I developed the following
schema to help me think more accurately about "gaming and
simulation" activities. The basis of this classification system
is three kinds of very different but related activities: simulations,
games, contests.
If we combine these three activities into all possible combinations,
we get the following categories:
- Simulations
- Games
- Contests
- Simulation Contests
- Simulation Games
- Game Contest
- Simulation Games Contests
These seven categories can account for most of the activities
that pass for "simulation" type activities. Let's examine
them one by one.
Pure Simulations (Non-contest, Non-game)
Much of the confusion around the word "simulation" occurs
because we want to differentiate between the noun "simulation"
and the infinitive "to simulate." In the simulation gaming
field, a simulation is something more than that which simulates;
the term "simulation" has been reserved for the modeling or
simulation of systems which can be represented in part by
mathematical or quasi-mathematical formulas.
In the taxonomy proposed here, however, that distinction
is not recognized. A simulation, rather, is anything that
simulates or models reality. Listing representative examples
of "simulations" from the very abstract to the concrete, we
arrive at a surprisingly varied array of activities:
- Mathematical formulas
- Models of:
- Physical systems
- Military, industrial, and economic systems
- Social systems
- Role Playing
- Film Making
- Literature
- Painting
- Sculpture
The first four items unquestionably qualify as simulations
in the traditional sense. Role-playing, however, is generally
regarded as a lower class cousin, and film making, art, and
sculpture as members of unrelated though honorable families.
They are included here as "simulations" because:
1. The Sculptor, artist, filmmaker,
and writer, are, in fact, simulating reality much of the
time.
2. Recognition of the similarity of the artist-as-simulator
and the engineer/social/scientist educator-as-simulator
may serve as a means of bridging the communication gap between
C.P. Snow's two cultures: the technocrats and the artists.
3. It is possible that we can learn something about modeling
form the artists. After all, they have been wrestling with
such questions as validity, the relationship of the model
to reality (abstract vs. representational art), the role
of criticism, the effect of the medium on the message, and
a myriad of mutual problems for several centuries.
Contest (Non-Simulation, Non-Game)
The essence of this kind of activity is competition. The
competition involving humans falls into four categories:
• man against man (man
is used in the generic sense to include women),
• man against himself,
• man against nature,
• man against animal.
Examples of contests are: competition between businesses
(man against man); a person trying to overcome an addiction
(man against him or herself); a person climbing mount Everest
(man against nature); a tiger hunt (man against animal); Sometimes
there are formal rules and sometimes the only rules are those
determined by the act of trying to win.
The contest and the game are frequently confused. Many contests
are games but not all; neither are all games contests. The
difference between the contest and the contest-game is discussed
below under the Game-Contest category.
Games (Non-Contest, Non-simulation)
Bernard Suits, in the American Philosophy of Science (XXXIV,
1967, 148-156) has in my opinion, done an excellent job
of
defining a game. He says several things in the article but
the three most critical ideas are: 1, a game is an activity
in which people agree to abide by a set of conditions (not
necessarily rules) in order to create a desired state or
end
and 2,the conditions that the participants agree to abide
by may well involve inefficient ways of accomplishing the
desired state or ends. For example, rather than getting a
golf ball in the cup by the most efficient method, which
is
probably walking over and placing it in the cup, we agree
to get it into the cup by hitting it with a metal stick
with
a small flattened surface on the end. We agree to run around
a track to cross a line instead of running directly toward
the line. We knock down bowling pins by rolling a heavy ball
down a narrow wooden lane instead of just walking over and
knocking them down. The notion of inefficiency is extremely
important in the definition of a game. Not that every game
has to use inefficient means to accomplish its end but that
inefficiency is a meaningful possibility. Inefficiencies
may
occur in a pure contest, but it's not a desired element.
A third important idea is that the condition the game is
created to produce may be something other than winning, such
as body movement, laughter, creativity, embarrassment, etc.
