Comments on: Are You a Ludologist?

By: Dominik

Dominik — Thu, 30 Mar 2006 19:46:06 +0000

At least one serious reply:
Best song got to be ‘sing sing sing’ on gorilla. Wonderful intro. Best real version of course is by Louis Prima. For Donkey Konga II, I’m not quite sure. Haven’t played that much, but finally got a second set of drums. Don’t talk, play, you ludologists :-)

By: Still not cool. » Blog Archive » Reading

Still not cool. » Blog Archive » Reading — Sun, 26 Mar 2006 17:02:48 +0000

[…] (And two responses: “Are You a Ludologist?” by Jesper Juul at The Ludologist, and Overly Escapist at Grand Text Auto.) […]

By: Walkerings

Walkerings — Sat, 18 Mar 2006 18:53:10 +0000

Play ‘n Tell…

My latest Escapist piece hauls out the old ludology vs. narratology debate. While readers seem to have largely enjoyed it, the piece has prompted a little more debate among the already debating parties themselves — which I can only think…

By: chico

chico — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 23:00:42 +0000

Trackback (featuring mea culpa)
http://nongames.com/article.php?story=20060313095436980

By: chico

chico — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:20:23 +0000

Good point. Plus, I don’t think one necessarily excludes the other. Quoting Frasca in “Ludology meets Narratology”, “Our intention is not to replace the narratologic approach, but to complement it. “.

Oh my god, here comes that discussion again…

By: Ben Cummings

Ben Cummings — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 15:06:21 +0000

To be frank, my largest problem with the debate is that it usually mischaracterizes “ludology,” at least the term as Frasca writes about it. Often, you’ll find that when people talk about “ludology vs. narratology” what they’re really talking about are people who value the mechanical agon vs. others who value the storytelling aspects of games.

In other words, somehow the characterization is narratology = Myst and ludology = Tetris. If people were really debating whether to use the tools of narratology to talk about games or whether the study of games requires something more drastic than an evolution of narratology — hence, ludology — well, at least that would be a more worthwhile debate. Even so, I think it’s one that’s been had.

I say, bring on the ludology!

By: chico

chico — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 12:25:57 +0000

You have a point there… I got carried away by the first paragraphs quoted above… I do apologize.

Still, I would’t dismiss the debate as an unimportant one (even if a past debate), and certainly not infertile. It?s just the manichaeist trait it often gets I don?t agree with.

By: Aubrey

Aubrey — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 11:01:33 +0000

Okay. That was actually exactly the antidote I was looking for!

By: Aubrey

Aubrey — Fri, 17 Mar 2006 10:55:50 +0000

“Seriously, we need new binary dichotomies. I am tired of the old ones. ”

“I actually thought that this kind of approach on the LxN debate was gone. ”

Agree, agree. It’s not the first time that this old dichotomy has been dragged out and flogged again. I’m frustrated about it, because I think back to how much time I wasted fretting over it, and if I had just opened a book and read up on it. Ahrgh. Lingering on this issue without treating it as a *past* debate is a bit too much like misinformation, if you ask me.

And now I’ll actually READ the article.

By: Patrick

Patrick — Thu, 16 Mar 2006 16:23:17 +0000

Heres some new dichotomies for you:

Ludus vs. Paidia (or explicitedly goal-oriented, structured gameplay versus open, player induced aesthetic goal-oriented toyplay)

Agon vs. Mimicry (or competition versus subversion/collaboration/social manuevering)

Um, its probably sad that I have to default to Roger Callois to come up with something “new”, but there you have it, I find those to be fairly useful.