The dialectic of freedom in the game space
https://doi.org/10.26907/2079-5912.2023.6.138-145
Abstract
By the dialectic of freedom, we understand the internal contradiction and interaction of opposite terms describing the game reality. At first glance, play and freedom are two incompatible phenomena. A game is a form of activity in which the subject adheres to the rules to achieve a goal. Freedom is a category that defines the borderline status of things. We will put forward the opposite thesis: it is within the limits of the game space that free will is formed.
This issue is becoming relevant due to the growing popularity of the field of video games and game design. With the development of digital technologies, people began to spend more time in virtual space, and relax and chat in video games. A video game is a digital product in which anthropological qualities are clearly expressed – in the game, the goal and actions are built around the player and for the player.
Since the game is a cultural creation of man, it cannot do without the participation of freedom. Freedom is a person's spiritual footprint in the game space. Moreover, the idea of freedom is already embedded in the essence of the game: a person's natural desire to overcome boundaries and himself. Can a game space reflect genuine human freedom?
About the Author
A. I. BabanovaRussian Federation
Babanova Anzhelika Igorevna, postgraduate student, Institute of Social and Philosophical Sciences and Mass Communications, Department of General Philosophy
Kazan, 420008
References
1. Grip T. (2014). 4-layers, A Narrative Design Approach. In the Games of Madness: Official blog of Frictional Games. https://frictionalgames.blogspot.com/2014/04/4-layers-narrative-design-approach.html. (In Russ.)
2. Swink S. (2009). Game feel and the perception of a human. In: Game feel: a game designer’s guide to virtual sensation. 2009;(2):35-60). Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. (In Russ.)
3. Yoshida H. (2014). Game as a Dialectic between Rule and Freedom. Ritsumeikan Studies in Language and Culture. 2014; (26(10)): 19-27. (In Russ.)
4. Nitsche M., McBride P. (2018). A Character in your Hand. Puppetry to inform Game Controls. Conference: Digital Games Research Association (DiGRA) 2018:1-16. (In Russ.)
5. Castronova E. (2020). Life Is A Game: What Game Design Says about the Human Condition. Bloomsburt. (In Russ.)
6. Burgun, K. (2013). The concept of game. In: Game design theory: a new philosophy for understanding games (1, pp. 1-17). Taylor&Francis Group. (In Russ.)
7. Granic I., Engels R., Lobel A. (2013). The Benefits of Playing Video Games. American Psychologist, 69(1). doi: 10.1037/a0034857. (In Russ.)
8. Erol A. (2020). Freedom and Control in the Digital Age. Human Affairs, 10. doi: 10.1515/humaff-2020-0050 (In Russ.)
9. Mazalek A., Chandrasekharan S., Nitsche M., Welsh T., Clifton P., Quitmeyer A., Peer F. (2010). I’m in the game: embodied puppet interface improves avatar control. Publication History, 1. doi: 10.1145/1935701.1935727(In Russ.)
10. Mayra F. (2009). Getting into the Game:Doing Multi-Disciplinary Game Studies. In:Perron B., Wolf M (eds.), The Video GameTheory Reader 2 (pp. 313-329). New York:Routledge. (In Russ.) \
Review
For citations:
Babanova A.I. The dialectic of freedom in the game space. The Kazan Socially-Humanitarian Bulletin. 2023;(6 (63)):138-145. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26907/2079-5912.2023.6.138-145