JavaScript disabled. Please enable JavaScript to use My News, My Clippings, My Comments and user settings.

If you have trouble accessing our login form below, you can go to our login page.

If you have trouble accessing our login form below, you can go to our login page.

The definitions game

Date

Zoom in on this story. Explore all there is to know.

Proteus is very different from most games, but that does not mean it is not a game at all.

Proteus is very different from most games, but that does not mean it is not a game at all.

Proteus certainly is an odd beast.

Played from a first-person perspective, like a classic shooter, it never the less features no weapons or combat, no enemies, and no clearly-defined goals or ending.

The Proteus experience consists of walking around a colourful and highly-stylised island, which is generated randomly for every game, interacting with the landscape around you by simply walking near it. Rocks ring like gongs as you tread close to them, birds sing complex notes and they fly away, and even the plants hum dissonant harmonies as you approach.

It's certainly a unique experience, but one that I quickly grew bored of. Many of the people I converse with on Twitter, some of them extremely smart video game critics, think Proteus is wonderful, while other, including me, think it is pretty but ultimately pointless.

Amid this amiable disagreement, a dusty old argument was dragged out of its display case and once again kicked around the room. "It isn't even a game!" shouted some of Proteus's critics. "You only dislike it because you think it's not a game!" shouted back some of its defenders.

Now, I enjoy arguing about games. I wouldn't be a games journalist if I didn't. A large part of my job, after all, is to share my opinions about particular games and give credible reasoning for those opinions. Even so, this is an argument I tire of quickly, because it is one that nobody can win.

Let's talk briefly about prototype theory, which I first encountered when I was studying linguistics at university. It is a theory of categorisation which suggests that rather than a set of similar things being within a hard-edged box, they are instead grouped around a central point, with some closer and some further away.

The classic example of prototype theory is what objects in our homes can be called "furniture". Many studies and surveys have shown that, for English speakers at least, the chair is the most central and prototypical piece of furniture we know of. A rocking chair is still furniture, but it is less typical, and therefore a little further from the central point.

At the other end of the scale there are outliers, items such as pianos and rugs. Most people would not generally class a piano as furniture, but they would agree that a piano is more like furniture than, say, an elephant or a loaf of bread.

As you can see, in the case of furniture you can easily pick examples that definitely are in the group, such as chairs and tables, and others that definitely aren't, like rowboats and grain silos. You can also pick out examples that are furniture, but are not typical examples, such as foot stools and hammocks.

Interestingly enough, another example we discussed in this linguistics class was games, in their broad sense and not just video games. Linguists and philosophers have been trying for centuries to formulate a universally agreed upon definition for what a game is, but the category is just too broad and fuzzy-edged for a clear, black-and-white definition to be applicable. As such, prototype theory has proven useful.

We can easily list many features that are typical of games, but we can also just as easily think of examples that lack each of these features. For examples, games are frequently competitive, such as chess or schoolyard tag, but the childhood singing game Ring O' Rosies has no competitive element. They usually have a formal set of rules, like team sports, but an impromptu race between friends to climb to the top of a tree will usually have no rules at all.

We can make a similar list with video games. They are typically interactive, and include tests of skill of some kind and challenges to overcome, have set goals, feature winning and losing conditions, give the player a rating or score according to their performance, and so on. I'm sure you can think of several games that meet all of those criteria, and they would all be considered central according prototype theory.

Again, we can also come up with games that break each of these rules. Minecraft has no set goals, though it does have complex rules and challenges to overcome. Dear Esther has no challenges or tests of skill - it is a game in which you simply walk through a world and experience the story around you - but it is definitely interactive, has a series of goals, and arguably a winning condition. Even interactivity, while it is clearly central to what video games are, is not a deal-breaker - imagine a game in which random instructions pop up on a screen, and you have to carry them out in the real world. I don't know of such a game, but it could be made, and it would still definitely be a game, albeit a very atypical one.

This brings us back around to Proteus. It is clearly game-like, at the very least. It is interactive, and is controlled using typical game controls: a mouse and the WASD keys on a keyboard. There are events that can be triggered in the game world by following particular steps, and it could be argued that these are goals. Even so, it does not test player skill, it has no clear winning or losing conditions, it contains no obvious problem solving, and it does not have a clearly-defined ending.

Within the framework of prototype theory, Proteus is a long way from the centre. Right in the middle we have strongly prototypical games - Pac-Man, Super Meat Boy, Super Mario Bros, Space Invaders - and on the outer fringe we have the games that are quite different from what we usually think of as a game - Dear Esther, Heavy Rain, Minecraft, Terraria, The Walking Dead, Journey, Flower, and now Proteus.

I think you can easily argue about which games are more central and which are further out, and it can be a fun conversation to have, but to bang your fist on the table and say definitively that Proteus (or Minecraft or Heavy Rain) is not a game is simply misguided, and bordering on arrogant.

What do you think readers? Have I made an excellent point, or is it all just pseudo-intellectual waffle? You can lend your support or tell me how wrong I am in the comments below.

 - James "DexX" Dominguez

twitter DexX is on Twitter: @jamesjdominguez

10 comments so far

  • It's obviously a simulator by the sounds of it.

