Game Rules as Art

 Posted by (Visited 8248 times)  Game talk
Apr 202006
 

It was sitting with Rod Humble in an office chatting about how to make crafting in EQII cooler that I first outlined the notion of a game grammar.

Now Rod has an Escapist article about how game rules are at the core of the game art form. It’s worth reading.

  23 Responses to “Game Rules as Art”

  1. Board Games and Gaming Blog from Jerusalem, Israel - Yehuda says:
    April 21, 2006 at 7:17 am

    Two fellow bloggers posted about personal difficulties yesterday: John Farrell and Darth Tanyan. Send ’em some love. Escapist Magazine ish #41 has an article on Game Rules as Art . (viaRalph Koster). We’ve got more Menonites coming for Friday night dinner. I don’t know where they are all coming from. We just keep getting calls from this tourist group asking us if we can host some more of them in order to give them the Jewish shabbat experience.

  2. rod humble says:
    April 20, 2006 at 5:56 pm

    Thanks bro!

    Whats yer darn email these days? 🙂

    Rod

  3. Morgan says:
    April 20, 2006 at 8:59 pm

    I’ll read the piece later when I’m done cringing. (No offense intended, Rob. I just strongly disagree with the idea that games are art.)

    Contrary to popular belief, games are not art. The content within games can be art, but to call games "art" is a stretch. It’s like calling a glass of milk milk. That’s the premise of the article I’m writing — no, not milk… I hope my article will at least encourage some people to think critically, but I presume my notions will either anger many people or provide them with reason to think I’m a kook. Probably the latter.

    In addition, using the "games as art" mantra as a crutch for socially, politically, and legally defending certain content in games presents the risk of long-term (and perhaps irreparable) harm to the utility of games. The damage may already be done. I’ll delve deeper in my article. (I don’t know where the article will be published.)

  4. Rik says:
    April 20, 2006 at 10:02 pm

    Games are art the way paintings are art. The way stories are art. And unless I’m missing something, a glass of milk would generally be called “milk”.

  5. rod humble says:
    April 20, 2006 at 10:34 pm

    No problem at all Morgan, good luck with the article!

    For the majority of my career I have been very much of the “Dude just make games FUN and get over it” kind of guy, so I sympathise 

    I am afraid I have moved to the beret wearing, poetry reading side of town.

    Before you finish your piece, I highly recommend you read Chris Crawford’s Dragon speech, I was lucky enough to be there for the speech itself, its hard to communicate the electricity, but the words are good on their own. Although interactive storytelling is not my interest, as a challenge for games to become MORE its hard to beat. You may find it useful at least as a good counter point for your piece.

    http://www.erasmatazz.com/library/JCGD_Volume_6/Dragon_Speech.html

    All the best!

    Rod

  6. Morgan says:
    April 20, 2006 at 11:51 pm

    You may find it useful at least as a good counter point for your piece.

    Thanks for the link, Rod. I’ll read the transcript several more times over the weekend. From the initial reading, the document appears more useful in preparing arguments in disfavor of the "games are art" mantra. I imagine that you may have a "wha?" look on your face. All will be made clear in time. 😉

  7. Michael Chui says:
    April 21, 2006 at 1:00 am

    Utility, huh?

    I recommend Josef Pieper’s “Leisure: The Basis of Culture”. =P

    Liked the article, and passed it on. Wrote my own thing, and it turned into a bit of a rant. http://raccaldin36.livejournal.com/895599.html

  8. Faith says:
    April 21, 2006 at 3:18 am

    […] Comments […]

  9. BPMWare says:
    April 21, 2006 at 9:37 am

    Great read! It really opened my eyes. It prompted me to write up a few thoughts on the relationship between game rules and the important part that designers play in teaching lessons that are needed right now.

    Here’s in the link if interested:

    The Importance of Game Design

    Thanks for the article, Rod.

    – Brian

  10. rod humble says:
    April 21, 2006 at 9:53 am

    Thanks Brian!

    I like your post! The game about change in particular is interesting. As a subject matter its a good fit and just crafting your game with intentionality of a message is half the battle I think.

    Exciting times!

  11. StGabe says:
    April 21, 2006 at 10:35 am

    I’ve always thought the “games as art” discussion was simply not a useful discussion. “Art” is just a word. Does it apply to games? If and only if we want it to. I think we can all agree that we value games and their design. Calling games “art” is just a way of trying to indicate that valuation (saying in effect, “I value game and game design as much as more traditional art and artistic design”). That valuation varies and there is no clear agreement. But does it really matter when really we do all agree that games and game design are important?

