<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: The Four Theories of Fun	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/2014/11/12/the-four-theories-of-fun/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/2014/11/12/the-four-theories-of-fun/</link>
	<description>My name is Jesper Juul, and I am a Ludologist [researcher of the design, meaning, culture, and politics of games]. This is my blog on game research and other important things.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2014 14:05:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Robert H. Dylan		</title>
		<link>https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/2014/11/12/the-four-theories-of-fun/comment-page-1/#comment-105573</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert H. Dylan]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2014 14:05:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/?p=2005#comment-105573</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hello Mr. Juul. One could also combine all these four: &quot;Fictional Rules regarding the Feel of The Social&quot; under something equally vague like &#039;Play&#039;. Also, your example of &#039;Go&#039; feels problematic, since the &#039;Rules&#039; of Go &#039;is&#039; innately bound up with the Social Fictions surrounding its symbolic (even spiritual) meanings - its *strategic* expressions of a perceived mindset of a culture / people / nation. Finally, never forget that Ludology could also be just another (awkwardly self-bootstrapping) &#039;Game&#039;, comprised of whatever rules its players currently choose to definite itself / themselves ;-) Sincerely, R.H.D]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello Mr. Juul. One could also combine all these four: &#8220;Fictional Rules regarding the Feel of The Social&#8221; under something equally vague like &#8216;Play&#8217;. Also, your example of &#8216;Go&#8217; feels problematic, since the &#8216;Rules&#8217; of Go &#8216;is&#8217; innately bound up with the Social Fictions surrounding its symbolic (even spiritual) meanings &#8211; its *strategic* expressions of a perceived mindset of a culture / people / nation. Finally, never forget that Ludology could also be just another (awkwardly self-bootstrapping) &#8216;Game&#8217;, comprised of whatever rules its players currently choose to definite itself / themselves ;-) Sincerely, R.H.D</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: J.Juul: The Four Theories of Fun &#124; Gabriele Ferri&#039;s research blog		</title>
		<link>https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/2014/11/12/the-four-theories-of-fun/comment-page-1/#comment-105470</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[J.Juul: The Four Theories of Fun &#124; Gabriele Ferri&#039;s research blog]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2014 13:30:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/?p=2005#comment-105470</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[[&#8230;] Read the full blog post at http://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/the-four-theories-of-fun [&#8230;]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[&#8230;] Read the full blog post at http://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/the-four-theories-of-fun [&#8230;]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Jesper		</title>
		<link>https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/2014/11/12/the-four-theories-of-fun/comment-page-1/#comment-105058</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jesper]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2014 08:36:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/?p=2005#comment-105058</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[@Dan &quot;Feel&quot; is not about feelings in general, but about the tactile feeling of engaging with the interface (controls, visuals, sound), so I would not put chess there.

The counter-example would be the &quot;feel&quot; of owning a high-end chess board, where the tactile experience becomes important after all.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Dan &#8220;Feel&#8221; is not about feelings in general, but about the tactile feeling of engaging with the interface (controls, visuals, sound), so I would not put chess there.</p>
<p>The counter-example would be the &#8220;feel&#8221; of owning a high-end chess board, where the tactile experience becomes important after all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Dan Milward		</title>
		<link>https://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/2014/11/12/the-four-theories-of-fun/comment-page-1/#comment-105057</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dan Milward]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Dec 2014 07:44:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.jesperjuul.net/ludologist/?p=2005#comment-105057</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Interesting! 

Rules, Favourite example: Streetfighter
Fiction, Favourite example:  Quest for Glory
Social, Favourite example: Chess
Feel, Favourite example: Streetfighter, Quest for Glory, and Chess

Do you think that &quot;feel&quot; is something in all games whether you like the feelings or not though. I agree that Super Mario is a good feeling game but all games make one feel something?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting! </p>
<p>Rules, Favourite example: Streetfighter<br />
Fiction, Favourite example:  Quest for Glory<br />
Social, Favourite example: Chess<br />
Feel, Favourite example: Streetfighter, Quest for Glory, and Chess</p>
<p>Do you think that &#8220;feel&#8221; is something in all games whether you like the feelings or not though. I agree that Super Mario is a good feeling game but all games make one feel something?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
