2018
Kultima, Annakaisa
Game design praxiology Väitöskirja
Informaatiotutkimus ja interaktiivinen media, Tampereen yliopisto, 2018, ISBN: 978-952-03-0742-4.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Avainsanat: creativity, englanninkieliset väitöskirjat, game design, game industry, game studies, ideation
@phdthesis{Kultima2018,
title = {Game design praxiology},
author = {Annakaisa Kultima},
url = {https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-03-0742-4},
isbn = {978-952-03-0742-4},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-01-01},
school = {Informaatiotutkimus ja interaktiivinen media, Tampereen yliopisto},
abstract = {This dissertation is positioned on the multidiscipline of game studies. It presents the findings of a ten-year study of game developers and the contexts of their creative practices. As a multidisciplinary enquiry, this study draws from the theoretical and methodological traditions of creativity studies, management studies, computer science, and design research to supplement the young discipline of game studies. However, studying game developers is not a typical focus for the field of academic game research. The dissertation critically comments on the tradition of game studies for its ontological narrowness and the neglect of the relevance of the creator in the quest for understanding the phenomenon of games and play.
Altogether, this work draws from nineteen sub-studies to explore game development as experienced, highlighting issues that frame creation practices. The study is exploratory utilising multiple methods capturing the voices and realities of the creators. The overview of the study is ethnographically informed: the data collection covers an extensive period in games from 2006 to 2016, bridging the sub-studies with field work and digital ethnography at multiple industry events around the globe and social media platforms.
The findings are distilled into five claims: 1) Game design is timely and particular, 2) Game design is value pluralistic, 3) Game design process is opportunistic, 4) Game design process is a plethora of ideas, and 5) Game design practice is natured and nurtured by the surrounding ecosystem. These theses form the grounding of game design praxiology, which in this work is defined as a pursuit of studying games as created.
This dissertation takes several levels of game developers’ realities and experiences into consideration. Firstly, it addresses the changing environment and recent trends in the game industry painting a picture of a challenging field of action. Such an environment requires flexibility and adaptation from the creators making game development a constant learning process. One of the highlighted trends is the casual turn in games. This normalisation of digital play has had a wide impact on the ways games are created.
Secondly, this work explores the multitude of game design, and discusses how games can be many and always affected by the values and appreciations of their respective creators. The notion of game design value is utilised in communicating the pluralistic nature of game design. Game design cannot be reduced to a single value, even though making a single game can be dominated by one.
Thirdly, the dissertation addresses the iterative nature of game development. Iteration as a core concept within game development is elaborated in this work into a larger notion of opportunism in design work. Opportunistic attitudes are visible on multiple levels of game work, and embraced as well as amplified within game creation cultures. Game developers do not only need to react to the changes within the industry, but take the opportunities that might come about within the development processes.
A big part of the study is revolving around the notion of a game idea. The level of ideas is more accessible to the outsiders of the creation cultures, but often misunderstood. The creative process of making games is collaborative and social, requiring creative input from several professions. The game innovation processes are not solely based on single overarching game ideas, but rather on various idea acts. This forms the fourth focus point for the dissertation.
Lastly, the work highlights how the larger ecosystem impacts on the game development practices. For the past decade, the game industry has expanded into a wide ecosystem of diverse actors and professions. This varying network of actors, including non-commercial actors, has its own role in nurturing the developments of the field. As one example, the phenomenon of the game jams is highlighted exposing a widely spread movement of creative communities emphasising diversity, co-creativity, opportunism, and prototyping cultures impacting a whole generation of game developers. The work calls for further research within game design praxiology: as long as game making is not a part of the basic education in the same way as writing or drawing, games are in danger of remaining misunderstood as a wide and vibrant form of art and practise.},
keywords = {creativity, englanninkieliset väitöskirjat, game design, game industry, game studies, ideation},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {phdthesis}
}
This dissertation is positioned on the multidiscipline of game studies. It presents the findings of a ten-year study of game developers and the contexts of their creative practices. As a multidisciplinary enquiry, this study draws from the theoretical and methodological traditions of creativity studies, management studies, computer science, and design research to supplement the young discipline of game studies. However, studying game developers is not a typical focus for the field of academic game research. The dissertation critically comments on the tradition of game studies for its ontological narrowness and the neglect of the relevance of the creator in the quest for understanding the phenomenon of games and play.
