![]() ![]() ![]() 97).Īs the definition of games is often intertwined with the notion of the magic circle, I must first look to the definition of games themselves. Another essential element of the magic circle is a sta“formalized interactions” from its participants (Salen & Zimmerman, 2004, p. The meanings and consequences of the game are limited to the game, and this gives the players space and time to experiment and enjoy (Zimmerman, 2009). The magic circle is a state where the player can experiment, try and fail without penalty, and becomes “an enchanted zone in which, in the end, you are confident that no harm can come” (Salen & Zimmerman, 2004, p. Caillois (2001) suggests that the game space can be understood as a “restricted, closed, protected universe: a pure space.” (p. Within the magic circle, players engage in safe, consequence-free, no-strings-attached, unproductive conflict, problem-solving, resource collection and/or co-operation (Zimmerman, 2009, p. Research Contextįor Zimmerman (2009), the magic circle is separate from the ordinary world, a game allows players to view a “miniature artificial system” to allow players to escape, for even a short time, reality’s serious consequences (p. While the magic circle provided an important analytical abstraction and jumping off point for scholars, game scholarship has matured in its understanding of the affordances and allure of games in contemporary life. I will demonstrate, the uncomplicated, pure space of the magic circle is a reductive conceit. There is, however, a splicing of the game space and real life, a complex hybridization of games and reality. As such, I will argue that the magic circle is a luxury that many, particularly marginalized people, simply can not afford. I will argue that the interests, desires, complications and consequences of the real world always creep into the game space, whether the player is a hardcore or casual gamer. A player’s membership in an in- or outgroup, their relative level of games literacy, their race, gender, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status will determine their level of access gaming and its many affordances. Instead, it is the intersectionalities of the game players themselves that determine their level of immersive and free play. I will demonstrate this “hallowed ground” as defined by Huizinga (1955), and purportedly afforded by game play, is an oversimplification (p. Drawing specifically on the research of Consalvo (2009), Juul (2010), Montola, Stenros and Waern (2009), and Keogh (2018), I will examine the concept of the magic circle in game studies. Games create spaces for players to “separate from ordinary life” and experience problem-solving outside of the constraints of reality (Salen and Zimmerman, 2004, p. Salen and Zimmerman (2004) have extrapolated from the Huizinga (1955) conception of a game’s “ritual space”, and evolved the idea of the magic circle as a “protective frame which stands between the player and the ‘real’ world and its problems” (p. The concept has been used by early and contemporary games scholars as a way of explaining the allure, uncommon pleasure and immersion experienced by players of analog, digital and pervasive games. The magic circle has been described as a sacred space that separates play from the seriousness of ordinary life (Salen & Zimmerman, 2004 Huizinga, 1955). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |