a gameplay definition through videogame classification

Hindawi Publishing CorporationInternational Journal of Computer Games TechnologyVolume 2008 Article ID 470350 7 pagesdoi1011552008470350

Research ArticleA Gameplay Definition through Videogame Classification

Damien Djaouti1 2 Julian Alvarez1 2 Jean-Pierre Jessel1 Gilles Methel2 and Pierre Molinier2

1 IRIT University of Toulouse III 118 route de Narbonne 31062 Toulouse France2 LARA University of Toulouse II 5 allees Antonio Machado 31058 Toulouse France

Correspondence should be addressed to Damien Djaouti djaoutiiritfr

Received 30 September 2007 Accepted 15 February 2008

Recommended by Kok Wai Wong

This paper is part of an experimental approach aimed to raise a videogames classification Being inspired by the methodology thatPropp used for the classification of Russian fairy tales we have identified recurrent diagrams within rules of videogames that wecalled ldquoGameplay Bricksrdquo The combinations of these different bricks should allow us to represent a classification of all videogamesin accordance with their rules In this article we will study the nature of these bricks especially the link they seem to have withtwo types of game rules the rules that allow the player to ldquomanipulaterdquo the elements of the game and the rules defining the ldquogoalrdquoof the game This study will lead to an hypothesis about the nature of gameplay

Copyright copy 2008 Damien Djaouti et al This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons AttributionLicense which permits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properlycited

1 INTRODUCTION

This paper is part of a global experimental approach aimed atstudying the nature of videogames in order to try to definewhat ldquogameplayrdquo is The first step of our methodology is toelaborate a classification suited to videogames

In a simple way we could consider videogames asan interactive application entering into interaction with aplayer

According to Crawford [1] interactions between aplayer and a videogame can be perceived as a dialogueldquoA cyclic process in which two active agents alternately (andmetaphorically) listen think and speakrdquo

Through this paper we aim to focus on the ldquocomputerrdquoside of the cycle in order to analyze the constitutive elementsof videogames as pieces of software

The first target of this approach is to identify formal dataignoring for now the knowledge and psychological aspects ofthe player

The next idea is to study this data in order to deducea classification of videogames It should also contribute tothe definition of a common language suited to videogameanalysis

We have been inspired by the work of Propp [2] in hisstudy of the Russian fairy tales during the beginning of thetwentieth century

Facing similar problems such as the impossibility forthe researchers of his time to conduct an objective study of

the inherent Russian fairy tales mechanisms Propp used aformal deconstruction

Starting from a hundred of fairy tales that he has beenanalyzed in this way he has been able to identify recurrentnarrative structures which lead him to build a classificationof Russian fairy tales

We have also been influenced by the joint work of Salenand Zimmerman [3] who led us to focus our study onvideogames rules ldquoLooking at games as rules means lookingat games as formal systems both in the sense that the rules areinner structures that constitute the games and also in the sensethat the rules schemas are analytic tools that mathematicallydissects gamesrdquo

By isolating the ldquocomputerrdquo part of the videogameinteraction cycle we obtain a simple structural diagram(Figure 2) composed of three parts the ldquoInputrdquo peripheraldevices allowing the user to enter choices These choices arethen evaluated by the rules of the ldquoComputerdquo part in orderto produce a ldquoresultrdquo This result is finally communicated tothe player through the ldquoOutputrdquo device

In order to stick to our paradigm we will focus on theldquorulesrdquo featured in the ldquoComputerdquo part made of software

According to this approach we have studied the rules of588 various videogames All this data has been indexed in adatabase called VEGaS (video amp electronic games studies)

Our previous researches [4 5] have shown strong recur-rences on the whole of videogames rules These recurrencesare exposed in the first part of this article

2 International Journal of Computer Games Technology

Watching

Player

Thinking Pushing

Displaying

Computing

Videogame

Inputing

Figure 1 Player and videogame interaction cycle

In the second part we will analyze these recurrences andtry to identify the eventual structures that could be related tothe gameplay of these videogames

2 A VIDEOGAME CLASSIFICATION

21 Game bricks

In accordance to Propprsquos methodology we have developeda tool suited to the indexation and analysis of a largevideogames corpus This quantitative approach should raiseeventual recurrent aspects likely to become criteria for aclassification

