What we tried to do with B.U.T.T.O.N. was to actively call attention to the NBA Live Mobile Coins ambiguities of gameplay, in attempt to convince players to revel in and enjoy them. Your talk description says you examined "traditional folk games, design research, and precedents in other media forms" when looking at alternative methods of multiplayer games. Can you describe what this research entailed and what you learned from it?For my Ph.D. dissertation I've spent a lot of time
\
olk games and sports, from old Danish children's games to the Forza Horizon 3 credits American New Games movement of the 1970s. One of my favorite examples is the traditional Inuit game of Iqiruktuk, also known as Mouth Pull. In Mouth Pull, two players stand side-by-side, placing their arms over each other's shoulders and hooking their thumb into their opponent's mouth. When the game begins, both players start tugging away at each other's mouth! The first player to surrender loses. Mouth
is a very performative -- and grotesque -- game. Play theorist Henning Eichberg calls it an "impossible game," in that the game is somewhat impossible to carry through. If the game was ever played too competitively, the players would literally end up mutilating each other. Eichberg points out that many games can be viewed in a similar light. For instance, the playground game Tag would also degenerate if played too competitively; the slowest player would get stuck as "It," never
to tag the faster players. What a game like Mouth Pull does is signal to mmogo its players in an especially obvious way that the game isn't really about "winning," but about public performance.B.U.T.T.O.N., too, is "impossible" in a very immediate sense. There isn't very much "game" there other than the silly tasks that the players are supposed to perform. An ultra-competitive player, for example, could refuse to put down the controller or follow any of the other instructions. This
What we tried to do with B.U.T.T.O.N. was to actively call attention to the NBA Live Mobile Coins ambiguities of gameplay, in attempt to convince players to revel in and enjoy them. Your talk description says you examined "traditional folk games, design research, and precedents in other media forms" when looking at alternative methods of multiplayer games. Can you describe what this research entailed and what you learned from it?For my Ph.D. dissertation I've spent a lot of time
\
olk games and sports, from old Danish children's games to the Forza Horizon 3 credits American New Games movement of the 1970s. One of my favorite examples is the traditional Inuit game of Iqiruktuk, also known as Mouth Pull. In Mouth Pull, two players stand side-by-side, placing their arms over each other's shoulders and hooking their thumb into their opponent's mouth. When the game begins, both players start tugging away at each other's mouth! The first player to surrender loses. Mouth
is a very performative -- and grotesque -- game. Play theorist Henning Eichberg calls it an "impossible game," in that the game is somewhat impossible to carry through. If the game was ever played too competitively, the players would literally end up mutilating each other. Eichberg points out that many games can be viewed in a similar light. For instance, the playground game Tag would also degenerate if played too competitively; the slowest player would get stuck as "It," never
to tag the faster players. What a game like Mouth Pull does is signal to mmogo its players in an especially obvious way that the game isn't really about "winning," but about public performance.B.U.T.T.O.N., too, is "impossible" in a very immediate sense. There isn't very much "game" there other than the silly tasks that the players are supposed to perform. An ultra-competitive player, for example, could refuse to put down the controller or follow any of the other instructions. This