Abstract

Games are created through the act of gameplay, which is contingent on player acts. However, to understand gameplay, we must also investigate contexts, justifications, and limitations. Cheating can be an excellent path into studying the gameplay situation, because it lays bare player’s frustrations and limitations. It points to ludic hopes and activities, and it causes us to question our values, our ethics. In comparison, the concept of the magic circle seems static and overly formalist. Structures may be necessary to begin gameplay, but we cannot stop at structures as a way of understanding the gameplay experience. Because of that, we cannot say that games are magic circles, where the ordinary rules of life do not apply. Of course they apply, but in addition to, in competition with, other rules and in relation to multiple contexts, across varying cultures, and into different groups, legal situations, and homes.

Keywords

CheatingMAGIC (telescope)Computer scienceRelation (database)EpistemologySociologyAestheticsSocial psychologyPsychologyArtPhilosophy

Affiliated Institutions

Related Publications

Computer graphics: principles and practice

1. Introduction. Image Processing as Picture Analysis. The Advantages of Interactive Graphics. Representative Uses of Computer Graphics. Classification of Applications. Developm...

2013 Choice Reviews Online 4665 citations

Publication Info

Year
2009
Type
article
Volume
4
Issue
4
Pages
408-417
Citations
387
Access
Closed

External Links

Social Impact

Altmetric
PlumX Metrics

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

387
OpenAlex

Cite This

Mia Consalvo (2009). There is No Magic Circle. Games and Culture , 4 (4) , 408-417. https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412009343575

Identifiers

DOI
10.1177/1555412009343575