Altogether, this work draws from nineteen sub-studies to explore game development as experienced, highlighting issues that frame creation practices. The study is exploratory utilising multiple methods capturing the voices and realities of the creators. The overview of the study is ethnographically informed: the data collection covers an extensive period in games from 2006 to 2016, bridging the sub-studies with field work and digital ethnography at multiple industry events around the globe and social media platforms.
The findings are distilled into five claims: 1) Game design is timely and particular, 2) Game design is value pluralistic, 3) Game design process is opportunistic, 4) Game design process is a plethora of ideas, and 5) Game design practice is natured and nurtured by the surrounding ecosystem. These theses form the grounding of game design praxiology, which in this work is defined as a pursuit of studying games as created.
This dissertation takes several levels of game developers’ realities and experiences into consideration. Firstly, it addresses the changing environment and recent trends in the game industry painting a picture of a challenging field of action. Such an environment requires flexibility and adaptation from the creators making game development a constant learning process. One of the highlighted trends is the casual turn in games. This normalisation of digital play has had a wide impact on the ways games are created.
Secondly, this work explores the multitude of game design, and discusses how games can be many and always affected by the values and appreciations of their respective creators. The notion of game design value is utilised in communicating the pluralistic nature of game design. Game design cannot be reduced to a single value, even though making a single game can be dominated by one.
Thirdly, the dissertation addresses the iterative nature of game development. Iteration as a core concept within game development is elaborated in this work into a larger notion of opportunism in design work. Opportunistic attitudes are visible on multiple levels of game work, and embraced as well as amplified within game creation cultures. Game developers do not only need to react to the changes within the industry, but take the opportunities that might come about within the development processes.
A big part of the study is revolving around the notion of a game idea. The level of ideas is more accessible to the outsiders of the creation cultures, but often misunderstood. The creative process of making games is collaborative and social, requiring creative input from several professions. The game innovation processes are not solely based on single overarching game ideas, but rather on various idea acts. This forms the fourth focus point for the dissertation.
Lastly, the work highlights how the larger ecosystem impacts on the game development practices. For the past decade, the game industry has expanded into a wide ecosystem of diverse actors and professions. This varying network of actors, including non-commercial actors, has its own role in nurturing the developments of the field. As one example, the phenomenon of the game jams is highlighted exposing a widely spread movement of creative communities emphasising diversity, co-creativity, opportunism, and prototyping cultures impacting a whole generation of game developers. The work calls for further research within game design praxiology: as long as game making is not a part of the basic education in the same way as writing or drawing, games are in danger of remaining misunderstood as a wide and vibrant form of art and practise.
Altogether, this work draws from nineteen sub-studies to explore game development as experienced, highlighting issues that frame creation practices. The study is exploratory utilising multiple methods capturing the voices and realities of the creators. The overview of the study is ethnographically informed: the data collection covers an extensive period in games from 2006 to 2016, bridging the sub-studies with field work and digital ethnography at multiple industry events around the globe and social media platforms.
The findings are distilled into five claims: 1) Game design is timely and particular, 2) Game design is value pluralistic, 3) Game design process is opportunistic, 4) Game design process is a plethora of ideas, and 5) Game design practice is natured and nurtured by the surrounding ecosystem. These theses form the grounding of game design praxiology, which in this work is defined as a pursuit of studying games as created.
This dissertation takes several levels of game developers’ realities and experiences into consideration. Firstly, it addresses the changing environment and recent trends in the game industry painting a picture of a challenging field of action. Such an environment requires flexibility and adaptation from the creators making game development a constant learning process. One of the highlighted trends is the casual turn in games. This normalisation of digital play has had a wide impact on the ways games are created.
Secondly, this work explores the multitude of game design, and discusses how games can be many and always affected by the values and appreciations of their respective creators. The notion of game design value is utilised in communicating the pluralistic nature of game design. Game design cannot be reduced to a single value, even though making a single game can be dominated by one.
Thirdly, the dissertation addresses the iterative nature of game development. Iteration as a core concept within game development is elaborated in this work into a larger notion of opportunism in design work. Opportunistic attitudes are visible on multiple levels of game work, and embraced as well as amplified within game creation cultures. Game developers do not only need to react to the changes within the industry, but take the opportunities that might come about within the development processes.
A big part of the study is revolving around the notion of a game idea. The level of ideas is more accessible to the outsiders of the creation cultures, but often misunderstood. The creative process of making games is collaborative and social, requiring creative input from several professions. The game innovation processes are not solely based on single overarching game ideas, but rather on various idea acts. This forms the fourth focus point for the dissertation.