We based our corpus on as large a period of time as possi-ble in order to limit the impact of technical evolution on theresults we may observe However we had to define severallimitations to the videogames likely to join our corpus

(i) single player games only(ii) computer games only

(iii) games based on both audio and graphical output

The 588 games in our corpus were chosen after an onlinealphabetical list of videogames titles however the greatmajority of them are ldquoarcade gamesrdquo or ldquocasual gamesrdquo

Thanks to our tool we have proposed a first stepfor the development of a classification criterion we haveemphasized the ldquoGame Bricksrdquo (Figure 3) the ldquofundamentalelementsrdquo whose different combinations seem to match thedifferent rules and goals of videogames

After analysis [7] we noticed that every ldquoGame brickrdquo cor-responds to a ldquorecurrent templaterdquo in the rules of videogames

For example two games such as ldquoPac-manrdquo and ldquospaceinvadersrdquo features the following rules

(i) ldquoIf Pac-man collides with Ghost then destroy Pacmanrdquo(ii) ldquoIf Spaceship collides with Enemyrsquos shot then destroy

Spaceshiprdquo

We notice a very strong similarity between these rules and wecan consider therefore that they are built on the followingtemplate ldquoIf player element collides with a hostile elementthen there is a negative feedback towards the player elementrdquo

This template is then the definition of a ldquoGame brickrdquonamely the AVOID brick So far we have identified tenldquoGame bricksrdquo all built upon this same principle

For example the Game bricks featured in ldquoPac-manrdquo areldquoMOVErdquo meaning the player can move an avatar ldquoAVOIDrdquofor the ghosts you have to avoid ldquoDESTROYrdquo for the dots

Input Compute Output

Player pushesany button

The computer is ldquothinkingrdquo A ldquoresultrdquo is displayedon the screen

Figure 2 Structural parts of a videogame

Avoid Manage Random Shoot Create

Destroy Match Write Move Select

Figure 3 Game bricks discovered as of now (A side note aboutthe different bricks we have identified since the paper presentingthe first version of ldquoVEGaSrdquo some bricks have been modifiedYou will notice that the bricks TIME and SCORE were removedThe COLLECT brick was merged with DESTROY The POSITIONbrick was extended in the form of MATCH Last but not least theANSWER brick was split in two bricks SELECT and WRITE Moredetail on the bricks modifications is presented in [7])

you have to eat and ldquoMATCHrdquo because you have to matcheach dotrsquos spatial position to destroy it

But you can also find these bricks in a racing gamelike ldquoNeed for Speedrdquo MOVE a car AVOID opponentsand MATCH on checkpoints you have to DESTROY Whenreached a checkpoint becomes ldquoout of the gamerdquo and is notreachable anymore so it can be considered ldquodestroyedrdquo justlike any dot eaten by Pac-man

Nevertheless even within their rules these two games aredifferent the movement and thus the ldquoMOVErdquo brick featurestwo dimensions in ldquoPac-manrdquo but three in ldquoNeed for SpeedCarbonrdquo the number of checkpoints to reach in Need forSpeed is much smaller than the number of dots that Pac-man has to swallow the movement of the elements to avoidis different in each game

Differences between these two example games are theissue of different implementations of ldquorule templatesrdquo fromthe bricks they are sharing but are also due to the use ofrules which are not covered by the bricks in order to obtainan efficient classification we could not make a brick for everyexisting rule template

We then had to limit the number of Game bricks tryingto identify the most recurrent rules templates after a closestudy of the games in our corpus

However the Game bricks are aimed to allow therepresentation of the diversity of challenges one can findamong videogames

Damien Djaouti et al 3

(a) (b)

Figure 4 Pac-man (1980) and need for speed carbon (2006)

Shoot Destroy

KILLER

Move Avoid

DRIVER

Figure 5 Two identified metabricks

Besides the recurrent factor we also took in accountthe nature of the rule we have concentrated our efforts onrepresenting the rules related to the actions of the player withthe ldquoGame Bricksrdquo meaning we focused on rules related tothe game goal and to the means of reaching it

Being inspired by the works of Koster [8] and Bura[9] who both try to elaborate a grammar of videogamesin the shape of diagrams we have formalized diagrams asdefinitions for our bricks (these diagrams are presented inSection 41)

