A Theory of Fun

[gusl]

A Theory of Fun (via crasch), written by a video game designer, seems to be very interesting. Has anyone read it?

This link was in response to this interesting comment by fishsupreme:

Currently I am trying to figure out why playing World of Warcraft is more fun than going to work. Sure, it's obvious to everyone that games are more fun than working... but why? What is the essential "gameness" of games vs. the essential "workness" of work that makes them different? Is there some way to tap into this key difference to find a pursuit that is productive and income-generating but lacks "workness" while possessing "gameness"? Some of the obvious things turn out to be red herrings (games can be repetitive, non-goal-driven, and involve following orders, for instance, yet remain fun.)

Can we make work more like play, and still be productive? Or are feelings of drudgery and boredom inseparably linked to the nature of obligation, to the feeling that one has no choice?

Comments

[ernunnos.livejournal.com]

Most MMORPGs and RTS games start feeling like work to me in very short order. So I don't think that's a very good goal, at least not for me.

[smandal.livejournal.com]

Well, often work is fun, and I'd rather be doing that than play games.

However, when work isn't fun, it's because it forces me to be too extroverted. Then, I can tailor my game selection to taste :)

[darius.livejournal.com]

I liked the book but didn't think it was as amazing as some other commenters. E.g. people have compared it to Scott McCloud's Understanding Comics, but a proper analog of that would be a game about games as a medium, not a book. It would also go deeper.

About work, Koster's basic thesis is that fun = learning. He'd like to see more games about learning more than running around mazes, etc.