Costikayn’s clarification of the “game”.

The article introduces Chris Crawford’s differentiation of games and puzzles, puzzles are static while games change with the player’s actions. Costikayn provides a functional definition of the word “game”, “an interactive structure of endogenous meaning that requires players to struggle toward a goal” and believes “non-game” interactive entertainment doesn’t exist, interactive entertainment means games. After creating a game that is compelling for people to play, one must ask why? (earlier he provides a great example of SimCity vs. SimEarth and their success) Costikayn uses Marc LeBlanc’s taxonomy of game pleasures to answer this question: sensation, fantasy, narrative, challenge, fellowship, discovery, expression, and masochism.

He concludes with the art aspect of game design, which might look simple from the outside, but is extremely difficult, the artist is creating without knowing if their work will be received as intended and has to continually refine and tweak constantly developing techniques. I certainly agree game designers are artists and I have a new-found respect for graphic design and digital applications. I recently took an intro graphic design class and was overwhelmed with the plethora of effects and tools involved in creating your masterpiece. It was difficult for me as a beginner to get what I envisioned in my head and sketched on my paper to a digital version until I spent an enormous amount of time just playing around and learning all of my possibilities. This artform definitely requires skill and patience. Costikayn sees that game design is “the creative attempt to imagine, a priori, the kinds of experiences players will have with your game, and through that act of imagination, to create a structure to point them toward the kinds of experiences you’d like them to feel”.