The structure of these templates is based on the ldquostruc-ture of a rulerdquo one or several ldquotriggering conditionsrdquo (If)associated with one or several effects (Then)

The ldquoIfThenrdquo structure of a rule obviously remindsone of the algorithmic scheme used in computer science asstudied in a previous article [7]

22 Metabricks

Nevertheless the number of ldquototal combinationsrdquo obtainablewith these different bricks is still rather large but we havenoticed that some couples of bricks were found very often in agreat number of games

We named those couples of bricks ldquoMetabricksrdquo and afterthe study of games that have one or two of these metabrickswe have given them names that are rather meaningfulMOVE and AVOID became the ldquoDRIVERrdquo metabrickand the association of SHOOT and DESTROY becameldquoKILLERrdquo

These ldquometabricksrdquo seem to us empirically related to thechallenges proposed by these games

Families that have identical metabricks but also somedifferent bricks seem to present a variation on the samechallenge For example the families of ldquoPac-manrdquo andldquoFroggerrdquo have a difference concerning the DESTROY brickPac-man has to swallow dots and thus to destroy them whilethe frog has only a busy road to cross

To summarize we have identified ldquoGame Bricksrdquo thatrepresent ldquorecurrent rule templatesrdquo within videogamesBased on these bricks we have elaborated a classificationthat gathers videogames into ldquofamiliesrdquo having identicalcombinations of ldquoGame bricksrdquo

Goal put ball in

Rule canrsquotuse hands

Rule gravity

Figure 6 Elements rules and goal for soccer

These families can then be classified through the use ofsome pairs of bricks named ldquoMetaBricksrdquo

3 TOPOLOGY OF A GAME

In order to fully analyze the results of our quantitative studywe also have studied the morphology of a videogame in aqualitative way

We started from the definition of a game according toSalen and Zimmerman [3] ldquoAn activity with some rulesengaged in for an outcomerdquo

The authors of ldquoThe Rules of Playrdquo consider a game as anactivity defined by two elements the rules and the result thelatter one coming from a previous goal

31 ldquoSome rulesrdquo

If we consider that a videogame takes place in a virtualuniverse we can also consider that this universe is composedof several ldquoelementsrdquo in the broadest sense

For example in soccer a game that is playable both as avideogame and as a sport the universe would be composedof elements featured in a match players pitch goals and ball

All these elements are driven by the ldquorulesrdquo of the gamein a similar way that elements from our own universe aredriven by physical or behavioral laws

From a soccer point of view these rules are the physicalrules handling the movement of several elements like thegravity applied on the ball and the players but also the gamerules specifying that only the goalkeeper is allowed to touchthe ball with his hands

These rules seem to determine a ldquofield of possibleactionsrdquo that may happen when a soccer match is playedThis is what Salen and Zimmerman call the ldquospace ofpossibilityrdquo [3]

32 ldquoAn outcomerdquo

According to the definition presented previously a gameproposes an outcome Talking about an outcome implies ajudgement of the player performance But in order to judgeone needs a reference In a game the reference is tied to thegoal the players have to reach

For soccer the goal of the game identical for each teamis to bring the ball into the goals of the opposing team Theldquogoalsrdquo and ldquogoalkeeperrdquo words are by the way very explicit

As shown in a previous article [7] we could also considerthe goal of the game as a rule indeed a special one this rulehas to state the end of the game in others words its outcomewhen some conditions are fulfilled


In

Avoid Out

No

Yes

Value linkedto player

MATCHESTarget value

NEGATIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Out

In

Create Out

No

Nonplayer elementIS CREATED

POSITIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Yes

Out

(a)

In

Destroy Out

No

Yes

Nonplayer element

IS DESTROYED

POSITIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Out

In

Random Out

No

INPUTPlayer triggers

ldquorandomrdquo

EFFECTNew random

valuelinked to

player

Yes

Out

In

Manage Out

No

INPUTAny is triggered

ANDresource R

is gt=X

EFFECTAny effect

is triggeredAND

R = Rminus x

Yes

Out

(b)

In

Match Out

No

Yes


MATCHESTarget value

POSITIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Out

In

Move Out

No


ldquomovementrdquo

EFFECTPositionchange

for playerelement

Yes

Out

In

ShootOut

No


ldquoshootrdquo

EFFECTNew elementplayer-linkedautonomousmovement

Yes

Out

(c)

In

Select Out

No

Yes

INPUTPlayer selectsan element

EFFECT

Any effectis triggered

Out

In

Write Out

No

INPUTPlayer inputs

an alphanumericstring

EFFECT

Any effectis triggeredYes

Out

(d)

Figure 7

Back to the soccer example the game is ldquoresetrdquo when theball enters into one of the goals and the score of the teamfeaturing the player who shot the ball is increased by onepoint

Even though a match ends after 90 minutes the outcomedoes not depend only on time the team with the highestscore after 90 minutes of play wins the game

Hence the judgement allowing the outcome of the gameis here tied to the goal of the game which is to throw the ballinto the opposing goal

33 Different kinds of rules

If the target of the game is also a part of the game rules doesit means that different ldquokindsrdquo of rules exists

The work of Gonzalo Frasca seems to indicate so inparticular his typology of the different kinds of game rules[10]

(i) ldquoManipulation rulesrdquo defining what the player can doin the game

(ii) ldquoGoal Rulesrdquo defining the goal of the game

(iii) ldquoMetarulesrdquo defining how a game can be tuned ormodified

For now we will put aside ldquoMetarulesrdquo which mean that onthe whole of videogame rules we will find some rules relatedto the definition of a goal and other rules defining means toreach it


As different kinds of rules exist and as ldquoGame bricksrdquoare based upon ldquorule templatesrdquo we can ask the followingquestion

On what kind of rules are the bricks based on

4 BRICKS AND GAMEPLAY

41 Game + Play = Gameplay

In order to find which kind of rules the bricks are based onlet us analyze the definition diagrams of each brick

We notice that the bricks CREATE DESTROY RAN-DOM MANAGE MOVE SHOOT SELECT and WRITE allfeature a reference to the videogamersquos Input within its triggers

Please note that these bricks assume that the receivedinputs are ldquovalidrdquo Hence these ldquoplayerrsquos inputsrdquo are previ-ously checked by additional mechanisms that are out of thescope of this article

On the other hand the AVOID BLOCK DESTROY andMATCH bricks all feature a feedback within its effects [6] (Animportant note about the use of the word ldquofeedbackrdquo in thisarticle we are aware that within computer science the termsldquonegative feedbackrdquo and ldquopositive feedbackrdquo refer to systemswith the ability to automatically correct their actual stateHowever in the field of game design ldquopositive feedbackrdquo andldquonegative feedbackrdquo refer to the different kinds of ldquorewardsrdquoa game can address to the player We chose to use the latterdefinition of these terms in this paper) This feedback isdisplayed by the videogamersquos Output

We could then divide bricks into two categories accord-ing to whether they feature one or another of these charac-teristics

The first category of bricks seems to be based on aprinciple that one could formulate in the following way ldquotolisten to Input and to consequently carry out modifications ongame elementsrdquo

The second category would rather correspond to ldquotoobserve the game elements and to return an evaluation of thequality of modifications made by the first rule categoryrdquo

We retrieve here principles close to two types of rulesevoked by Frasca the first category approaches the definitionof ldquoManipulation rulesrdquo while the second one seems to berelated to ldquoGoal Rulesrdquo

But from our point of view the difference between thesetwo categories of bricks is also tied to the difference betweenthe two words ldquoPlayrdquo and ldquoGamerdquo

Indeed as the bricks of the first category are related toInput they can be connected to the word ldquoPlayrdquo whereas thebricks of the second category which are related to the goaland so to the Output would approach a concept related tothe word ldquoGamerdquo

Following these observations we can try to sort thebricks

The difference between the two bricks categories appearsall the more clear by the fact that they are not in direct relationbetween each other

Indeed the two categories of bricks ldquointeractrdquo throughthe ldquogame elementsrdquo the ldquoPlayrdquo bricks modify them and theldquoGamerdquo bricks observe the modifications made by the firstones

Play brickslinked to input

Game bricks

linked to goal

Random Write Select Destroy Match

Move Manage Shoot Avoid Create

Figure 8 ldquoPlayrdquo or ldquoGamerdquo related bricks

101

1010101

0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

10101010101

Playbricks

Gamebricks

Game elements

Compute

Input

Triggers

Acts on

Acts on

Triggers

Output

Figure 9 Bricks interaction with input and output

Shoot Destroy

KILLER

Play brick Game brick

Move Avoid

DRIVER

Figure 10 Play brick + Game Brick = Metabrick

We could finally extend the ldquovideogame structural dia-gramrdquo (Figure 2) by detailing the ldquoComputerdquo part where therules are located

Unfortunately the expression ldquoGame brickrdquo does notseem adequate anymore to refer to our full set of bricksbut only to the subset of bricks from the second categoryWe must then choose another term which seems obvioushere we will now refer to the set of 10 identified bricks asldquoGamePlay bricksrdquo

More than a simple name change this word leads to animportant question still looking for a precise answer

ldquoWhat is Gameplayrdquo

Gameplay is empirically seen as a central element within avideogame and seems closely related to the game quality inthe mind of many players


If the question of its nature appears of capital impor-tance it is unfortunately a concept which remains to beprecisely defined

Looking for a definition of gameplay let us synthesize thepoints studied until now

We identified a set of recurrences within the rulesof videogames that we named ldquoGameplay bricksrdquo Afteranalysis we observe two types of bricks related to two ldquokindsof videogame rulesrdquo

(i) Rules listening to Input and acting on the gameelements consequently named ldquoPlay bricksrdquo

(ii) Rules observing the state of the game elements andreturning to the player an evaluation of his perfor-mance named ldquoGame bricksrdquo

May the association of ldquoPlay bricksrdquo with ldquoGame bricksrdquo be thespirit of gameplay

A draft answer to this question may come from the twoMetabricks presented in Section 22 namely DRIVER andKILLER

If we analyze them we notice that they are composed of aldquoPlay brickrdquo associated to a ldquoGame brickrdquo

We would say that if the ldquoGame Brickrdquo refers to a goalto reach the ldquoPlay Brickrdquo seems to represent a means (or aconstraint) in order to reach this goal

For example DRIVER asks the player to avoid collidingwith some elements and allows the player to move its avatarin order to do so In the same way KILLER asks to destroyelements through the use of projectiles that the player canshoot or throw

As these ldquoMetabricksrdquo represent pairs of ldquoGamePlaybricksrdquo that is rules templates which are identified in a largegroup of games our hypothesis about the nature of gameplayseems very promising

5 CONCLUSION

Being inspired by the methodology that Propp used forhis fairy tales classification we have started a quantitativeanalysis of videogames

Propprsquos methodology leads us to build a classificationbased on ldquorecurrent templates of games rulesrdquo as we identifieda set of recurrent rules templates formalized into tenldquoGamePlay bricksrdquo

According to the work of Frasca these bricks can be oftwo kinds

(i) ldquoGamerdquo if the rule template is directly related to thegoal of the game mainly as a feedback within the ruleeffectsIn this case the rule is characterized by a trigger basedon the state of the game elements and an effect linkedto the videogamersquos Output

(ii) ldquoPlayrdquo if the rule template is independent from the goalThe rule is then characterized by a trigger based onthe videogamersquos Input and an effect targeting only thegame elements

We would then state as hypothesis that ldquoGameplayrdquo is at leastwithin the videogame rules composed of both ldquoGame bricksrdquoand ldquoPlay bricksrdquo

We have then been able to identify pairs of ldquoGameplaybricksrdquo that have been found recurrently in our gamescorpus

We have named these recurrent pairs ldquoMetabricksrdquo asthey are composed of ldquoPlay brick(s)rdquo associated to ldquoGamebrick(s)rdquo

The discovery of ldquoMetabricksrdquo which are the result ofpure statistical analysis over a 588 videogames corpus seemsto lean towards a validation of our hypothesis about thenature of gameplay

However our corpus of videogames needs to be extendedto more games and to more ldquokindsrdquo of games to fulfill thisvalidation

Moreover the expansion of our videogames corpusshould lead to the discovery of additional Metabricks with 4ldquoGame bricksrdquo and 6 ldquoPlay Bricksrdquo numerous new potentialmetabricks await

More precisely the next steps of our study will be basedon two complementary approaches

(i) A ldquobottom-uprdquo (qualitative) approach which will leadus to pursue the development of an experimentalvideogame named ldquoGamBASrdquo (a first prototype wasexposed in a previous article [7]) The aim of this gameis to allow one to observe the interaction between thedifferent kinds of videogame rules through the abilityof enablingdisabling any videogame rule at runtimeFor now this game only implements rules from theldquoGameplay bricksrdquo templates limiting its videogamegeneration abilities to quite simplified versions ofactual videogames

(ii) A ldquotop-downrdquo (quantitative) approach which will leadus to pursue the classification of videogames

We are modifying our classification tool in order to pro-pose a collaborative version of our videogame classificationfreely accessible on the Internet

This improved version adds the possibility to collect andcompare a large number of evaluations for each game inorder to minimize the subjectivity introduced during theanalysis of videogames

You might then freely propose evaluate or even consultinformation about any videogame on the following websitehttpwwwgameclassificationcom

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors wish to thank Jean-Yves Plantec and MartialBret from the ldquoIoderdquo company for their point of view onthe idea of ldquobricksrdquo as well as Stephane Bura Art Directorat ldquo10Tacle Studiordquo who directed us towards a great numberof references They also wish to offer many thanks to AnnikaHammarberg for the translation of this paper from Frenchto English and Dominic Arsenault for his expert correctionsand suggestions A very special thanks finally goes to RashidGhassempouri for his general help and thoughts in ourearlier works about the game classification

REFERENCES

[1] C Crawford Chris Crawford on Game Design New RidersIndianapolis Ind USA 2003


[2] V Propp Morphologie du conte (1928) Seuil Paris France1970

[3] K Salen and E Zimmerman The Rules of Play MIT PressCambridge Mass USA 2003

[4] J Alvarez D Djaouti R Ghassempouri J-P Jessel andG Methel ldquoVEGaS a tool to study morphology of thevideo gamesrdquo in Proceedings of the International Digital GamesConference (GAMES rsquo06) pp 145ndash155 Portalegre PortugalSeptember 2006

[5] J Alvarez D Djaouti R Ghassempouri J-P Jessel andG Methel ldquoMorphological study of the video gamesrdquo inProceedings of the International Conference on Games Researchand Development (CGIE rsquo06) pp 36ndash43 Perth AustraliaDecember 2006

[6] E Adams and A Rollings Game Architecture and Designchapter 3 New Riders Indianapolis Ind USA 2004

[7] D Djaouti J Alvarez J-P Jessel G Methel and P MolinierldquoTowards a classification of video gamesrdquo in Proceedingsof Artificial and Ambient Intelligence Conference (AISB rsquo07)Newcastle UK April 2007

[8] R Koster ldquoA grammar of gameplayrdquo httpwwwtheoryoffuncomgrammargdc2005htm

[9] S Bura ldquoA Game Grammarrdquo httpusersskynetbeburadiagrams

[10] G Frasca ldquoSimulation versus narrative introduction toludologyrdquo in The Videogame Theory Reader pp 221ndash236Routledge London UK 2003

International Journal of

AerospaceEngineeringHindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2010

RoboticsJournal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporationhttpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014


Active and Passive Electronic Components

Control Scienceand Engineering

Journal of



RotatingMachinery


Hindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom

Journal ofEngineeringVolume 2014

Submit your manuscripts athttpwwwhindawicom

VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration


Civil EngineeringAdvances in

Acoustics and VibrationAdvances in



Electrical and Computer Engineering

Journal of

Advances inOptoElectronics


Volume 2014

The Scientific World JournalHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014

SensorsJournal of


Modelling amp Simulation in EngineeringHindawi Publishing Corporation httpwwwhindawicom Volume 2014


Chemical EngineeringInternational Journal of Antennas and

Propagation




Navigation and Observation



DistributedSensor Networks



Watching

Player

Thinking Pushing

Displaying

Computing

Videogame

Inputing

Figure 1 Player and videogame interaction cycle

In the second part we will analyze these recurrences andtry to identify the eventual structures that could be related tothe gameplay of these videogames

2 A VIDEOGAME CLASSIFICATION

21 Game bricks

In accordance to Propprsquos methodology we have developeda tool suited to the indexation and analysis of a largevideogames corpus This quantitative approach should raiseeventual recurrent aspects likely to become criteria for aclassification

We based our corpus on as large a period of time as possi-ble in order to limit the impact of technical evolution on theresults we may observe However we had to define severallimitations to the videogames likely to join our corpus

(i) single player games only(ii) computer games only

(iii) games based on both audio and graphical output

The 588 games in our corpus were chosen after an onlinealphabetical list of videogames titles however the greatmajority of them are ldquoarcade gamesrdquo or ldquocasual gamesrdquo

Thanks to our tool we have proposed a first stepfor the development of a classification criterion we haveemphasized the ldquoGame Bricksrdquo (Figure 3) the ldquofundamentalelementsrdquo whose different combinations seem to match thedifferent rules and goals of videogames

After analysis [7] we noticed that every ldquoGame brickrdquo cor-responds to a ldquorecurrent templaterdquo in the rules of videogames

For example two games such as ldquoPac-manrdquo and ldquospaceinvadersrdquo features the following rules

(i) ldquoIf Pac-man collides with Ghost then destroy Pacmanrdquo(ii) ldquoIf Spaceship collides with Enemyrsquos shot then destroy

Spaceshiprdquo

We notice a very strong similarity between these rules and wecan consider therefore that they are built on the followingtemplate ldquoIf player element collides with a hostile elementthen there is a negative feedback towards the player elementrdquo

This template is then the definition of a ldquoGame brickrdquonamely the AVOID brick So far we have identified tenldquoGame bricksrdquo all built upon this same principle

For example the Game bricks featured in ldquoPac-manrdquo areldquoMOVErdquo meaning the player can move an avatar ldquoAVOIDrdquofor the ghosts you have to avoid ldquoDESTROYrdquo for the dots

Input Compute Output

Player pushesany button

The computer is ldquothinkingrdquo A ldquoresultrdquo is displayedon the screen

Figure 2 Structural parts of a videogame

Avoid Manage Random Shoot Create

Destroy Match Write Move Select

Figure 3 Game bricks discovered as of now (A side note aboutthe different bricks we have identified since the paper presentingthe first version of ldquoVEGaSrdquo some bricks have been modifiedYou will notice that the bricks TIME and SCORE were removedThe COLLECT brick was merged with DESTROY The POSITIONbrick was extended in the form of MATCH Last but not least theANSWER brick was split in two bricks SELECT and WRITE Moredetail on the bricks modifications is presented in [7])

you have to eat and ldquoMATCHrdquo because you have to matcheach dotrsquos spatial position to destroy it

But you can also find these bricks in a racing gamelike ldquoNeed for Speedrdquo MOVE a car AVOID opponentsand MATCH on checkpoints you have to DESTROY Whenreached a checkpoint becomes ldquoout of the gamerdquo and is notreachable anymore so it can be considered ldquodestroyedrdquo justlike any dot eaten by Pac-man

Nevertheless even within their rules these two games aredifferent the movement and thus the ldquoMOVErdquo brick featurestwo dimensions in ldquoPac-manrdquo but three in ldquoNeed for SpeedCarbonrdquo the number of checkpoints to reach in Need forSpeed is much smaller than the number of dots that Pac-man has to swallow the movement of the elements to avoidis different in each game

Differences between these two example games are theissue of different implementations of ldquorule templatesrdquo fromthe bricks they are sharing but are also due to the use ofrules which are not covered by the bricks in order to obtainan efficient classification we could not make a brick for everyexisting rule template

We then had to limit the number of Game bricks tryingto identify the most recurrent rules templates after a closestudy of the games in our corpus

However the Game bricks are aimed to allow therepresentation of the diversity of challenges one can findamong videogames


(a) (b)


Shoot Destroy

KILLER

Move Avoid

DRIVER






22 Metabricks






Goal put ball in


Rule gravity


















In

Avoid Out

No

Yes


MATCHESTarget value

NEGATIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Out

In

Create Out

No


POSITIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Yes

Out

(a)

In

Destroy Out

No

Yes

Nonplayer element

IS DESTROYED

POSITIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Out

In

Random Out

No


ldquorandomrdquo

EFFECTNew random

valuelinked to

player

Yes

Out

In

Manage Out

No


ANDresource R

is gt=X

EFFECTAny effect

is triggeredAND

R = Rminus x

Yes

Out

(b)

In

Match Out

No

Yes


MATCHESTarget value

POSITIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Out

In

Move Out

No


ldquomovementrdquo


for playerelement

Yes

Out

In

ShootOut

No


ldquoshootrdquo


Yes

Out

(c)

In

Select Out

No

Yes


EFFECT


Out

In

Write Out

No

INPUTPlayer inputs


EFFECT


Out

(d)

Figure 7






























Game bricks

linked to goal




101

1010101

0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

10101010101

Playbricks

Gamebricks

Game elements

Compute

Input

Triggers

Acts on

Acts on

Triggers

Output


Shoot Destroy

KILLER


Move Avoid

DRIVER



















5 CONCLUSION


















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


REFERENCES














RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation










(a) (b)


Shoot Destroy

KILLER

Move Avoid

DRIVER






22 Metabricks






Goal put ball in


Rule gravity


















In

Avoid Out

No

Yes


MATCHESTarget value

NEGATIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Out

In

Create Out

No


POSITIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Yes

Out

(a)

In

Destroy Out

No

Yes

Nonplayer element

IS DESTROYED

POSITIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Out

In

Random Out

No


ldquorandomrdquo

EFFECTNew random

valuelinked to

player

Yes

Out

In

Manage Out

No


ANDresource R

is gt=X

EFFECTAny effect

is triggeredAND

R = Rminus x

Yes

Out

(b)

In

Match Out

No

Yes


MATCHESTarget value

POSITIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Out

In

Move Out

No


ldquomovementrdquo


for playerelement

Yes

Out

In

ShootOut

No


ldquoshootrdquo


Yes

Out

(c)

In

Select Out

No

Yes


EFFECT


Out

In

Write Out

No

INPUTPlayer inputs


EFFECT


Out

(d)

Figure 7






























Game bricks

linked to goal




101

1010101

0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

10101010101

Playbricks

Gamebricks

Game elements

Compute

Input

Triggers

Acts on

Acts on

Triggers

Output


Shoot Destroy

KILLER


Move Avoid

DRIVER



















5 CONCLUSION


















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


REFERENCES














RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation










In

Avoid Out

No

Yes


MATCHESTarget value

NEGATIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Out

In

Create Out

No


POSITIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Yes

Out

(a)

In

Destroy Out

No

Yes

Nonplayer element

IS DESTROYED

POSITIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Out

In

Random Out

No


ldquorandomrdquo

EFFECTNew random

valuelinked to

player

Yes

Out

In

Manage Out

No


ANDresource R

is gt=X

EFFECTAny effect

is triggeredAND

R = Rminus x

Yes

Out

(b)

In

Match Out

No

Yes


MATCHESTarget value

POSITIVEFEEDBACK

Playerelement

Out

In

Move Out

No


ldquomovementrdquo


for playerelement

Yes

Out

In

ShootOut

No


ldquoshootrdquo


Yes

Out

(c)

In

Select Out

No

Yes


EFFECT


Out

In

Write Out

No

INPUTPlayer inputs


EFFECT


Out

(d)

Figure 7






























Game bricks

linked to goal




101

1010101

0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

10101010101

Playbricks

Gamebricks

Game elements

Compute

Input

Triggers

Acts on

Acts on

Triggers

Output


Shoot Destroy

KILLER


Move Avoid

DRIVER



















5 CONCLUSION


















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


REFERENCES














RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation




























Game bricks

linked to goal




101

1010101

0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0

10101010101

Playbricks

Gamebricks

Game elements

Compute

Input

Triggers

Acts on

Acts on

Triggers

Output


Shoot Destroy

KILLER


Move Avoid

DRIVER



















5 CONCLUSION


















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


REFERENCES














RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation





















5 CONCLUSION


















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


REFERENCES














RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation





















RoboticsJournal of





Journal of



RotatingMachinery





VLSI Design



Shock and Vibration







Journal of



Volume 2014


SensorsJournal of





Propagation









a gameplay definition through videogame classification

Documents