Sobx.1758 Posted September 1 Share Posted September 1 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Logos.5603 said: No need to misrepresent my position. It is not about disliking a part of the game. I can like picking up materials like a mindless bot because I like mindless activities. But I'm not gaming when I'm doing these activities. That's the whole point. As for the silly butterfly "counterargument"... It misses the point. The reason why I focus on "game" and "play" is because those are the kinds of things we would normally expect to be doing in a video game, and what we do in a video game is commonly referred to as gameplay. Hence, gameplay refers to the game and play in a video game. It just happens that the words "game" and "play" make up the compound word "gameplay." Thus, it makes sense to explore the meanings of "game" and "play" within this context to understand what "gameplay" truly encompasses and whether certain activities in GW2 count as gameplay. I'm not misrepresenting your position, the whole idea for this thread came directly from you disliking gathering resources for housing equipment (while also using inflated time-to-get values), after which you tried latching onto "this is not gamepaly" angle, which lead to you claiming even mario or tetris don't have gameplay. 2 days later this thread pops up where you're attempting to establish what "gameplay" is based on you trying to openly redefine its meaning and dissecting it into separate words specifically to deem [that thing you dislike] isn't gameplay and people should care. Too bad you're blatantly wrong at the very start of what you're arguing about, which was also repeatedly pointed out by multiple people and you subsequently claiming... your definition is better. 🤦♂️ And that was still page 1. No, we would not "normally expect it from a video game", the only thing you base "what we would expect from it" is what you personally like or dislike. That's where your "expectations" come from and that's what you're now trying to not only tell other people what "they are expecting from video games", but also force your way into the actual definition of the words you're trying to diuscuss here. And yes, what you keep doing throughout this thread is exactly debating semantics of the words barely tangentially contected to what is actually considered "gameplay". 27 minutes ago, Logos.5603 said: The butterfly analogy misses the point. The focus on "game" and "play" isn't about arbitrarily dissecting a compound word into its parts and thereby defining it by its parts (that would be silly, which is why you aren't being charitable), but about examining the kinds of activities we expect to engage in within a video game. "It's not about it even though that's literally what I'm basing my whole argument on!". Right. At least you see how ridiculous that line of argumentation actually is, I'd backpedal out of it asap too. 😉 Edited September 1 by Sobx.1758 5 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logos.5603 Posted September 1 Author Share Posted September 1 (edited) 23 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said: I'm not misrepresenting your position, the whole idea for this thread came directly from you disliking gathering resources for housing equipment (while also using inflated time-to-get values), after which you tried latching onto "this is not gamepaly" angle, which lead to you claiming even mario or tetris don't have gameplay. 2 days later this thread pops up where you're attempting to establish what "gameplay" is based on you trying to openly redefine its meaning and dissecting it into separate words specifically to deem [that thing you dislike] isn't gameplay and people should care. Too bad you're blatantly wrong at the very start of what you're arguing about, which was also repeatedly pointed out by multiple people and you subsequently claiming... your definition is better. 🤦♂️ And that was still page 1. No, we would not "normally expect it from a video game", the only thing you base "what we would expect from it" is what you personally like or dislike. That's where your "expectations" come from and that's what you're now trying to not only tell other people what "they are expecting from video games", but also force your way into the actual definition of the words you're trying to diuscuss here. And yes, what you keep doing throughout this thread is exactly debating semantics of the words barely tangentially contected to what is actually considered "gameplay". Ok, I think that from the use of your italics you are coming across a bit angry for a "semantics" debate. I can both dislike something, and think that it is not a game or a form of play. I can also dislike it for various reasons, including that it is not a form of gameplay (what I paid for). Sometimes I do enjoy mindless activities as a form of stress relief. Sometimes I don't like certain kinds of games. Disliking this aspect of GW2 was surely a motivation that got me to think about why I don't like it. But the definitions that I gave for both "game" and "play" are so not because I dislike a particular aspect of GW2. They are from learned sources in the topic of gaming (which I have also addressed). So, you have it backwards. The