A lot of the activities in GW2 are not gameplay

[Logos.5603]

Games are structured, rule-based activities that test skills and have the particular telos or end goal of succeeding at the task. It involves developing or acquiring competence. For example, chess is a game, and so is beating a world-boss in GW2 .Engaging in these activities is gaming.

However, some video games also have playful activities–these are activities that don’t have any rules attached to it, where fun itself is the goal, and where one doesn’t worry about competence. It involves an attitude of being open to surprise or a new experience. To borrow from the philosopher Lugones, play is an activity that "has no rules, though it is certainly intentional activity and we both understand what we are doing. The playfulness that gives meaning to our activity includes uncertainty, but in this case the uncertainty is an openness to surprise...we are there creatively." Examples of play include splashing your siblings with water at the pool is a form of play, and so is painting an image, dancing wildly atop the bed, or playing with dolls. In GW2 activities like dressing up your character, and decorating your home are a form of play. While these activities can be turned into games, they are inherently different from gaming.

(I’m aware that in English we say “let’s play a game,” but that's just confusing language. What should be said is “let’s game a game” or “let’s game.” You can’t play in a game, and you can’t game when you play.)

Why should this matter to you?

Gameplay, if it refers to anything at all, refers to these activities in video games.

Activities for heart completion are not gameplay. For example, picking poop or collecting trinkets is neither a game, nor a playful activity. Likewise, collecting materials is also not a form of gameplay. When we engage in these activities we are not playing, nor are we gaming.

As a buyer, who presumably bought the DLC to both play and game, you should be a bit annoyed that the inclusion of these activities in your video game. Especially when these non-gameplay elements make up a large part of the experience.

[DeanBB.4268]

16 minutes ago, Logos.5603 said:

Games are structured, rule-based activities

Don't your opening words disprove every argument that follows?

[Funky.4861]

The wayfinder/commander is just a clean-up bot. All we do is clean up other peoples' mess.

[Sigmoid.7082]

You're going to get pretty much the same disagreement of your assertion as you did in the thread on homesteading.

[QueenKeriti.5176]

What did I just try to read

[Inssengrimm.7924]

Gameplay: "Game play is the formalized interaction that occurs when players follow the rules of a game and experience its system through play."
Everything you mention that isn't gameplay, is in fact, gameplay.

At best you are confusing structured gameplay with emergent gameplay and at worse you are confusing VIDEOGAME gameplay with GAMES gameplay. As in you are confusing playing FIFA24 with actually going and playing futbol with your own two legs. 

 

[Logos.5603]

54 minutes ago, DeanBB.4268 said:

Don't your opening words disprove every argument that follows?

Not everything you do in a video game is necessarily gaming. However, a video game can be just a game. For example, old Tetris was one game, and lacked a play aspect. Other video games, like GW, have multiple games.

Actually, to add something more provocative...most (all?) RPG games nowadays are not a video game (in the singular), they are technically multiple games. Though the word "video game" doesn't really refer to "games" in the strict sense in which I'm using the term (for ontological consistency). It refers to a kind of media. The same way that a "hotdog" doesn't refer to a dog that is hot, but a kind of food item.

Edited August 28 by Logos.5603

[Logos.5603]

14 minutes ago, Inssengrimm.7924 said:

Gameplay: "Game play is the formalized interaction that occurs when players follow the rules of a game and experience its system through play."
Everything you mention that isn't gameplay, is in fact, gameplay.

At best you are confusing structured gameplay with emergent gameplay and at worse you are confusing VIDEOGAME gameplay with GAMES gameplay. As in you are confusing playing FIFA24 with actually going and playing futbol with your own two legs. 

 

Nope, that definition you gave is confusing the nature of play with something you can do while you game. You can't fundamentally play a game. They are different things.

"At best you are confusing structured gameplay with emergent gameplay and at worse you are confusing VIDEOGAME gameplay with GAMES gameplay. As in you are confusing playing FIFA24 with actually going and playing futbol with your own two legs."

The assumption is that there is something that all games (games you play in video games, and games like futbol) share, an essence of gaming. I don't actually understand your comment. Just like futbol, the game in the FIFA24 is a structured, rule-based activity that test skills and have the particular telos or end goal of succeeding at a task. It involves developing or acquiring competence. It is why both are games.

Edited August 28 by Logos.5603

[Zok.4956]

1 hour ago, Logos.5603 said:

Why should this matter to you?
As a buyer, who presumably bought the DLC to both play and game, you should be a bit annoyed that the inclusion of these activities in your video game. Especially when these non-gameplay elements make up a large part of the experience.

