I recently came across a paper by Dan Pinchbeck called Ludic Reality: a construct for analysing meaning-mapping and epistemology in play which is presumably part of the author's PhD in which he cites Dovey and Kennedy's discussion of Turner in their book Game Cultures:
"His concept of rituals as liminal spaces, that is, transformative spaces that suspend normal social rules, constraints and affordances, has been co-opted by games theorists to describe the extra-daily structure of play (Dovey & Kennedy 2006, Flynt 2006, Pinchbeck 2006). Dovey & Kennedy draw attention to Turner’s crucial distinction between the liminal and the liminoid, that “the liminoid... is a commodity, which one selects and pays for [rather] than the liminal, which elicits loyalty and is bound up with one’s membership or desired membership in some highly corporate group. One works at the liminal, one plays with the liminoid.” (Turner 1982: 55)."
p. 5
Here are my notes from the whole paper:
Pinchbeck proposes an approach to analysing FPS game content based on the phenomenological embodiment of player in the transitional object of a 'Ludic Reality'. He proposes a way to reconcile Juul's "real rules and fictional worlds" by viewing the 'reality' of the game to be constituted by the relation between a schema or mental set of rules for being-in-the-world and the player's embodied, meaningful experiences in that world. Furthermore, these rules become progressively more constraining as the player advances through the narrative of the game, thereby focussing the sense of immersion.
Four "homodiegetic devices" are presented as examples of ways in which the ludic reality is maintained.
1) Drama is presented as a cybernetic process of reduction to control temporal flow and focus player attention.
2) The world of the game is considered as structural limitation of affordances available to the player, as a liminoid domain in which schema from actual reality can be rewritten, and also as a space by which the temporal dimension becomes meaningful though virtually physical space.
3) NPCs or AI agents are devices which construct the impression of a world with fewer limitations for the player than really exist. Actions which the player expects as reasonable but which are unavailable are delegated to NPC agents. They additionally serve to position the player inside a world with the illusion of temporal and dramatic dimensions existing beyond the extent of the player's sessions.
4) Player avatars themselves often exhibit cyborg or other unusual qualities which function to limit what we might expect to be reasonable actions for them to take. Furthermore they are often embroiled in mysterious scenarios which force the player to construct meaning local to the ludic reality, thus putting further constraints on what they might consider reasonable. This reduction in affordances results in a vessel into which the player can project.
Each of these devices operates within the system of the game rather as content, but also serves to structure the form of the player's experiences.
Reference:
Pinchbeck, Dan.
Ludic Reality: a construct for analysing meaning-mapping and epistemology in play. (University of Portsmouth: 13 February 2007)
<http://www.danpinchbeck.co.uk/ludicreality.pdf> (Last accessed 14th June 2007)
