Monthly Archives: January 2011

Whenever I think of play, I always think of the nature programs that I used to watch as a kid.  There would always the offspring of mammals such as lions or bears playing and roughhousing.  While human play is more … Continue reading →

When we were prompted to answer the question what is fun, the first thing that came to my mind was famous saying: time flies when you’re having fun. Thinking upon how games  relate to fun, I found it interesting when Koster … Continue reading →

When applying Koster’s definition of a good game to Pac-Man and Flow I thought that each in their own way fit the mold of a game that, “teaches everything it has to offer before the player stops playing.” While each … Continue reading →

In the second reading from Caillois he attempts to define what a game is in the context of his earlier chapter on fun.  He defines games in four main categories: Agon (Competition-pg-14), Alea (Chance-pg-17), Mimicry (Simulation-pg-19), and Ilinx (Vertigo-pg-23). It … Continue reading →

Koster talks about how games all teach us something, whether that something is a skill applicable to modern life or an obsolete skill that once was necessary to learn. Pac-Man at first seems to be about map exploration, but I … Continue reading →

If play is such a “waste of time, energy, ingenuity, skill, and money”, as Caillois suggests, then what motivates people to play? Is it purely for leisure purposes, or are they seeking something else? Both Caillois and Koster believe that … Continue reading →

Pac Man is, according to Raph Koster, a “visit every location game.” If the player does not touch every space, they do not advance to the next level, which is the goal of the game. Flow is an advancement of … Continue reading →