I bought the expansion because I hoped it would be fun to play, and as long as I'm having fun doing what I'm doing in the game, I don't care what you define that as.

[Logos.5603]

Just now, Zok.4956 said:

I bought the expansion because I hoped it would be fun to play, and as long as I'm having fun doing what I'm doing in the game, I don't care what you define that as.

Sure, but some of the tasks you are doing don't involve play. That's the point. But if you are having fun regardless, go for it.

[Cyninja.2954]

1 hour ago, Logos.5603 said:

Games are structured, rule-based activities that test skills and have the particular telos or end goal of succeeding at the task. It involves developing or acquiring competence. For example, chess is a game, and so is beating a world-boss in GW2 .Engaging in these activities is gaming.

That's your personal definition. Let's just say it fits your narrative and the point your are desperately trying to make while directly making conflicting comments in your continued post.

If you want an ACTUAL definition, here is the most basic one:

Quote

the features of a video game, such as its plot and the way it is played, as distinct from the graphics and sound effects.

- Oxford dictionary.

I'm sorry but your personal custom cookie cutter definition does not carry enough weight to overrule one of the major english language dictionaries.

FYI: other major dictionaries also disagree with you, such as Merriam-Webster or the Cambridge dictionary.

I could go into more detail for the rest of your post, but given you seem to have not correctly defined the terminology you are complaining about that is kind of moot.

Edited August 28 by Cyninja.2954

[Logos.5603]

5 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

That's your personal definition. Let's just say it fits your narrative and the point your are desperately trying to make while directly making conflicting comments in your continued post.

If you want an ACTUAL definition, here is the most basic one:

- Oxford dictionary.

I'm sorry but your personal custom cookie cutter definition does not carry enough weight to overrule one of the major english language dictionaries.

FYI: other major dictionaries also disagree with you, such as Merriam-Webster or the Cambridge dictionary.

Well one of the benefits of my definition is that it neatly distinguishes between game and play. Doesn't let in any confusions. It also tells us why things like chess,  futbol, and some activities you find in video games are all games.

Dictionary definitions don't aim to capture the essence of something (which is what I'm trying to capture), that's not their purpose. They just capture the common way in which something is understood, or try to establish a common definition for usage. Whether they are ontologically sound definitions is an open question. They won't help you (us) here.

You also say that I make conflicting comments in my posts. Care to point to them?

Edited August 28 by Logos.5603

[Zok.4956]

4 minutes ago, Logos.5603 said:

Sure, but some of the tasks you are doing don't involve play. That's the point.

This detail seems to be important to you. But I don't agree with your definition and don't think it's correct or relevant. So why should such a definition be important to players in general? That's my point.

[Logos.5603]

2 minutes ago, Zok.4956 said:

This detail seems to be important to you. But I don't agree with your definition and don't think it's correct or relevant. So why should such a definition be important to players in general? That's my point.

Well you said that you "bought the expansion because I hoped it would be fun to play." But somethings that you will be doing (quite a bit of things) are not play. So, presumably you have an interest in playing.

Edited August 28 by Logos.5603

[Cyninja.2954]

Just now, Logos.5603 said:

Well one of the benefits of my definition is that it neatly distinguishes between game and play. Doesn't let in any confusions.

Dictionary definitions don't aim to capture the essence of something (which is what I'm trying to capture), that's not their purpose. They just capture the common way in which something is understood, or try to establish a common definition for usage. Whether they are ontologically sound definitions is an open question. They won't help you (us) here.

You also say that I make conflicting comments in my posts. Care to point to them?

Sure, you immediately move the narrative to things which YOU consider "fun".

Have you ever watched children play? The most activities which they do are literally: WORK. Yes, children play WORK. They go do the dishes, they go shopping, they do all kinds of thing which more mature individuals would consider necessities and most certainly not consider fun.

As far as custom definitions: you don't get to ignore established definitions if you are making a custom one just to make a point stick. At least not if you want to get taken serious.

[Logos.5603]

6 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Sure, you immediately move the narrative to things which YOU consider "fun".

Have you ever watched children play? The most activities which they do are literally: WORK. Yes, children play WORK. They go do the dishes, they go shopping, they do all kinds of thing which more mature individuals would consider necessities and most certainly not consider fun.

As far as custom definitions: you don't get to ignore established definitions if you are making a custom one just to make a point stick. At least not if you want to get taken serious.

I'm assuming you mean things like playing house and stuff? That's role play. That's a whole different use of the word "play." It the sense that we use when we say "play acting." See, this is why dictionary definitions (and common usage) are problematic when discussing essences...they are too slippery and ambiguous.

