang xem: (Pdf) Games And The Art Of Agency

Some have approached games as something like a text, deploying theoretical frameworks from the study of narrative, fiction, và rhetoric lớn interrogate games for their representational content. Others have approached games as artworks and asked questions about the authorship of games, about the ontology of the work và its performance. Yet others, from the philosophy of sport, have focused on normative issues of fairness, rule application, and competition. The primary purpose of this article is khổng lồ provide an overview of several different philosophical approaches to games and, hopefully, demonstrate the relevance và value of the different approaches lớn each other. Early academic attempts lớn cope with games tried to lớn treat games as a subtype of narrative & to interpret games exactly as one might interpret a static, linear narrative. A faction of trò chơi studies, self-described as “ludologists,” argued that games were a substantially novel form and could not be treated with traditional tools for narrative analysis. In traditional narrative, an audience is told and interprets the story, where in a game, the player enacts và creates the story. Since that early debate, theorists have attempted to offer more nuanced accounts of how games might achieve similar ends to more traditional texts. For example, games might be seen as a novel type of fiction, which uses interactive techniques to achieve immersion in a fictional world. Alternately, games might be seen as a new way lớn represent causal systems, và so a new way to lớn criticize social và political entities.

Xem thêm:

Work from contemporary analytic philosophy of art has, on the other hand, asked questions whether games could be artworks and, if so, what kind. Much of this debate has concerned the precise nature of the artwork, và the relationship between the artist và the audience. Some have claimed that the audience is a cocreator of the artwork, & so games are a uniquely unfinished & cooperative art form. Others have claimed that, instead, the audience does not help create the artwork; rather, interacting with the artwork is how an audience thành viên appreciates the artist"s finished production. Other streams of work have focused less on the game as a text or work, and more on gameplay as a kind of activity. One common view is that chơi game occurs in a “magic circle.” Inside the magic circle, players take on new roles, follow different rules, and actions have different meanings. Actions inside the magic circle vày not have their usual consequences for the rest of life. Enemies of the magic circle view have claimed that the view ignores the deep integration of game life from ordinary life and point khổng lồ gambling, gold farming, và the status effects of sports. Philosophers of sport, on the other hand, have approached games with an entirely different framework. This has lead into investigations about the normative nature of games—what guides the applications of rules và how those rules might be applied, interpreted, or even changed. Furthermore, they have investigated games as social practices & as forms of life.
KeywordsGames Aesthetics Computer Games Sports Philosophy of sports Computer art công nghệ PlayCategories