My children play a game called "Truth or Dare": you ask another
person a question and he must either tell the truth or do
some daring or ridiculous stunt; either way it produces laughter
and fun, no competition is involved. The point is that many
people want to limit games to the notion of competition, but
games have been created for many other reasons. Opie, in Children's
Games in Street and Playground (1969), points out that when
children are confined to school grounds, they tend to play
competitive games with winners and losers (what we are calling
here "contest games"). However, when they are not confined
by the school boundaries and can roam at will on streets and
in the fields, they tend to play non-competitive games, which
create laughter, physical exercise, and body contact.
Examples of non-competition, non-simulation games include
many of the encounter games where the purpose is to create
an open climate of trust, many of the theater games by Viola
Spolin. Much of what we generally classify as "play" are non-competitive,
non-simulation games.
Contest Game (Non-Simulation)
Many people limit their definition of games to this category.
However, this is only one type of game - a game in which the
conditions one agrees to abide by are designed to create competition
and winning. Educational game publishers receive many games
to be considered for publication. Most are straight role-playing
situations that generally are not published because almost
any teacher can build them with very little effort. The second
most popular type of game received is contests, which are
frequently called simulations incorrectly by their authors.
For example, there is a game that purports to be a simulation
of the Electoral College. What it consists of is a series
of questions which participants answer and if they answer
correctly, they are given so many electoral votes. The process
of the game is in no way simulating the process of the Electoral
College. It is a game contest pure and simple.
Sports, gambling, mathematical games, and word games are
all examples of non-simulation contest games. The difference
between a pure contest and a contest game is the relative
importance of the conditions under which the contest is
conducted.
In a pure contest, inefficiency in the rules is not a possible
alternative. In other words, in the pure contest whenever
possible the rules or conditions of the contest must be related
to what is won as efficiently as possible. For example,
a businessperson
would not consider setting up a business next to his competition
in order to make the competition keener and more enjoyable.
He might move next to his competitor for other reasons, but
not to create more competition.
Another way to differentiate between the game contest and
pure contest is to realize that in the pure contest the
participants
will always be seeking ways to reduce the competitive aspects
of the situation and at the same time increase their chances
of winning, regardless of whether it makes the competition
fairer.
Still a third way is to realize that in the pure contest
the participant may want to impose rules or conditions which
would give him an unfair advantage over his opponent, whereas
in a game contest a participant would not seek to establish
such rules since that would destroy the purpose of the game.
Non-Contest Simulation Games
In this category are those activities that are games designed
to simulate reality but are not contests. For example, that
harmless activity known as "Ring Around the Rosies" is really
a non-contest simulation game having to do with the Black
Plague. The ring around the rosies is a pustule; the pocketful
of posies refers to the pus; "ashes, ashes" means that the
pustule goes black; and "All fall down" means that everyone
dies. The child's game of "Store" and "Assemblyline" are
other examples.
Non-Game Simulation Contest
In this category are activities, which are contests and simulations
but not games. For instance, suppose an industrial engineer
were interested in determining which of two methods for warehousing
a product was most efficient. He might simulate a contest
between the two methods to determine which one to adopt.
Simulation Game Contest
This is the category in which most of the experiences that
are generally called "Educational Simulations" and "Simulation
Games" belong — for example, SIMSOC, StarPower, INS,
etc. These experiences are contests because they are concerned
with the allocation of scarce resources such as money, influence,
time, space, etc. They are simulations because they model
reality
and games because (1) the participants agree to abide by
a set of conditions in order to create an experience,
and (2)
inefficient means such as communicating by written message
rather than through talking are frequently incorporated
into
the rules.
Summary
There are three ideas in this article that are especially
important to me as a designer of "simulations". One is the
notion that the activity of artists, sculptors, filmmakers
and the designer of educational simulations are engaged in
essentially the same activity. This means that the simulation
designer may gain insights into the designing process from
studying these artists and how they work. The second notion
is Suit's definition of a game. I heartily recommend his article
on games for anyone interested in the topic. Third, is the
recognition that games are not always designed to create competition;
they are often designed to create such conditions as laughter,
physical contact, and trust.
---
Thanks to Ted Rogers of The Hawaii Department of Education
for this piece of information.
Most of this article originally appeared in the book:
Gaming-Simulations: Rationale, Design and Applications by
Cathy S. Greenblat and Richard D. Duke. Sage Publications,
1975