Lastly, the work highlights how the larger ecosystem impacts on the game development practices. For the past decade, the game industry has expanded into a wide ecosystem of diverse actors and professions. This varying network of actors, including non-commercial actors, has its own role in nurturing the developments of the field. As one example, the phenomenon of the game jams is highlighted exposing a widely spread movement of creative communities emphasising diversity, co-creativity, opportunism, and prototyping cultures impacting a whole generation of game developers. The work calls for further research within game design praxiology: as long as game making is not a part of the basic education in the same way as writing or drawing, games are in danger of remaining misunderstood as a wide and vibrant form of art and practise.
2009
Sotamaa, Olli
The player's game: Towards understanding player production among computer game cultures Väitöskirja
Mediatutkimus, Turun yliopisto, 2009, ISBN: 978-951-44-7650-1.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Avainsanat: digital games, englanninkieliset väitöskirjat, game culture, game industry, player production, player-centred design
@phdthesis{Sotamaa2009,
title = {The player's game: Towards understanding player production among computer game cultures},
author = {Olli Sotamaa},
url = {https://urn.fi/urn:isbn:978-951-44-7651-8},
isbn = {978-951-44-7650-1},
year = {2009},
date = {2009-01-01},
school = {Mediatutkimus, Turun yliopisto},
abstract = {This dissertation presents a cultural approach to player production. The contribution of my work to the current scholarship on players is to broaden the understanding of the relation between play and other forms of game cultural productivity. The dissertation suggests that as the manifestations of gaming hobby break out of magic circle of play , the productive activities of players become central to our understanding of games and gaming.
While game studies have so far been pretty good in identifying the structural elements of game systems and the different motivations of players, they have mostly not touched the larger social structures and industrial systems that ultimately shape both the games that are offered to players and the ways they are played. Whilst we know quite a lot about how the rules can be used to guide and constrict players activities, the rules that direct player production are scarcely investigated. This dissertation provides an approach to how these regulations and byelaws could be studied.
Instead of sticking to the game world boundaries the dissertation turns the focus to the larger dynamics of game culture and examines the opportunities and constraints provided by the current game industry paradigms. The underlying interest is in outlining games as profoundly co-produced entities which can be only understood if both the contributions of developers and other industry bodies and the investments of players are taken into account.
The dissertation consists of six articles and a lengthy overview section. The introductory chapters provide theoretical and historical background for the approach. The articles introduce practical case studies and apply, discuss and develop further the starting points. While various dimensions of player production are elaborated in the introductory chapters, the articles focus mostly on the players productive practices that result in new game elements (game modifications) and the ones that exploit the game software to produce entirely new digital objects (machinima).
The dissertation is committed to a particular notion of the nature of play. I argue that segregating the sphere of play from ordinary life , utility and productivity runs the risk of hiding the similarities and interesting connections between play and the related realms. Rather than happening in a given magic circle , the space for play needs to be negotiated. I have in the thesis examined how these negotiations spread beyond the borders of the game as games are increasingly integrated into our daily lives. Secondly the study suggests that also the boundaries between players and producers are by definition blurred and actively negotiated. I further argue in favour of conceptualizing player production as a network of activities. The composition and dynamics of this network are guided by forms of gaming capital.
Finally, the dissertation seriously questions the tendency of studying media consumption and production in separation. As the media practices are becoming increasingly participatory and co-operative, it is difficult to argue for keeping these domains of research apart from each other. Player production highlights how digital media products are increasingly also tools that allow media consumers not only to personalize their experiences but also to share and circulate their productions. This furthermore underlines the need to abandon the dichotomous and stabile either-or models and the demand for holistic studies of the emerging media culture. While the industry bodies take part in shaping the emerging player cultural formations, it is at the same time increasingly difficult to understand game industry without taking players into account. In this respect, game cultures originate in various sites, often defined both by resistance, exploitation and mutually beneficial relations.},
keywords = {digital games, englanninkieliset väitöskirjat, game culture, game industry, player production, player-centred design},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {phdthesis}
}
This dissertation presents a cultural approach to player production. The contribution of my work to the current scholarship on players is to broaden the understanding of the relation between play and other forms of game cultural productivity. The dissertation suggests that as the manifestations of gaming hobby break out of magic circle of play , the productive activities of players become central to our understanding of games and gaming.