    Maybe the title just needs a bit of work maybe call it:

    The Falls Festival: Out of your gourd experience

    But seriously it is like a simulator, just not a very good one, of hiking through a landscape.It just sounds like the visuals and sounds need work to make it like real life :)

    Commenter
    Knotpossible
    Date and time
    February 08, 2013, 9:25AM
    • I've been looking for a game exactly like this for my three year old (no, I'm not kidding). He loves exploring games but is too young to really understand goals or conflict, and certinaly not ready for swords or guns.

      Is it available on PS3? iPad, perhaps?

      Commenter
      TC
      Date and time
      February 08, 2013, 10:46AM
      • PC only at this stage, I'm sorry, but it does have Xbox controller support.

        Commenter
        DexX
        Location
        MCDexX on XBL, PSN, Steam, and iOS Game Centre
        Date and time
        February 08, 2013, 12:11PM
    • Yes (you have made an excellent point) and yes (it is all just pseudo-intellectual waffle).!
      I also enjoy watching people try to classify music into genres (or boxes), and the arguments that ensue over what is 'metal' or 'rock', then what is 'black metal' or 'death metal' or 'blackened death metal' or 'post-industrial blackened funeral drone doom dark ambient metal'.
      The more you try to classify art (such as games or music) the more it wriggles around trying to avoid it.
      I know I hear some of the stuff my daughter listens to, and would argue 'that's not music'!
      It is what you make it.
      Thanks for the article DexX, I enjoyed it!

      Commenter
      Martus
      Date and time
      February 08, 2013, 11:11AM
      • I do think it is a little bit of intellectual waffle... BUT, I do think it is quite valid waffle.

        I think in this current gaming era, with the number of gaming hardware formats (PC, console, tablet, phone etc) and input mechanisms (mouse, keyboard, controller, touch screen, motion sensing etc) available to us, not to mention the types of experiences being produced, that we should indeed be questioning and challenging ourselves on what a game is. I definitely think the definition of a game has broadened greatly recently, and even if you want to firmly disagree with how we categorise games (personally, I think the prototype theory mentioned here seems quite apt), you can't ignore the fact that the breadth and depth of electornic based "experiences" (classical games, or otherwise) has blossomed. And I think that's a great thing.

        On a related note, this reminds me of a recent discussion regarding what are games, and how do we review them:
        http://www.buzzfeed.com/josephbernstein/why-do-we-read-game-reviews

        Commenter
        Swordfactor
        Date and time
        February 08, 2013, 11:15AM
        • I neglected to get Proteus because it didn't look like something I'd be into. Your description of prototype theory reminds me somewhat of Plato's ideal forms, and I don't like the concept that you can pick an arbitrary point to be the example of "the most game-ness" or "prototypical game" simply because it leads to a comparison of game to game to determine which is more game-like.
          It's similar to the genre question. Genre gets harder and harder to distinguish, where new genres are created, old genres are blended, and elements and influences from different games come together in a new form. But can you take one game and call it the prototypical example of a genre? Would anyone agree on that?

          Games and genres alike are always evolving, and for me it's more useful to compare elements that appear similar to other games, regardless of genre.

          Interesting piece, DexX.

          Commenter
          Lucid Fugue
          Location
          Melbourne
          Date and time
          February 08, 2013, 11:27AM
          • Funny you should bring up Platonic ideals. I talked about those in my piece a year or two ago about genres. Contrary that that, I don't think there is a Platonic "perfect game", but there is definitely a central point that the gamiest of games cluster close to, and that least gamey games are furthest from. I wouldn't care to pick a single game that is _the_ archetypal perfect game, which is what Platonic idealism demands, but I could certainly rattle off a few titles that are clustered quite close to the central point.

            Commenter
            DexX
            Location
            MCDexX on XBL, PSN, Steam, and iOS Game Centre
            Date and time
            February 08, 2013, 12:08PM
          • Makes me think that perhaps someone is doing the same data driven analysis that has happened in the music industry, tracking a wide number of variables across games to determine the attributes that make a successful game, so they can quit dealing with creative types and just get talented coders to churn out specific recombinations of mechanics and story elements that sell to the masses.

            Commenter
            Lucid Fugue
            Location
            Melbourne
            Date and time
            February 08, 2013, 1:06PM
        • I'm reminded of the classic definition of what comprises "science fiction". To quote from Wikipedia:

          Science fiction is difficult to define, as it includes a wide range of subgenres and themes. Author and editor Damon Knight summed up the difficulty, saying "science fiction is what we point to when we say it",[6] a definition echoed by author Mark C. Glassy, who argues that the definition of science fiction is like the definition of pornography: you don't know what it is, but you know it when you see it

          Sound familiar?

          Commenter
          Ronny
          Location
          Sydney
          Date and time
          February 08, 2013, 2:51PM
          • A game is a form of play. Proteus definitely fits that. SO using your prototype theory it would sit rather close to the centre.

            Commenter
            Narna
            Date and time
            February 12, 2013, 2:13PM

            Make a comment

            You are logged in as [Logout]

            All information entered below may be published.

            Error: Please enter your screen name.

            Error: Your Screen Name must be less than 255 characters.

            Error: Your Location must be less than 255 characters.

            Error: Please enter your comment.

            Error: Your Message must be less than 300 words.

            Post to

            You need to have read and accepted the Conditions of Use.

            Thank you

            Your comment has been submitted for approval.

            Comments are moderated and are generally published if they are on-topic and not abusive.

            Advertisement
            Featured advertisers
            Advertisement