Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games 2017
DOI: 10.1145/3102071.3102107
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Refining operational logics

Abstract: is paper expands on and re nes the theoretical framework of operational logics, which simultaneously addresses how games operate at a procedural level and how games communicate these operations to players. In the years since their introduction, operational logics have been applied in domains ranging from game studies to game generation and game modeling languages. To support these uses and to enable new ones, we resolve some standing ambiguities and provide a catalog of key, fundamental operational logics. Con… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
3

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…When it comes to computational process, this aspect is cutting across different categories from the foundational architectural layer of a given game design, up to the representational level where the player interfaces with the game -what Walk et al (2017) call the "experience layer" in the DDT framework (which in turn is an improvement of the MDA model for game design by Hunicke et al from 2004). This aspect of the TOG model is similar to the concept of "operational logics" as defined by Mateas and Wardrip-Fruin (2009), and further refined by Osborn et al (2017), in that the technology, or processes an operational logic can consist of, is neither beneath nor above mechanics, but represents a different slice through a game, cutting from system architecture to what effect it may have on the player experience.…”
Section: The Tog Modelmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…When it comes to computational process, this aspect is cutting across different categories from the foundational architectural layer of a given game design, up to the representational level where the player interfaces with the game -what Walk et al (2017) call the "experience layer" in the DDT framework (which in turn is an improvement of the MDA model for game design by Hunicke et al from 2004). This aspect of the TOG model is similar to the concept of "operational logics" as defined by Mateas and Wardrip-Fruin (2009), and further refined by Osborn et al (2017), in that the technology, or processes an operational logic can consist of, is neither beneath nor above mechanics, but represents a different slice through a game, cutting from system architecture to what effect it may have on the player experience.…”
Section: The Tog Modelmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…The operational logics (Osborn, Wardrip-Fruin, and Mateas 2017) expressed by games in the GVG-AI framework are quite limited, and use of the term "general" to describe it risks contributing to hegemonic thinking in games research (Fron et al 2007). The other major multi-game level design corpus, VGLC , is also quite limited in its scope, including mostly games that appeal to 80s and early 90s nostalgia.…”
Section: On "Generality"mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…is covers signi cant aspects of a broad class of games including platformers, actionadventure games, and role-playing games. We based this view of the world on these games' usual composition of four operational logics [11,19]: collision logics, which describe spaces made up of distinct objects which can touch each other and possibly block each other's movement; linking logics, which de ne larger conceptual spaces including connected rooms and the transit between them; camera logics, which account for the fact that the visible part of the world is a window onto a larger contiguous world; and control logics, which map e.g. bu on inputs to in-game actions.…”
Section: Mappymentioning
confidence: 99%