A Proposed Definition of “Game”

What is a game?

Famous game board.

There have been many different definitions and attempts at defining the term “game” but I think one of the most appropriate definitions for application in an instructional setting was put forth by Katie Salen and Eric Zimmerman in their book Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals

The only change I have made is I replaced their word “conflict” for the word “challenge.” So the definition of a game is “a system in which players engage in an artificial challenge, defined by rules, that result n a quantifiable outcome.” The original definition appears on page 80 in the book.
Let’s look at each element in the definition:


  • System-A set of interconnected elements occur within the “space” of the game. A score is related to behaviors and activities which are, in turn, related strategy or movement of pieces. So the idea that each part of a game impacts and is integrated with other parts of the game.
  • Players-Games involve a person interacting with the content of the game as in a first person shooter or with other players as in multiple player games.
  • Artificial-Games typically involve an abstraction of reality and typically take place in a narrowly defined “game space.” This means that traditionally games and “reality” are not mixed, although, I could argue that “gamification” is bringing games from the artificial to the tangible and to reality.
  • Challenge-Games challenge players to achieve goals and outcomes that are not simple or straight forward. For example, even a simple game like tic-tac-toe is a challenge when you play against another person who is of equal knowledge of the game. A game becomes boring when the challenge no longer exists. But even the challenge involved with the card game of solitaire provides enough challenge that the player continues to try to achieve the winning state within the game.
  • Rules-The rules of the game define the game. They are the structure that allows the artificial construct to occur. They define the sequence of play, the winning state and what is “fair” and what is not “fair” within the confines of the game environment.
  • Quantifiable Outcome-Games are designed in a manner that winning is concrete. The result of a well designed game is that the player knows whether or not she has won. Their is no ambiguity about winning. Their is a score, level or winning state (checkmate) that defines a clear outcome. This is one element that distinguishes games from a state of “play” which has no defined end state. This is also one of the traits that make games ideal for instructional settings.

Posted in: Content Guide, Games, Games video games, learning design

Leave a Comment (2) ↓

2 Comments

  1. karlkapp April 26, 2011

    I don’t totally disagree, we speak also of the “game” of life or “gaming” a system…but Stephen, if we don’t attempt to define terms and terminology then how can we be assured that we are speaking of the same thing…that our perceptions are similar or that we have any common ground? While it might be a fool’s errand, I think that some thought into the definition is necessary. Some attempt is needed. To paraphrase Socrates, an unexamined term is not worth speaking…

  2. Stephen Downes April 25, 2011

    Trying to define ‘game’ is a mug’s game. None of the conditions you stipulate is necessary; none of them is sufficient. And many games involve none of the conditions. You are thinking of things formal and structured, but in so doing leave out scrub baseball, word games and punning, making up stories (as on ‘Date Night’), ‘edge games’ and other challenges to order, playing dressup, and more, so many more.

    Reading Wittgenstein on the definition of games (cf. ‘language games’) will cure you forever of the desire to define ‘game’ – and may force you to rethink how words obtain their meaning altogether.

Karl Kapp
  • About
  • Contact