reason why I don't like them is because they are neither playful nor gaming activities (which I have explained multiple times). They are not playful or gaming activities because I don't like them, which is what you are implying. In fact, you seem to be doing exactly what you are accusing me of. You don't like what I'm saying, and from this you conclude that these activities must therefore be a form of game or play. Edited September 1 by Logos.5603 1 10 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logos.5603 Posted September 1 Author Share Posted September 1 4 hours ago, Malus.2184 said: You have no idea what gamification is or how it works. Please stop trying to explain things you have no understanding of. But that was an example of gamification... Without getting academic, here is wikipedia: "Gamification is the strategic attempt to enhance systems, services, organizations, and activities by creating similar experiences to those experienced when playing games in order to motivate and engage users. This is generally accomplished through the application of game design elements and game principles (dynamics and mechanics) in non-game contexts." This is what casino machines are. 1 9 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sobx.1758 Posted September 1 Share Posted September 1 (edited) 24 minutes ago, Logos.5603 said: Ok, I think that from the use of your italics you are coming across a bit angry for a "semantics" debate. I can both dislike something, and think that it is not a game or a form of play. I can also dislike it for various reasons, including that it is not a form of gameplay (what I paid for). Sometimes I do enjoy mindless activities as a form of stress relief. Sometimes I don't like certain kinds of games. Disliking this aspect of GW2 was surely a motivation that got me to think about why I don't like it. But the definitions that I gave for both "game" and "play" are so because I dislike a particular aspect of GW2. They are from learned sources in the topic of gaming (which I have also addressed). So, you have it backwards. The reason why I don't like them is because they are neither playful nor gaming activities (which I have explained multiple times). They are not playful or gaming activities because I don't like them, which is what you are implying. In fact, you seem to be doing exactly what you are accusing me of. You don't like what I'm saying, and from this you conclude that these activities must therefore be a form of game or play. No, I don't know in what country, situation or place italics are used to signify being angry. Not sure what logic you used to draw that conclusion. You can both dlsike something and think it's not a game, but as already mentioned before the timeline of your attempted argumentation about it didn't start from you trying to establish what gameplay is. It started from you disliking having to play parts of the game (or buy materials off tp) and then it gradually evolved into trying to argue your way into "that's not even gameplay!". Some people might not be in that thread, but I was so please spare the theatrics. 1. I don't like x, this shouldn't be part of housing! 2. well, it's not because I dislike it, it's because it's not even gameplay 3. gameplay definition doesn't agree with your hypothesis 4. reinvent what "gameplay" means based on dissecting it into "game" and "play" 5. see, I'm correct, this shouldn't be part of the game! Sorry, but words have meaning and it's not whatever you just decided it should be to achieve your established goal of gathering not being the rightful part of mmorpgs. 24 minutes ago, Logos.5603 said: So, you have it backwards. The reason why I don't like them is because they are neither playful nor gaming activities I "have it backwards" and yet... in the very next sentence you're still deciding what has a right to be called a "playful or gaming acitivity" (which still aren't really the definition of what "gameplay" is) based on nothing more than your own personal preferences. Almost as if I didn't have it backwards at all and you repeatedly keep presenting it. Ok, now I'm done getting baited again, this thread continues making no sense and you rather clearly couldn't even find reasoning behind your intended outcome without literally disagreeing with dictionaries and inventing your own new definitions. 🤷♂️ Edited September 1 by Sobx.1758 5 2 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logos.5603 Posted September 1 Author Share Posted September 1 32 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said: "It's not about it even though that's literally what I'm basing my whole argument on!". Right. At least you see how ridiculous that line of argumentation actually is, I'd backpedal out of it asap too. 😉 Read my comment again...closely. Here I'll break it down further for you: 1) "Game" and "play" are the kinds of things we would normally expect to be doing in a video game. 2) What we do in a video game is commonly referred to as gameplay. 