    Personally I think the article is a bit confused about what a rule is. Are rules just the bare bones mechanics or are they the themes that go along with the rules? Personally I find the former definition to be most useful. Do the chess rules invoke a theme of feudalism? Not really. They delineate sets of spaces that specific pieces can move to. The feudalistic theme comes from the names given to the pieces. By changing the names of the pieces we could invoke new themes just as we can invoke completely different themes for Snakes & Ladders by adding “virtue/vice” labels to the snakes and the ladders. Go has a theme? It’s one of the most abstract games there is with no attempt at all to invoke a theme. Sure, we can assign all sorts of meanings if we want to, but that is us doing that. Not the rules.

    I didn’t follow the jump from there to games with metarules. First of all I think that it’s a mistake to think of games with metarules as categorically different. A game like a tabletop RPG where an umpire decides outcomes really just has an explicit rule that says that a certain player (the umpire) can make decisions in a certain space about what outcome comes next. Secondly I think we do have computer games with metarules. We have this explicitly with games like Achaea, persistent worlds created with NWN, Second Life and A Tale in the Desert but also with games like Quake. In Quake we create rules like “no camping”. The “umpire” is the person who controls the server and can boot people. Most multiplayer games create rules pretty quickly. Singleplayer games with “construction kits” have existed for 20 years or more and we’ve used those to modify the rules of our singleplayer experiences. Generally some “artists” do arise although they tend to be a very small part of the audience. Phil Steinmeyer had an interesting article on his blog a while back talking about the extent to which it was useful to create such toolkits for singleplayer games.

  12. Morgan says:
    April 21, 2006 at 12:45 pm

    Will Computer Games Ever Be A Legitimate Art Form? by Ernest J. Adams, GDC 2001

    What I especially like about this article is that Adams reports on the "games as art" situation in a realistic manner. He doesn’t blatantly generalize all games as art and he doesn’t actually say that games are not art. Adams promotes the idea that games could legitimately be considered art. The situation hasn’t changed. I don’t think games need to or should be considered "art". The thesis of my article isn’t actually the combative stance that "games are not art"; instead, I promote the idea that games are games — a new, independent platform (read: medium) worthy of receiving intense scrutiny.

  13. BPMWare says:
    April 21, 2006 at 1:03 pm

    I wouldn’t necessarily say that games in and of themselves can always be considered art. Instead, I’d suggest that there’s an “art to creating games”; perhaps “craft” is a better word for what’s being talked about here. Game designers, in this light, are no different than sculptors, ship builders, or masons. While perhaps the result of masonary may be a building made of stone that sells burgers, there’s a good chance that creativity and passion went in to laying each piece of stone.

    Let’s call them “Game Wrights”!

  14. rod humble says:
    April 21, 2006 at 1:53 pm

    It might be worth me outlining my pre-work on the article.

    First off the art word. By art I mean what the creator wishes to say, so if thats the rush of speed in a racing game thats cool, if its the triumph of strategy in a wargame then thats what I mean as well. Its just what you are trying to get the player to feel or enjoy.

    I was drilling down on what each form of art does uniquely well. Obviously a game can have great graphic art, great story or great music but thats not unique to it as a medium. What it can do uniquely well is the player(s) interacting with rules.

    Now the players will make their own art, BUT the rules that have been selected or created by the game designer(s) can be a form of artistic expression all by themselves. So for example in The Sims 2 there was a deliberate choice NOT to put in a rule that prohibited same sex marriage. Thats a statement. If you put in a rule in a WW2 shooter that the player loses the game if he sees more than 20 people die then you have made a statement about war. Look at Balance of Power for a victory/lose condition that makes a statement. Or look at Planescape Torment for how using a common death mechanic can be turned into a statement by well thought out game design.

    Of course things dont have to be this overt, a crafting system for example in an MMO is a subtle statement about economics. I would argue EVERY mechanic you create is a statement whether you want it to be or not. Sometimes that statement is “This is the easiest and most fun way to represent this part of the game” and thats fine but its worth noting to yourself that that is what you have chosen to do and what you have chosen not to do.

    So if you buy into the notion that each mechanic has that potential then it naturally follows what can technology do to it? Having rules generated in response to the players desires is a feedback loop which might enable players to create games which they find most enjoyable as they play them and potentially allow for very personal works of art or entertainment if you find the art word too loaded.

    So yes I am focusing on a very small segment of game design, I make no comment on MMO’s or interactive stories there are a lot of smart folks working on those issues. But game rules as an intentional artistic statement and in the future having procedurally generated game rules is my interest right now.

    I could be nuts but as its such a large topic and one seemingly un-addressed I thought it might be of wider interest.

  15. rod humble says:
    April 21, 2006 at 2:04 pm

    Morgan thanks for the James Ernest piece, thats awesome. I hope that I can convince you that the selection and creation of game rules is an aesthetic for games.

  16. rod humble says:
    April 21, 2006 at 2:17 pm

    Err Ernest Adams 🙂 Not sure how I managed to mistype that so decisively.

