Requerimientos de Normas Internacionales de Conexión de Generación Eólica. 18

Gaming unplugged is all about social interaction.— R509

At the beginning of this chapter I cited designer Alan Moon’s description of board games wherein he claims that games are not “about rolling dice and

moving your piece around a track” (in Aleknevicus, 2002). As a professional game designer, it is particularly telling that Moon dismisses the idea that board games are about the mechanics that define play. Instead, claims Moon, “Gaming is about interactions, decisions and social skills.” The survey responses that I have summarized here go a long way to confirming Moon’s observation.

Of the pleasures derived from games specifically, it is the opportunities for decision- making and interaction that players value most highly. Elements such as immersion and narrative that have such a significant place in the study of video games are considered comparatively unimportant when set against the possibilities for meaningful interaction with other players within the con- text of the game. The importance of this decision- making as intellectual chal- lenge, and the dependency upon interaction with other players, is highlighted by a number of player responses:

I derive most pleasure from working out my brain, in a socially interactive set- ting. I can do either (work out my brain or interact socially) on its own, but there is a synergy between the two that gets my whole brain abuzz that isn’t really achieved by much else [R7].

I prefer involved games in a social environment. I prefer a social environment for play, however don’t really enjoy “party games.” I like involved games, where you have to think about the game, but lots of people who play these can get too serious and don’t have a chat while in the game. Any game that can combine social environment but be fairly involved works well for me [R195].

I enjoy challenging games that force me to use different strategies. I also like to be able to experience these games with others in a fun, social atmosphere [R305].

I love to play for the play and for the social interaction between friends that a boardgame originates. It’s much better than playing a console or computer game, and it really exercises your intellect and imagination. It’s a good intel- lectual exercise that I love to do and is not rivaled by anything [R672].

Above all other constitutive elements of particular games, respondents valued the pleasure of the game encounter and the spontaneous interaction brought about by participation in the social event of the game. When asked to describe in their own words what it is that they enjoy about play, the pro- portion of respondents who cite the social interaction afforded by face- to- face gaming is far higher than those citing any in- game element:

Social interaction is very important, as the entire reason I play is to get with a group of people to have fun. If I wanted to do something by myself I’d do something else [R13].

I play games as a way to relax, spend time with family and friends. These are social games [R143].

I enjoy the social interaction. I have a regular weekly game group that will try any game. We can experiment struggling through something new, or play an old favorite, it doesn’t matter, the conversations, in- jokes, and fun remain no matter what. If the social interaction wasn’t there, there is not a point to play [R164].

What I like most about playing boardgames is that it gives me a good social outlet. It’s “play,” with all that suggests, and it allows social interaction over a particular event [R608].

I think I play games at this point more as a social medium than to find a specific in- game experience. The eurogame model of design has allowed for people to get together for an evening of play, with some chit chat and snacks, to enjoy the games and interacting with each other. I wouldn’t characterize the games themselves as the most enjoyable for what I want out of a game, as they tend to be a little too abstract and themeless; however, I bend to the reality of time and other obligations and get what I can out of the games that work for the group [R361].

The comments listed here are just a few of the many that emphasized the social experience of play as paramount in the enjoyment of board games gen- erally. Such responses indicate why enthusiasts have a tendency to evangelize the hobby — it is not so much the games that are being evangelized, but the sense of sociability and security that must necessarily accompany them. That is, it is not the game, but the game encounter, that provides this. The par- ticular form of semi- structured social interaction that spontaneously occurs through co- located play provides an intrinsic motivation to engage with the hobby.

The importance placed by players on social interaction stands in contrast to a number of the pleasures that were earlier identified as being associated with video game play. While Csikszentmihalyi’s model of flow may be appli- cable to the focused play of a game, as Sweetster and Wyeth note, social inter- action often serves to disrupt immersion and thus the flow state (2005). Koster’s suggestion that cognitive problem solving provides the fun in games is reflected here to a degree; yet when Koster describes the “social fun” that can be derived from play, it is framed largely in terms of schadenfreude,23_a

focus on achievement that was largely absent in responses. Lazzaro too men- tions schadenfreude, although her estimation of social pleasure is closer to the findings of this survey, as she discusses the camaraderie that is brought about by shared goals. Finally, Hunicke et al.’s notion of fellowship, which sees games as a “social framework,” falls closest to the types of pleasure described by participants in emphasizing the playful social interaction engendered by

games as a principal source of enjoyment. As Goffman notes, “While it is as players that we can win a play, it is only as participants [in the gaming encounter] that we can get fun out of this winning” (1961, p. 37).

Despite the emphasis I have placed here upon the social aspect of gaming, it must nevertheless be acknowledged that the specific avenue for interaction remains the games that are played — in this case eurogames. The interaction that occurs through play is situated within a specific semi- structured envi- ronment that emphasizes competition. While the design of eurogames tends towards indirect or asynchronous interaction, the fact remains that the intel- lectual challenge to which players attribute so much of their enjoyment is focused specifically upon engaging in competition with others. Thus, as much as the formal game structure prescribes the pursuit of goals, players are simul- taneously called upon to engage in competition while at the same time main- taining the sociability that is at the heart of the encounter.

Yet as Goffman notes, the participant in a gaming encounter is far removed from an ideally rational player whose focus lies purely on the game (1961, p. 38). Although the game rules, both explicit and implicit, describe a structure for interaction that constitutes a world apart from the real, “The character and stability of this world is intimately related to its subjective rela- tionship to the wider one” (p. 80). As players are caught up in spontaneous involvement with the gaming encounter, the world apart that is ideally created by participation in the game cannot be entirely separated from the context in which the encounter occurs. As has been seen through these survey responses, to set aside this spontaneous sociability would be to ignore what makes the activity so enjoyable. Thus the question arises as to how it is that players are able to maintain the competitive drive mandated by the game within such an environment. It is to these ostensibly incompatible motivations — competition and sociability — that I turn my attention in the next chapter.

8

Goals and Outcomes