Design games as a tool, a mindset and a structure Kirsikka Vaajakallio
Design games as a tool, a mindset and a structure Kirsikka Vaajakallio
Design games as a tool, a mindset and a structure Kirsikka Vaajakallio
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
According to Caillois (1961, p 5), play <strong>and</strong> <strong>games</strong> do not include material<br />
interest or profits: “Property is exchanged, but no goods are produced. This<br />
exchange affects only the players.” He excludes the professionals who earn<br />
their living by playing by considering them <strong>as</strong> workers instead of players.<br />
As I see it, this is not self-evident in all <strong>games</strong>; for instance, if you think<br />
about gambling, which is inherent in many <strong>games</strong>, a great part of the tension<br />
comes from the exchange of profits or material artefacts. B<strong>as</strong>ed on my<br />
own experiences playing many sort of <strong>games</strong>, I would say that, where<strong>as</strong><br />
there are different re<strong>as</strong>ons for playing, depending on the particular game<br />
<strong>and</strong> the player, the tension, whether it comes from competition, surprise,<br />
learning, or some other means, is often a bigger driving force than any possible<br />
material gain.<br />
Caillois (ibid. pp 9–10) builds on Huizinga’s work but proposes an<br />
alternative way of organizing the main play-qualities: according to him,<br />
play is free, separate, uncertain, unproductive, governed by rules, <strong>and</strong> makebelieve.<br />
The important contribution by Caillois, in terms of design <strong>games</strong>,<br />
is his cl<strong>as</strong>sification of <strong>games</strong> into four categories depending on which the<br />
most dominant characteristic is (ibid. p 12) competition (agôn), chance<br />
(alea), simulation (mimicry), or vertigo (ilinx). Thus, where<strong>as</strong> Huizinga<br />
(1950) proposed two main functions for play, contest <strong>and</strong> display, Caillois<br />
(1961) identified four main functions from which simulation, or in other<br />
words mimicry, is perhaps closest to most of the design <strong>games</strong>. The four<br />
cl<strong>as</strong>ses of <strong>games</strong> differ fundamentally in terms of the driving force but they<br />
all share some play-qualities, hence belonging to a play category (ibid.).<br />
From the co-design perspective, there are some characteristics of<br />
play, <strong>games</strong> <strong>and</strong> performance, <strong>as</strong> they were described above, that could<br />
describe design <strong>games</strong> <strong>as</strong> well: they are bounded with regard to time <strong>and</strong><br />
space, they proceed according to explicit rules, are typically intensive<br />
<strong>and</strong> they utilize the magic circle of play, the make-believe. All of these<br />
play-qualities together create a special play spirit (Figure 25). These qualities<br />
are further elaborated in the next sections, where I broaden the view<br />
from language to bodily engagement by looking at co-design gatherings<br />
through the lens of performance.<br />
The way play <strong>and</strong> <strong>games</strong> are described above show them <strong>as</strong> <strong>structure</strong>s<br />
with particular play-qualities <strong>and</strong> rules for action. Moreover, they focus on<br />
characteristics that create a special play spirit. I already discussed some of<br />
the play-qualities in relation to performances, however, in this section I<br />
will extend this view by considering co-design gatherings <strong>as</strong> performances.<br />
I will utilise the performance theory, <strong>as</strong> outlined by Schechner, to widen<br />
the perspective into the unfolding of performance process. Schechner<br />
builds on, among others, Johan Huizinga (1950) <strong>and</strong> Roger Caillois (1961),<br />
underlying the notions of play <strong>and</strong> <strong>games</strong>, but shifting the focus on performance<br />
process <strong>as</strong> it emerges in theatrical performances but also in rituals<br />
3.2.3<br />
Co–design<br />
gatherings<br />
<strong>as</strong><br />
performance<br />
120