3) Hence, gameplay refers to the gaming and playing we do in a video game. 4) Thus, it makes sense to explore the meanings of "game" and "play" within this context to understand what "gameplay" truly encompasses and whether certain activities in GW2 count as gameplay. This is not what you are suggesting I am doing which is something like: 1) "Gameplay" is a compound word made up of "game" and "play." 2) Compound word's definitions are a combination of the definitions of the words that make it up. 3) Therefore, gameplay must be refer to a combination of the definitions of "game" and "play." Can you now see your misrepresentation. No one can really believe 2) to be true for all words, which is why you are purposely being uncharitable for the purposes of ridicule. You are the troll here. 1 11 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logos.5603 Posted September 1 Author Share Posted September 1 (edited) 19 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said: No, I don't know in what country, situation or place italics are used to signify being angry. Not sure what logic you used to draw that conclusion. You can both dlsike something and think it's not a game, but as already mentioned before the timeline of your attempted argumentation about it didn't start from you trying to establish what gameplay is. It started from you disliking having to play parts of the game (or buy materials off tp) and then it gradually evolved into trying to argue your way into "that's not even gameplay!". Some people might not be in that thread, but I was so please spare the theatrics. 1. I don't like x, this shouldn't be part of housing! 2. well, it's not because I dislike it, it's because it's not even gameplay 3. gameplay definition doesn't agree with your hypothesis 4. reinvent what "gameplay" means based on dissecting it into "game" and "play" 5. see, I'm correct, this shouldn't be part of the game! Sorry, but words have meaning and it's not whatever you just decided it should be to achieve your established goal of gathering not being the rightful part of mmorpgs. Mmm...but I guess you get to say what gameplay is or it isn't? Or no one can (so we can't know what it is)? Is it democratically selected (do you know what the consensus is)? Or do video game companies decide? Is there something that is "gameplay" regardless of what people believe? Who can say that? Experts? Who are the experts? Etc., etc. I'm not pulling my definition from thin air btw (which you seem to think for some reason even though I already explained this). There is ample literature that refers to these terms like this. In fact, my definitions are some of the more liberal ones. Most definitions of gaming and playing (and gameplay) are quite restrictive on what they counts as a games or play. Edited September 1 by Logos.5603 1 8 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sobx.1758 Posted September 1 Share Posted September 1 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Logos.5603 said: Mmm...but I guess you get to say what gameplay is or it isn't? No, dictionaries do. Pay attention please, plenty of people already explained it to you by now. Cheap "no u" attempts don't work when they were already addressed as part of refuting your original lackluster argumentation. Edited September 1 by Sobx.1758 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logos.5603 Posted September 1 Author Share Posted September 1 Just now, Sobx.1758 said: No, dictionaries do. Pay attention please, plenty of people already explained it to you by now. Lol. Really? Jesus, that's not what dictionaries are for. They are more like a historical document of how certain terms are used (at least in the US). That's what they record: usage (and sometimes not very well). They aren't after the nature of the thing they are attempting to define. They aren't interested in metaphysics. It's not like someone writes a definition in the dictionary and that becomes the truth about the thing. Should a the word "car" end up being accidentally defines as "a wild carnivorous mammal of the dog family, living and hunting in packs. It is native to both Eurasia and North America, but has been widely exterminated" then cars become wolves? I guess you don't believe that dictionary definitions can be wrong then. This actually tells me quite a bit. 1 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sobx.1758 Posted September 1 Share Posted September 1 Just now, Logos.5603 said: Lol. Really? Jesus, that's not what dictionaries are for. They are more like a historical document of how certain terms are used (at least in the US). That's what they record: usage (and sometimes not very well) And here you are, singlehandedly changing meaning of the words because you dislike their actual meaning. Yeah, you're in place to write "LoL" here. 😉 4 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logos.5603 Posted September 1 Author Share Posted September 1 Just now, Sobx.1758 said: And here you are, singlehandedly changing meaning of the words because you dislike their actual meaning. Yeah, you're in place to write "LoL" here. 😉 OK, we are going in circles now since you aren't really willing to engage with anything and continue to purposely misrepresent the position despite multiple attempts at correction. Bye. 