On the Architecture of Game Science

Background. Game studies show a high diversity of university departments that contribute to the field. They offer a cross-disciplinary image that includes a range of professions. Game science is responsive to the needs of government institutions, to industry, and to individuals vis-à-vis institutions. That pragmatism makes the field issue-oriented, representing a post-normal science approach in a context of political pressure, values in dispute, high decision stakes and high epistemological and ethical systems uncertainties. The body of knowledge is not yet in the form of a cohesive structure: a game science paradigm. Thematic diversity, theoretical and methodological pluralism, and a strong focus on the instrumentality of games are weak credentials within academia, arranged according to analytical science (normal science) principles. Moreover, within the conventional academic settings, game science faces serious limitations, due to the fragmented positioning in different departments and faculties (Klabbers, 2009). Aim. A comprehensive and coherent view on game science is needed that connects three levels of inquiry: the philosophy of science level, the science level, and the application level. Advances in physics have impacted on the philosophy of science, on modernism and postmodernism, and as a consequence, on game science. Being able to understand the current position of game science requires that we are aware of its scientific roots, and future options for research and professional practice. Method. Literature review with emphasis on theories of knowledge (epistemology) that focuses on game architecture, and the player’s experience. The analytical science approach to game science is insufficient to deal adequately with key questions societies nowadays are facing. Therefore, in addition to the analytical science, the design science approach to gaming is needed to be able to address issues that apply to various zones of practice, and related questions about social problem solving. Results. A coordinating frame-of-reference – a game science paradigm – is presented, independent of the instrumentality of games - taking into account the great variety of forms of play, and gaming applications. Conclusion. To advance game science, well-equipped game centers are needed that cover the three levels of inquiry: the philosophy of science level, the science level, and the application level. They should pursue a long term coherent research and educational policy, in line with the natural sciences tradition, offering both continuity and innovation.

[1]  C. P. Goodman,et al.  The Tacit Dimension , 2003 .

[2]  Richard N. Landers,et al.  Gamification Science, Its History and Future: Definitions and a Research Agenda , 2018 .

[3]  Victoria Hoban,et al.  The Reflective Practitioner , 2013 .

[4]  Jan H. G. Klabbers,et al.  The magic circle : principles of gaming & simulation , 2006 .

[5]  K. Sweeney.  Personal knowledge , 2006, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[6]  R. Stadsklev.  Handbook of simulation gaming in social education , 1974 .

[7]  Paul Bourgine,et al.  Autopoiesis and Cognition , 2004, Artificial Life.

[8]  B. Wynne.  Uncertainty and environmental learning: reconceiving science and policy in the preventive paradigm. , 1992 .

[9]  C. Achilles,et al.  Evaluation: A Systematic Approach , 1980 .

[10]  Jan H. G. Klabbers,et al.  Guest Editorial: Artifact assessment versus theory testing , 2006 .

[11]  E. Rowland.  Theory of Games and Economic Behavior , 1946, Nature.

[12]  J.L.A. Geurts,et al.  Gaming/Simulation for policy development and organizational change , 1998 .

[13]  Jens Rasmussen,et al.  Cognitive Systems Engineering , 2022 .

[14]  Jerry H. Gill,et al.  The Tacit Mode: Michael Polanyi's Postmodern Philosophy , 2000 .

[15]  J. Moran-Ellis.  The ambiguity of play , 1998 .

[16]  Christopher Alexander.  Notes on the Synthesis of Form , 1964 .

[17]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Sciences of the Artificial , 1970 .

[18]  Michael E. Atwood,et al.  How does the design community think about design? , 2002, DIS '02.

[19]  Pelle Ehn,et al.  Work-oriented design of computer artifacts , 1989 .

[20]  David L. Goodstein,et al.  Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman, James Gleick. 1992. Pantheon Press, New York, NY. 532 pages. ISBN: 0-679-40836-3. $27.50 , 1994 .

[21]  Abdulmotaleb El-Saddik,et al.  Serious games , 2011, ACM Multimedia.

[22]  Karl R. Popper,et al.  Epistemology Without a Knowing Subject , 1968 .

[23]  W. Thorngate.  "In General" vs. "It Depends": Some Comments of the Gergen-Schlenker Debate , 1976 .

[24]  Ian Hacking,et al.  Inaugural lecture: Chair of Philosophy and History of Scientific Concepts at the Collège de France, 16 January 2001 , 2002 .

[25]  Laura Blasi,et al.  Increasing the transfer of simulation technology from R&D into school settings: An approach to evaluation from overarching vision to individual artifact in education , 2006 .

[26]  D. J. A. Kalff.  Strategic decision making and simulation in Shell , 1989 .

[27]  John Chris Jones,et al.  Design Methods: Seeds of Human Futures , 1981 .

[28]  J. Huizinga.  Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture , 1938 .

[29]  H. W. Rittel,et al.  Second-generation design methods , 1984 .

[30]  K. J. Vicente,et al.  Cognitive Work Analysis: Toward Safe, Productive, and Healthy Computer-Based Work , 1999 .

[31]  C. Frank,et al.  An Uncertain Life: Uncertainty: The Life and Science of Werner Heisenberg , 1994 .

[32]  Madhabi Chatterji,et al.  Evidence on “What Works”: An Argument for Extended-Term Mixed-Method (ETMM) Evaluation Designs , 2004 .

[33]  N. Balazs,et al.  Schr̈odinger: Life and Thought , 1989 .

[34]  D. Schoen.  Educating the reflective practitioner , 1987 .

[35]  John P. van Gigch.  Comparing the epistemologies of scientific disciplines in two distinct domains: modern physics versus social sciences. I: The epistemology and knowledge characteristics of the physical sciences , 2002 .

[36]  A. Collins,et al.  Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning , 1989 .

[37]  A. Giddens.  NEW RULES OF SOCIOLOGICAL METHOD , 1980 .

[38]  K. Weick.  The social psychology of organizing , 1969 .

[39]  Emma Cohen,et al.  Anthropology of knowledge , 2010 .

[40]  S. Funtowicz,et al.  Science for the PostNormal Age , 2001 .

[41]  G. Mann.  The Quark and the Jaguar: adventures in the simple and the complex , 1994 .