  17. StGabe says:
    April 21, 2006 at 4:11 pm

    Now the players will make their own art, BUT the rules that have been selected or created by the game designer(s) can be a form of artistic expression all by themselves. So for example in The Sims 2 there was a deliberate choice NOT to put in a rule that prohibited same sex marriage.

    I still think you are talking about the dressing around the rules. The rule, “you lose the game if certain event occurs in the view frame 20 times” is not a statement about war. Once put into the context of WW2 we’re not talking just about rules but about presentation and game metaphors. You’ve taken a core set of rules and pasted on meanings from outside the game itself. I think most of your examples with traditional games missed this distinction. Labeling a snake or ladder with the word “chastity” or “avarice” is not a rule.

    I think there’s something to what you’re saying I just think there is a confusion of sorts about what’s a rule and what’s a metaphor pasted onto the rule.

    Raph had a post a while back talking about mechanics, statistical variation narrative and metaphor as different parts of a game. We may have disagreed where to draw the boundaries exactly but I think that a strong distinction between mechanics and narrative/metaphor is important.

  18. rod humble says:
    April 21, 2006 at 5:09 pm

    StGabe,

    Thats a very interesting thread thank you.

    Yes its a murky area. I appreciate your responses they help to de-murk it.

    I think it is possible to make some mechanics/rules and then wrap a theme around them. I think its possible to make a theme and apply some pre selected rules around it. It is also possible to create rules which attempt to simulate the theme. I also think its possible to create rules which ADDRESS the theme.

    Or you can decide on what you wish to say about it and create rules to say it or help say it.

    In a sense I wish to unify the two rather than distinguish them.

    There is nothing wrong with any approach, I love games with fun rules, I love games with a great setting but derivative rules. I think however there is a vein to be mined in considering each rule as a highly compact artistic statement.

    I love Knizia’s games as well. Interestingly he says his Tigris and Euphrat game’s rules were designed specifically to model the theme he was addressing which is interesting (geekspeak episode 18 on itunes podcasts) worth listening to as he really is an inspirational designer.

    So for example your election card game. I love the idea of corruption and gerrymandering being a mechanic, in fact I love the idea of making a politics game where the essential commentary is the corruption of being in power over time.

    Is there a way to make a set of rules which you could point at and say “There, that is what I have to say about politics.” and as players play it they have a wry grin at the mechanics you have selected?

    How deep game rules go as a tool for making a statement is very much open to question, but its worth a shot I think.

    Thought provoking, you may have now ruined my weekend as I think of some rules for a politics game 🙂

  19. SBrodie says:
    April 21, 2006 at 8:03 pm

    I haven’t had a chance to read the dragon speech article that was posted here, but this Escapist article reminded me of a chapter in Chris’s recent book on Interactive Storytelling. He essentially explains how mathamatical modeling is an art form as far as choosing how to represent emotions or concepts within a simulation. It is interesting to think about all the possible ways that fear, loyalty, love, etc might possibly be modeled, and it takes an intelligent and specialized person to do it right.

    I don’t feel like sticking my nose into the “games as art” debate, but I think this article does a great job of making a case for why talented game designers (in the most pure sense of the job description) are considered a valuable commodity for any game studio.

  20. Raph says:
    April 21, 2006 at 8:19 pm

    I feel like I should join in but I also feel like I’ve previously said everything I can on this topic.

    Of course games are art.

    Of course the art of the game is whole, not solely the rules.

    Of course the art of the rules is at the heart of games.

    Of course rulesets aka models can convey information, biases, opinions, and so on.

    Of course rulesets and dressings are separate yet deeply intertwined, and it can be very hard to separate the two.

    Of course dressings can enhance or damage the sense conveyed by the rules.

  21. Ola Fosheim Grøstad says:
    April 26, 2006 at 6:31 am

    Hmm… You need a definition. Art is that which invoke reflection beyond the object itself. Without signs that is obviously harder to do, but still possible (e.g. pure music). If the gamerules leave you in awe, thinking “could that be so?”, then maybe they approach art, but how common is that? Most games doesn’t score very high as Art as they focus on action and predefined goals and adhere strictly to particular genres.

  22. Michael Chui says:
    April 26, 2006 at 9:43 am

    Are all movies Art, then?

  23. Ola Fosheim Grøstad says:
    April 27, 2006 at 12:50 am

    Michael Chui: Are all movies Art, then?

    Many movies have some potential for functioning as Art, but due to the premises of film making (Hollywood) relatively few of them makes for Good Art as they don’t leave much thinking to the public. Indies often are better Artworks. If you want to turn something abstract such as game rules into Art, you will need to focus on “elegance”. Maybe the game rules of Othello qualifies as Art as they achieve complexity through simplicity and hints of CA, but I am not too sure how your typical computer game rules would.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.