🙄 1 9 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radiancee.6537 Posted September 2 Share Posted September 2 (edited) 6 hours ago, Logos.5603 said: That's because us gamers don't necessary know what it is that we are doing when we are doing it. That is, we don't know the activity we are engaging in. Seriously, can you please just stop. What the hell are you even talking about. You can't just change the meaning of words and force your opinions on others as facts, contrary to all logic. Edited September 2 by Radiancee.6537 6 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flowersunshine.7385 Posted September 2 Share Posted September 2 (edited) @Logos.5603 If you want to have a discussion about whether things in game are gaming/play/gameplay, you have to define these words first. If you want to have an ontological discussion about the nature of games, that's a different thing. You cannot do both at the same time. It seems to me you want a discussion about what aspects are gameplay - other people picked this up too, that's why they shared dictionary definitions. But you don't want dictionary definitions, cause they might be wrong. (The argument of historical usage is moot, because we're using dictionaries that describe current usage, but I'll grant you that theoretically they might be incorrect.) So define gameplay. 'what we would expect to do in a game' is fine, but it's not the definition you're actually using, because you claim things that might well be expected are not 'play', so they are not 'gameplay'. So give us the definition of play you're using. With a source, please, and in their words. No paraphrasing, just citing. We want to have a commonly used definition, not your personal one. (Cause otherwise we first need to have an ontological debate to come up with a definition.) PS: this is what historians do. They define a concept before they have a discussion about whether something is that concept or not. Do they discuss what the definition of concepts should be? Of course. (Debate about what 'magic' is in ancient times and how to distinguish it from religion has been going on for decades.) But if someone says 'A is not B', he better define A before he starts to discuss B. Edited September 2 by Flowersunshine.7385 Typos, typos everywhere... 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaos God.1639 Posted September 2 Share Posted September 2 (edited) I can think of this right now. if a food is unhealthy and can make you ill,... then it's called a poison. but what are you going to call a video game that is unhealthy for you, because of addictive mechanics, low brain activity tasks,...? sometimes animals play which each other, they have no intentions to hurt each other and so it's healthy for them. in sports people talk about sportsmanship to support the healthy behavior,... Edited September 2 by Chaos God.1639 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanAlcedo.3281 Posted September 2 Share Posted September 2 Ohh no. The fun police! Run! 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malus.2184 Posted September 2 Share Posted September 2 10 hours ago, Logos.5603 said: But that was an example of gamification... Without getting academic, here is wikipedia: "Gamification is the strategic attempt to enhance systems, services, organizations, and activities by creating similar experiences to those experienced when playing games in order to motivate and engage users. This is generally accomplished through the application of game design elements and game principles (dynamics and mechanics) in non-game contexts." This is what casino machines are. No. You used GAMES as an example of gamification and compared it to another kind of gambling where several psychological tricks are used to reinforce gambling behaviour. 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malus.2184 Posted September 2 Share Posted September 2 12 hours ago, Logos.5603 said: Sure, but a game isn't just about using some skills. It has a telos, an aim, or goal. It calls for us to develop competence among other things. ...The goal of any game is the reward you get at the end, whether it's an item or a score to which you can compare your last performance. That's how gamification works, another topic you think you know anything about. I have an education in occupational therapy and from that, I have extensive knowledge about gamification. Wiki is just correct enough as it's unable to contain all the relevant information. If you look at the Reference section, which is where all the information in the article is sourced from it's huge. Every one of those references is most likely the same length or longer than the Wiki article. Wiki is just an abstract of the knowledge and thus short an inaccurate. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Lumpix.6108 Posted September 2 Share Posted September 2 4 hours ago, Flowersunshine.7385 said: @Logos.5603 If you want to have a discussion about whether things in game are gaming/play/gameplay, you have to define these words first. If you want to have an ontological discussion about the nature of games, that's a different thing. You cannot do both at the same time. It seems to me you want a discussion about what aspects are gameplay - other people picked this up too, that's why they shared dictionary definitions. But you don't want dictionary definitions, cause they might be wrong. (The argument of historical usage is moot, because we're using dictionaries that describe current usage, but I'll grant you that theoretically they might be incorrect.) So define gameplay. 