One game i consider to be a ludus is Resident Evil. Although you appear to have the freedom to explore the map once you have fought your way through and defeated all of your enemies there is nothing left to do in that area except move on to the next level, forcing you to carry on with the game. The map isn't unlimited as you are restricted within areas and many objects you cant interact with, even if you think they could be useful within the game. Also if you play the game strategically by killing all the zombies the game will still end the same way even if you rush through all the levels. You are given clear objectives throughout and you can only proceed to the next level after you have completed each one.
One game i consider to be paidea is Harvest Moon. In the game you are given a farm and are left freely to go about your life dealing with all the issues that farmers face. You can choose which towns people you interact with, the animals you have, the crops you grow, the buildings you have built etc .... There is no way you can win or lose the game, you really just play it for the fun of it.
Although many games do fit into these categories i believe they cannot be 100% and one of the other. When i play a paidea game such as the Sims, i find i can get bored of it a lot quicker as i don't have any objectives other than the ones i create and that can be a tedious. However when i play a ludus game such as Halo i really enjoy working within boundaries and towards goals. In my opinion games that fall into the ludus category can be played for pleasure and games that fall into the paidea category, once the novelty wears off, aren't always that fun.
Reference:
Newman, J., 2004. Videogames, London: Routledge.
No comments:
Post a Comment