While game studies have so far been pretty good in identifying the structural elements of game systems and the different motivations of players, they have mostly not touched the larger social structures and industrial systems that ultimately shape both the games that are offered to players and the ways they are played. Whilst we know quite a lot about how the rules can be used to guide and constrict players activities, the rules that direct player production are scarcely investigated. This dissertation provides an approach to how these regulations and byelaws could be studied.
Instead of sticking to the game world boundaries the dissertation turns the focus to the larger dynamics of game culture and examines the opportunities and constraints provided by the current game industry paradigms. The underlying interest is in outlining games as profoundly co-produced entities which can be only understood if both the contributions of developers and other industry bodies and the investments of players are taken into account.
The dissertation consists of six articles and a lengthy overview section. The introductory chapters provide theoretical and historical background for the approach. The articles introduce practical case studies and apply, discuss and develop further the starting points. While various dimensions of player production are elaborated in the introductory chapters, the articles focus mostly on the players productive practices that result in new game elements (game modifications) and the ones that exploit the game software to produce entirely new digital objects (machinima).
The dissertation is committed to a particular notion of the nature of play. I argue that segregating the sphere of play from ordinary life , utility and productivity runs the risk of hiding the similarities and interesting connections between play and the related realms. Rather than happening in a given magic circle , the space for play needs to be negotiated. I have in the thesis examined how these negotiations spread beyond the borders of the game as games are increasingly integrated into our daily lives. Secondly the study suggests that also the boundaries between players and producers are by definition blurred and actively negotiated. I further argue in favour of conceptualizing player production as a network of activities. The composition and dynamics of this network are guided by forms of gaming capital.
Finally, the dissertation seriously questions the tendency of studying media consumption and production in separation. As the media practices are becoming increasingly participatory and co-operative, it is difficult to argue for keeping these domains of research apart from each other. Player production highlights how digital media products are increasingly also tools that allow media consumers not only to personalize their experiences but also to share and circulate their productions. This furthermore underlines the need to abandon the dichotomous and stabile either-or models and the demand for holistic studies of the emerging media culture. While the industry bodies take part in shaping the emerging player cultural formations, it is at the same time increasingly difficult to understand game industry without taking players into account. In this respect, game cultures originate in various sites, often defined both by resistance, exploitation and mutually beneficial relations.
While game studies have so far been pretty good in identifying the structural elements of game systems and the different motivations of players, they have mostly not touched the larger social structures and industrial systems that ultimately shape both the games that are offered to players and the ways they are played. Whilst we know quite a lot about how the rules can be used to guide and constrict players activities, the rules that direct player production are scarcely investigated. This dissertation provides an approach to how these regulations and byelaws could be studied.
Instead of sticking to the game world boundaries the dissertation turns the focus to the larger dynamics of game culture and examines the opportunities and constraints provided by the current game industry paradigms. The underlying interest is in outlining games as profoundly co-produced entities which can be only understood if both the contributions of developers and other industry bodies and the investments of players are taken into account.
The dissertation consists of six articles and a lengthy overview section. The introductory chapters provide theoretical and historical background for the approach. The articles introduce practical case studies and apply, discuss and develop further the starting points. While various dimensions of player production are elaborated in the introductory chapters, the articles focus mostly on the players productive practices that result in new game elements (game modifications) and the ones that exploit the game software to produce entirely new digital objects (machinima).
The dissertation is committed to a particular notion of the nature of play. I argue that segregating the sphere of play from ordinary life , utility and productivity runs the risk of hiding the similarities and interesting connections between play and the related realms. Rather than happening in a given magic circle , the space for play needs to be negotiated. I have in the thesis examined how these negotiations spread beyond the borders of the game as games are increasingly integrated into our daily lives. Secondly the study suggests that also the boundaries between players and producers are by definition blurred and actively negotiated. I further argue in favour of conceptualizing player production as a network of activities. The composition and dynamics of this network are guided by forms of gaming capital.
Finally, the dissertation seriously questions the tendency of studying media consumption and production in separation. As the media practices are becoming increasingly participatory and co-operative, it is difficult to argue for keeping these domains of research apart from each other. Player production highlights how digital media products are increasingly also tools that allow media consumers not only to personalize their experiences but also to share and circulate their productions. This furthermore underlines the need to abandon the dichotomous and stabile either-or models and the demand for holistic studies of the emerging media culture. While the industry bodies take part in shaping the emerging player cultural formations, it is at the same time increasingly difficult to understand game industry without taking players into account. In this respect, game cultures originate in various sites, often defined both by resistance, exploitation and mutually beneficial relations.