If you mean literally doing the dishes as a form of play, that's again another slippery use of the word. Here "imitation" is more accurate. People can have fun engaging in imitative behaviors, and when doing work. Doesn't mean it is play.

Well, I mean I'm not ignoring them...they are just confusing the essences of play and game. They give rise to all kinds of confusions in language and so are not really helpful. Not even as starting points.

 

Edited August 28 by Logos.5603

[Zok.4956]

4 minutes ago, Logos.5603 said:

Well you said that you "bought the expansion because I hoped it would be fun to play." 

Yes, I play a game in my free time. That's the general term for me. In contrast to work, for example, for which I am paid by my employer. It doesn't matter to me whether the activities in the game that I enjoy are categorized as "play" by you.

10 minutes ago, Logos.5603 said:

But somethings that you will be doing (quite a bit of things) are not play.

And again my question, which you have not answered yet: Why should your categorization of different activities in GW2 be important and have practical relevance for anyone other than you?

[Flowersunshine.7385]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_Ludens

Johan Huizinga, still considered an authority when it comes to games/play. (Dutch uses the same word for both, so your distinction feels super artificial to me either way.)

Anyway, perhaps you can take Huizinga's definition as a point to start from. 

"Huizinga identifies 5 characteristics that play must have:[8]

Play is free, is in fact freedom.

Play is not "ordinary" or "real" life.

Play is distinct from "ordinary" life both as to locality and duration.

Play creates order, is order. Play demands order absolute and supreme.

Play is connected with no material interest, and no profit can be gained from  it.[9]"

[Logos.5603]

Just now, Zok.4956 said:

Yes, I play a game in my free time. That's the general term for me. In contrast to work, for example, for which I am paid by my employer. It doesn't matter to me whether the activities in the game that I enjoy are categorized as "play" by you.

And again my question, which you have not answered yet: Why should your categorization of different activities in GW2 be important and have practical relevance for anyone other than you?

Maybe you play a game. That's basically what's at stake here.

As for your second question: Well if I bought the DLC to play and game only, and I'm not doing that when I interact with the game, then I would be annoyed. That's the point.

[Zok.4956]

19 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

As far as custom definitions: you don't get to ignore established definitions if you are making a custom one just to make a point stick. At least not if you want to get taken serious.

It is not uncommon in philosophy to write an entire book just to discuss a concept or issue from scratch.

And you get bonus points (challenge mode) if you quote as many concepts as possible from other books of exactly the same kind (the references to which you can only understand if you have also read all of these other books). 😉 And I get the feeling that we are involuntarily helping with philosophy homework. 😎

 

[Zok.4956]

12 minutes ago, Logos.5603 said:

Maybe you play a game. That's basically what's at stake here.

I suspect that, in the good old philosophical tradition, you want to solve a problem that doesn't even exist without your "solution". 😉

[Zok.4956]

42 minutes ago, Logos.5603 said:

I'm assuming you mean things like playing house and stuff? That's role play. That's a whole different use of the word "play."

What could the "RPG" in the word "MMORPG" (GW2 is an MMORPG) stand for? 😅

[Shuzuru.3651]

2 hours ago, Logos.5603 said:

Activities for heart completion are not gameplay. For example, picking poop or collecting trinkets is neither a game, nor a playful activity. Likewise, collecting materials is also not a form of gameplay. When we engage in these activities we are not playing, nor are we gaming.

As a buyer, who presumably bought the DLC to both play and game, you should be a bit annoyed that the inclusion of these activities in your video game. Especially when these non-gameplay elements make up a large part of the experience.

Then, I guess we are lucky that those are a minimal part of the experience 😁

[Sobx.1758]

2 hours ago, Logos.5603 said:

Gameplay, if it refers to anything at all, refers to these activities in video games.

Activities for heart completion are not gameplay. For example, picking poop or collecting trinkets is neither a game, nor a playful activity. Likewise, collecting materials is also not a form of gameplay. When we engage in these activities we are not playing, nor are we gaming.

At this point you should just check the meaning of the words you're trying to use instead of inventing your own definitions in a very obvious attempt to label anything you dislike as "not gameplay".

2 hours ago, DeanBB.4268 said:

Don't your opening words disprove every argument that follows?

Yes, they do.

Edited August 28 by Sobx.1758

[Inssengrimm.7924]

1 hour ago, Logos.5603 said:

Nope, that definition you gave is confusing the nature of play with something you can do while you game.

Is the MIT definition from Rules of Play. One if not the most important and influential literature on game design.

You really are out of your league talking about things you don't understand.
 

Edited August 28 by Inssengrimm.7924