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 once an individual has mastered a game, it becomes boring and they will no longer want to play it. If this is true, then why do people have favorite games that they play repeatedly?
If the evolution of games mirrors that of humans, such that they teach us skills that are useful in our everyday lives (i.e. teamwork, classifying, etc.), then what would be an appropriate skill to incorporate into current games? Explain your reasoning for why the skill is needed.
Which type of games are more important for people to play: those that teach us to masterfully complete a task in a short amount of time, or those that teach us to be thorough in completing a task? Are they equally important
Additionally, in what type of situation would it be beneficial for someone to complete a task quickly, rather than thoroughly? Or, thoroughly more so than quickly?
Caillois defines play in six parts (see p. 9-10). Describe how Flow relates to each of these six aspects of play. If it does not apply to one in particular, explain why.
Explain this: if an individual cannot be forced into the act of play, why do most teachers, daycare providers, nannies, etc. schedule “playtime” for children? More importantly, how is play accomplished if it is forced on children in this type of situation?
Koster states, “There are no games that take just one turn” (p.56). What about the ball-and-string game? It can certainly be won (i.e. ball lands in cup) in only one turn. Does this mean it is not a game? Also, are there any other games like this?