Like most other ‘new games’ Knots is a game about working together to find a solution. The core game itself is not competitive in nature, but like everything else it can be made competitive if the players so wish it. But a game does not necessarily have to be competitive to be a game according to Pearce’s seven parameters (69). There is a goal: to result with everyone in a circle holding hands. There is an obstacle: the ‘knot’. There are resources: everyone is directly connected to exactly two other people, one on either side. There is information: who is connected to who, and how closely that shape currently represents a circle. The last one, consequences, is rather debatable in the terms of new games. It basically asks ‘what happens if I fail to meet the goal? And what happens when I do meet the goal?’ Unlike in the traditional gaming sense, there is no tangible reward for completing a game of knots and no penalty for not completing a game of knots. But neither is there for other games like solitaire. The sense of accomplishment for completing a goal and disappointment for not completing a goal is rewarding enough to be considered a ‘consequence’.
Mother Earth is another new game that at first glance seems to be more competitive in nature, but in fact, is actually far less competitive. The game requires two teams and a large ball. Each team tries to roll the ball over to the end of the other team’s side of the playing field. However, there are no designated goal lines, and no score is taken. Also, people are allowed to switch teams whenever they wish. Apparently in practice this lead to “… whenever a team neared a goal, it was noted that players from the winning team would defect to help the other side.” (Ludica 2). This led to promoting a group goal of keeping the game going as long as possible rather than trying to ‘score points’ in the more traditional sense.
Rock-Paper-Scissors tag is probably the closest a new game can get to being a traditional game without being one. Again, two teams; each team as a group decides what throw they will use in a RPS match. The teams line up and throw out their plays. The team that wins is now ‘it’ and the game turns into traditional tag. Everyone who was tagged switches sides until everyone is on the same team, thus everyone wins and no one looses.
By closely inspecting the mechanics of these three games, we can conclude that new games differentiate and pull away from the ideas of traditional games in two ways. Firstly, they promote everyone working together to achieve one goal, rather than different people racing to complete the same or similar goals. And also, they lessen the reward for winning and the punishment for losing. If fact, you could say they might not exist at all if not for the player’s predetermined sense of winning and losing. The ultimate goal is to get away from the traditional punishment and reward system and try to find a better method where everyone wins in the end.
Works Cited
Lucidia (Fron, J., Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C.) (2005). "Sustainable Play: Towards A New Games Movement for the Digital Age." Digital Arts & Culture Conference Proceedings, Copenhagen, December 2005.
Pearce, Celia. "Games as Art: The Aesthetics of Interactivity." Visible Language: Special Issue on Fluxus. January 2006.
Comments