Unifying Game Ontology: A Faceted Classification of Game Elements Michael S. Debus This dissertation is submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) at the IT University of Copenhagen. Title: Unifying Game Ontology: A Faceted Classification of Game Elements Candidate: Michael S. Debus Alliancevej 32, 2TV 2450 Copenhagen SV Denmark +45 50 38 45 13 [email protected] Supervisor: Espen Aarseth This research has received funding from the European ResearchCouncil (ERC) under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant Agreement No [695528] – MSG: Making Sense of Games). Resumé I mindst hundrede år er spil blevet defineret og klassificeret. I de sidste to årtier er der dog opstået en forøget forskningsmæssig interesse for hvad spil er og består af. For at at udvikle en mere entydig terminologi for spil og deres bestanddele, undersøger denne afhandling spillets ontologi i to henseende. Med en tilgang inspireret af Wittgenstein, belyser jeg de forskellige betydninger der knytter sig til udtrykket ’spil’. Jeg fremlægger en ikke-udtømmende oversigt over fem underliggende ideer, der tjener som områder hvor man kan finde spils såkaldte familie-ligheder: spil som genstande, forløb, systemer, holdninger og ud fra deres udvikling og distribution. Jeg introducerer dernæst en række ontologiske begreber, for at kunne eksplicitere den forståelse af spil, som tages i anvendelse i denne afhandling. Spil er ’specifikker’ – samlinger af anonyme ’partikulærer’ – som enten kan være materialiseret (som genstande) eller instantieret (som forløb). Jeg vil dernæst, ud fra en ludologisk tilgang, undersøge spils underliggende formelle system. En række begreber fra biblioteksvidenskaben danner rammen for en analyse af de distinktioner der bliver anvendt i seksten forskellige spil-klassificeringer. Ifølge biblioteksvidenskaben er distinktioner iboende egenskaber ved den genstand de klassificerer. Dermed kan de anvendte distinktioner betragtes som spil-elementer. En endelig liste med seks elementer er dernæst yderligere klassificeret i et facetteret klassificerings-skema, som i modsætning til de mere almindelige hierarkiske systemer, er mere åben for fremtidige justeringer, såvel som for at tildele facetterne såkaldte ’multivokale’ udtryk, der kan bidrage til yderligere betydnings-afgrænsning. På baggrund af denne klassificering observerer jeg, at anvendelsen af klassificerings-skemaer holistisk på spil er en umulighed, idet især moderne digitale spil indeholder mange forskellige bestanddele. I stedet bør klassificeringer kun tage individuelle bestanddele i betragtning. Jeg diskuterer og kritiserer eksisterende klassificeringer og identificerer tre primære mangler. (1) at flere forskellige dele sidestilles på ét niveau af opdelingen, (2) at der i klassificerings-skemaet inddrages uformelle aspekter og (3) at de forskelle der anvendes synes uklare og utilgængelige. Klassificering-skemaet kan ikke kun anvendes i den humanistiske spil-forskning. Psykologien forsker i effekterne af ’voldelige computerspil’ og drukspil, men ofte uden en omhyggelig skelnen mellem spillenes forskellige bestanddele. Derudover kan arbejdet med at kvalitetssikre spil også anvende klassificeringen til udviklingen af en mere detaljeret terminologi til brug i spørgeskemaer og analyse-redskaber. Abstract Definitions and classifications of games range back at least a century, but especially in the past two decades research regarding games and what they consist of has gained more interest. With the goal of developing a clearer terminology for games and their elements, I set out to explore the ontology of games in two main ways. Adopting a Wittgenstanian position towards games, I discuss concepts behind the term ‘game’. I identify a non-exhaustive list of five underlying ideas that serve as areas in which family resemblances of games occur: Games as objects, processes, systems, attitudes, and through their development and distribution. I continue with the explication of my understanding of games in the present project by applying ontological concepts. Games are ‘specifics’ – groups of anonymous particulars – which can either be materialized (as objects) or instantiated (as processes). I will then take a ludological position and examine the underlying formal system of games. Using library studies’ concepts as a framework, I analyze the employed differences for distinction of seventeen game classifications. Following library studies, differences are inherent properties of the subject they classify. Thus, the employed differences are considered elements of games. The final list of six elements is further classified in a faceted classification scheme, which’s advantages, as opposed to the more common hierarchical ones, are easier future adjustments, as well as the assignment multivocal terms to various facets for delineation of meanings. The result of this classification is the observation that the application of classification schemes holistically to games is impossible, as especially contemporary digital games combine many different parts. Instead, one should only consider individual elements for classification. Existing game classifications are discussed and criticized, identifying three main shortcomings: (1) the conflation of several differences into one level of division, (2) inclusion of informal aspects into the classification of elements, and (3) the inaccessibility of employed differences. The developed classification is not only useful for humanistic game studies and game analysis. In psychology the effects of ‘violent videogames’ and drinking games have been researched, mostly without careful distinction between particular game elements. Furthermore, quality assurance can benefit as well from a more detailed terminology for the development of questionnaires and analysis tools. Acknowledgements First, I want to thank my supervisor Espen J. Aarseth, who supported me on this journey and whose openness and patience enabled me to explore the interesting detours that have been transformative for my intellectual and professional development thus far. I am also indebted to my fellow members of the Making Sense of Games project, Joleen Blom, Nina P. Houe, Pawel Grabarczyk, Rune K. Nielsen, and Miruna Vozaru, who contributed to my understanding of games throughout my participation in MSG. I would like to especially thank Ida Kathrine Hammeleff Jørgensen for the countless hours of reflection about the nature of games. I could count on her whenever I needed someone to disagree with. I want to thank Hans-Joachim Backe and Miguel Sicart for the critical readings of and feedback for parts of my dissertation, and Sebastian Risi and Martin Pichlmair for evaluating my achievements and outline half-way through the PhD. These are, however, only a few people from the Center for Computer Games research and ITU more broadly. I am indebted to everyone within these institutions to varying degrees, for assistance, feedback, as well as creating a worthwhile environment for a PhD student. I am deeply grateful for having had the opportunity to visit the Entertainment Arts and Engineering Department at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, which was made possible by José P. Zagal. I want to thank him and Rogelio E. Cardona-Rivera for the ongoing collaboration, as well as the other members of the EAE – among them Roger Altizer, Ashley ML Brown, and Michael Young – who welcomed me into their robust research and teaching community. Outside of the circles I have directly participated in, I want to thank Curtis Maughan and Federico Alvarez Igarzábal, whom I have collaborated with for the greater part of my academic career; my ‘PhD brothers’ Olli Tapio Leino and Sebastian Möring, who helped guide me in the early stages of my PhD; Christoffer Bagger as a friend and advisor on film and media studies; and everyone I have encountered at conferences, workshops, and symposia. I also want to thank all those people outside of academia who have accompanied me along the way, but especially my siblings Christian and Desiree, for their boundless support and understanding. I finally want to apologize to everyone I should have thanked but who escaped my thoughts in the moments of writing these paragraphs. You know who you are. Thank you. I dedicate this dissertation to my parents Christine Debus (née Achenbach) and Dietmar Paul Arnold Debus. Contents Chapter 1: Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Motivation and Contribution ........................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Approach ......................................................................................................................................... 6 1.2.1 Previous Ontological Works ................................................................................................... 10 1.4 Overview of this dissertation ......................................................................................................... 16 Chapter 2: What We Call a Game ...................................................................................................... 19 2.1 Games in Context .......................................................................................................................... 22 2.2 Games and Ambiguity ..................................................................................................................