I was intrigued by the discussion about the definition of game vs. toy. A conclusion in the class debate was that a toy can be easily converted into a game if goals, rules, or competitors are added. While that is a valuable truth, we did not draw clear conclusion on what exactly are the differences between game and toy, which I would like to discuss in this post.
First I’d like to argue that unlike the relationship between simulation and game, which is a continuum, the difference between games and toys is distinct. The reason many times the two seem mixed up and people disagree on each other is that we are not defining our subject under a consistent context and based on the same set of criteria. In this post, I will discuss the criteria that can be used to distinguish toy from game. Let’s start with the definition.
The Oxford dictionary defines toy as:
- “an object for a child to play with, typically a model or miniature replica of something”
- “an object, especially a gadget or machine, regarded as providing amusement for an adult”
Game is defined by the Oxford dictionary as:
- “a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck”
It can be felt from the definition that a toy is static and a game is dynamic and involves interactivity. A toy is an object. A game is a certain form of activity that people can play with. The above definition actually implies a relationship between game and toy: game is a system that consists of toys.
The definition reveals the difference in the characteristics of toy and game. However, with that we still cannot easily distinguish toy from game. So what are the criteria that can be used to separate the two? People have had discussions online1,2 .
The first criterion is inherent goals. A game should always define a goal for the player, while toys are to be played in any way you like until you are fed up. Of course you can create a goal when you play with your toy, but the toy does not specify a goal itself. Toys may have an intended use, but the goal needs to come from the player. The toy and the goal you created, when looked at together, can be seen as a game.
The second criterion is inherent rules and restrictions. Games always have rules, but toys are usually for free play.
The third criterion is the ending condition. You never win or lose when playing with a toy. For example, when you are playing with your teddy bear, there is no win-lose situation. When playing a game, however, you usually end up winning or lose. It’s worth pointing out that a small portion of games don’t have a clear win or lose scenario. Therefore we can say if something has a win-lose situation at the end, they are a game. The other way around, however, may not be true.
Although three criteria are drawn to help determine if something is a game or a toy, to make the distinction still involves subjective judgment. For example, is there a goal for a flight simulation application in which you just fly around? Someone could argue that the goal is to fly safely, but others could argue that there is no goal. You can choose to crash and you don’t lose or get punished for that. In that case, the flight simulation is a game for some people, but is a toy for others.
Any thought is warmly welcomed.
Reference:
Good insights, Yifan. The Oxford dictionary also has a definition for video game:
“a game played by electronically manipulating images produced by a computer program on a television screen or other display screen.”
…and this sounds very little like the definition for game. One thing I like about Schell’s definition is that it’s applicable across all types of games, not just video games. The oxford definition certainly gives me the impression that sports games (soccer, football, tennis, etc) were the type of games that definition applies.