'what we would expect to do in a game' is fine, but it's not the definition you're actually using, because you claim things that might well be expected are not 'play', so they are not 'gameplay'. So give us the definition of play you're using. With a source, please, and in their words. No paraphrasing, just citing. We want to have a commonly used definition, not your personal one. (Cause otherwise we first need to have an ontological debate to come up with a definition.) PS: this is what historians do. They define a concept before they have a discussion about whether something is that concept or not. Do they discuss what the definition of concepts should be? Of course. (Debate about what 'magic' is in ancient times and how to distinguish it from religion has been going on for decades.) But if someone says 'A is not B', he better define A before he starts to discuss B. The point of a forum is to have express your own opinion and share your own feedback, not cite someone else's feelings as though it's a research paper in need of peer reviewed material lol. 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyninja.2954 Posted September 2 Share Posted September 2 (edited) 13 hours ago, Logos.5603 said: It misses the point. The reason why I focus on "game" and "play" is because those are the kinds of things we would normally expect to be doing in a video game, and what we do in a video game is commonly referred to as gameplay. Hence, gameplay refers to the game and play in a video game. It just happens that the words "game" and "play" make up the compound word "gameplay." Thus, it makes sense to explore the meanings of "game" and "play" within this context to understand what "gameplay" truly encompasses and whether certain activities in GW2 count as gameplay. Just to reiterate, you: A. failed to use a correct definition for gameplay to begin with, at least not according to accepted English language dictionaries and B. your custom definition fails to meet the basic criteria of "game" and "play" as well, given even easy observations of most basic play from minors disputes your claim This entire thread is a semantics argument and not even a good one at that. Which is exactly why many here consider your posts "wanna be intellectual mumbo jumbo", besides obviously starting such a debate on a gaming forum for the game in question to begin with. Edited September 2 by Cyninja.2954 2 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zohane.7208 Posted September 2 Share Posted September 2 I have to admit I couldn't be bothered to read through the whole thing, but it seems to me that the OP is complaining about the use of the word "play"? I mean really??? "Play" has several meanings, one being an activity kids do to have some fun and to pass some time - seems to be like a perfect match for what GW2 is - be it for kids or adults. Or is the OP in fact telling me I'm not allowed to like this because it's not - in their mind - "play"? Not sure what to think here so I'll just go back to PLAYing the GAME in order to HAVE FUN 🙂 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flowersunshine.7385 Posted September 2 Share Posted September 2 1 hour ago, Jumpin Lumpix.6108 said: The point of a forum is to have express your own opinion and share your own feedback, not cite someone else's feelings as though it's a research paper in need of peer reviewed material lol. Except OP started out with doing exactly that and is claiming he's trying to have a scholarly discussion as he is in fact a certified philosopher. What OP is failing to recognize is that pretty much the rest of the forum is not. OP is writing as if we have all studied the same subject matter, and we're being willfully ignorant by disagreeing with him. Except we're not willfully ignorant. Each of us comes from a very different perspective as OP. As a philosopher, I'd expect OP to realize that, and to realize that if he wants to be able to convince any of us, he needs to find common ground with us first. Since OP claims to have studied pedagogy as part of his studies, I'd assume he'd know all about the need to build relation when you want anything from anyone. There's a lot of ways to do that, and a lot of forum users have been clear in the common ground they are looking for: a shared definition of what 'play' is. OP is ignoring this, which is why this discussion is not getting anywhere. 6 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArenaNet Staff Rubi Bayer.8493 Posted September 2 ArenaNet Staff Share Posted September 2 How people individually define games and gameplay is an endlessly interesting topic that is so subjective! That said, I'm closing this thread--everyone has had their say and it has stopped being constructive. A reminder that the forum has an ignore function for anyone who needs to use it--simply hover over the username and select it from the popup panel, as shown below. (Sorry Flowersunshine, you happened to be the most recent poster in this thread before I got here--I am not picking on you!) 7 10 15 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts