The notion of invariant structural elements in games has been an interest of mathematicians for a number of years. Von Neumann and others have delimited a number of elements which they believe are present in all games, elements that are necessary and invariant, i.e., number of players, rules of the game, results or "pay-off," and strategies that could be employed in play of the game. (J. Von Neumann and O. Jorgensen, "Theory of Games and Economic Behavior", New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1944, 3rd edition 1964.) However, these elements are not sufficient to make a game. Also, strategy is something that a player brings to the game; it is not an intrinsic part of a game. It is something that the player develops, based on past experience, knowledge of the game, and the personality of the other players.
In addition to mathematicians, others have also been interested in the structural elements of games. A contemporary of Von Neumann's, George H. Mead, was primarily interested in the influences of various aspects of society on human growth and development. Mead taught that games were primarily a pattern or set of specific social situations which affect personality. As a by-product of his concerns, he delimited a number of structural elements of games which he felt influenced behavior.
The game has logic, so that there is a definite end to be obtained; the actions of the different individuals are all related to each other with reference to that end . . . so that they further the purpose of the game itself. They are interrelated in a unitary, organic fashion.... (George H. Mead, "Play, the Game, and the Generalized Other" Mind, Self, and Society, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934, pp. 158-159.)
Thus, one element - the logic of the game, the definite end - may be thought of as the purpose or raison d' etre. Another element would be the actions in reference to the purpose, or the procedures for action. A further element Mead specifies is that of the roles which games require players to take. One more element he identifies is the only one which Von Neumann also identifies, i.e., rules governing action. Mead indicates that games include social processes which influence or regulate interaction of the players, and thus that element might be termed interaction patterns.
Szasz built directly upon Mead's theories. Applied within a psychiatric frame of reference, he strengthens Mead's delimitation of game elements and stresses the factor of interaction patterns. In analyzing the structure of games, he delimits such elements as rules, roles, procedures, etc. (Thomas S. Szasz, "Game Model Analysis of Behavior," Part V. The Myth of Mental Illness, New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1961, pp. 223-293.)
Goffman, a contemporary of Szasz, in studying the sociology of interaction, strengthens Mead's delimitation of game elements. Goffman reports on different types of "focused interactions" and stresses the same game elements as others before him. However, Goffman introduces a new element, which he refers to as fun or euphoria. He indicates that this element must be present to ensure participation, and that players modify and manipulate various other elements in order to find fun in a game. Fun, like strategies, is subjective and is therefore not an intrinsic element in games. As Goffman rightly points out, often the other elements must be manipulated for a participant to have fun. In addition to the elements Mead identifies, Goffman emphasizes some of the elements Von Neumann and his colleagues have identified. Unlike Szasz, Goffman's concerns are not with the game as a mode of behavior, but the game as a milieu for behavior.(Erving Goffman, "Fun in Games," Encounters, Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc., 1961, pp. 17-8l).
Another psychiatrist, Eric Berne, published an exposition on behavior and games. Berne concerned with interaction, uses the term "transaction," while Goffman uses the term "encounters." They both discuss a variety of interaction patterns subsumed under these labels, and indicate that games are only one type of interaction. Berne emphasizes the same elements as Mead, Szasz, and Goffman; however, he uses different labels. A striking aspect of Berne's approach is his identification of seemingly non-game interactions as games. He points out that games are differentiated from other types of interaction because of their intrinsic elements, and many social situations, although appearing not to be games, possess these elements, and are in reality, games, a notion similar to the one expressed by Saint Augustine. He also indicates that some playing is with conscious intent, and some is the result of unconscious conflict. (Eric Berne, Games People Play, New York: Grove Press, 1964.)
In addition to these, personnel in the field of recreation have called attention to additional game elements which must be considered, and they have written extensively about these elements. One major element which recreation personnel have long been concerned with are the abilities and skills required for participation - the playing of a specific game. Two other elements which recreation personnel consider to be of importance are the environmental requirements for the playing of each game, and the necessary physical setting, Finally, a vital element to be considered is the required equipment needed for participation in a game.
Last update December 30, 2009