Games and End States

[WhiteShark]

Inspired by the conversation in IRC. You must post to vote. My answer below.

► Show Spoiler

I think you need both a victory state and a loss state. @Lutte argued that arcade games with no internal victory state count as games because you can compare score with other players, but to me that just proves the necessity of victory states: the players had to add an external victory state to make it into a game.

[maidenhaver]

Games have turns, and winners and losers.

[Lutte]

The players didn't "add an external victory state" the scores were part of the games and intended as a competition between humans.

[rusty_shackleford]

Getting the high score in an arcade game was the win state, someone else defeating you or not getting that score was the loss state. Yes, arcade scores were serious business. Developers knew this, it wasn't something added by players.

No, Kenshi is not a game.

[WhiteShark]

The players didn't "add an external victory state" the scores were part of the games and intended as a competition between humans.

So if you were the only one who played a given arcade game, would it still be a game?

[Segata]

"is fun to play"

[WhiteShark]

"is fun to play"

That can't be the criterion. There are games that are zero fun to play but still have rules, winners, and losers. There are activities that are fun to do but have neither rules, winners, nor losers.

[Acrux]

I lean heavily toward must have victory/loss states, but I think there are some games with victory states but without "permanent" loss states, (Maniac Mansion, Bard's Tale, I think Darkest Dungeon, arguably farming games like Harvest Moon or Stardew Valley).

[WhiteShark]

I lean heavily toward must have victory/loss states, but I think there are some games with victory states but without "permanent" loss states, (Maniac Mansion, Bard's Tale, I think Darkest Dungeon, arguably farming games like Harvest Moon or Stardew Valley).

Thinking about this, I would further add that any 'game' that can be completed through sheer time investment—that is to say, a game wherein any and all skill thresholds can be bypassed through mindless grinding etc.—isn't really a game at all. IIRC you are correct about Darkest Dungeon but I believe it also requires some player skill and forethought to not get beaten back to square one repeatedly, so it passes this test.

[MadPreacher]

Arcade games are games. They're designed differently than what came later in the home. The entire goal of the game was to suck your quarters while seeing how far you could get. The high score is the end state and seeing your initials immortalized for a time on the screen.

It's hilarious that a Zoomer thinks he knows what a game is and forgets the entire history of video games. Arcade games came first then the consoles/computer games.

I'm not counting Space War or other mainframe games that existed in the university setting because they were limited in reach to those that could actually access the mainframe. Something that you had to reserve days or months in advance for only a few hours of access.

[The_Mask]

That should be a slur: suck my quarters, *****!

[maidenhaver]

Most arcade games even tell you when you suck and lose.

[Acrux]

Most arcade games even tell you when you suck and lose.

[maidenhaver]

Gamer culture grew out of arcades, woke cultre grew out of home console safe space bibyeo gayms.

[J1M]

List is wrong. The requirement for something to graduate from activity to game is challenge.

[WhiteShark]

List is wrong. The requirement for something to graduate from activity to game is challenge.

I agree that challenge is another necessary element, but this poll was specifically about end states. A challenging activity with no winners and losers isn't a game.

[General Reign]

The first time I played Fallout I ended up skipping time too much and losing the entire game. I like that.

[Suissant]

Most arcade games even tell you when you suck and lose.

I liked the one where Haggar dies of a heart attack.