A Response to the Playful and The Serious: An Approximation to Huizinga's Homo Ludens by Hector

A reaction to a reaction of Huizinga's highly-acclaimed Homo Ludens.

---

For game designers, an understanding of Huizinga's Homo Ludens is essential as it assesses basic elements that follow the construction of effective gameplay.

Essentially, in Homo Ludens, the idea that play is a necessary and primary condition to the generation of culture. In fact, it clearly defines conditions of 'play' in five characteristics.

Whether or not serious games can ultimately be an element of social change is debatable.

Yet, the fundamental aspects of game design does hinge largely on game theories such as the Homo Ludens– which provide insight to the roots of what 'play' essentially means.

However, the extent of impact such games can have is subjective and varies across different cultures and demographics. The optimal way to make sure that serious games become elements that help propel social change might be to exploit aspects of game theory in the construction of the gameplay itself.

As Rodriguez states, "Huizinga and Caillois argue that the boundaries of the magic circle and the rules of the game must always be fixed in the advance start of the play."

This type of play would then make both elements contingent on the decisions and response of players.

The argument effectively provides explanation as to how the magic circle can come into play during the execution of a serious game. The magic circle refers to the space in which normal rules of reality are suspended and replaced by the artificial reality of the game world.

A Graphic Demonstration of The Magic Circle

On the flip side, the theory of the magic circle does reveal certain limitations. The theory asserts that within the magic circle, rules of the game are absolute. The absolute nature of the theory not only restricts the creative abilities and boundaries for game designers, it does not consider the widely varied reactions players can have towards a particular game.

Another argument surfaced by Huizinga was how many valuable achievements of human culture depend on a deep-rooted craving for ludic experience. An example would be the public display of skill and intense competition.

Rodriguez asserts that the fundamental mistake many game-makers of educational games commit was regarding their subjects of serious play as essentially non-playful. This action means they dismiss the inherent, natural dispositions of their subject. The practice also directly clashes with Huizinga's notion that play is intrinsic and the subject must be assumed, in some regard, to be playful.

By taking into view Huizinga's theory, the makers of serious games can provide an intrinsic connection between the process of playing and the core content– allowing for these games to connect the player with the serious content.

These are ultimately preconceived notions that the act of gameplay, or 'playing', when interfused with serious topics, makes these topics immediately more attractive to the player. Rodriguez, in line with Huizinga's Homo Ludens, addresses how essential it is for game designers to consider having the goal of not making a particular subject more appealing to the subject.

Instead, their focus should be on the act of playing and creating the game through the perspective lens of the player himself. With this, he states how, "the use of serious games in the learning process theres illuminates the fundamental nature of the subject being taught."

Serious games can be an element of social change, especially for a large demographic, in the current digital. Yet, the extent of impact of a particular game such as Darfur is Dying (Check out my previous article) or McDonald's Game, is dependent on how effectively game designers are able to exploit and highlight the key aspects of game theory through practice. From theory to practice, delving deeper to accentuate what's truly important. It is possible.

#gaming #seriousgames #videogames #play #critic