Nombre del Paper

De qué va

Abstract

While the game design and game studies communities have analyzed combat both in specific games and game genres, and while combat is clearly central to many types of games, there is no general account of combat that is portable across diverse games. We provide such an account in the form of criteria which are satisfied by games that players inter- pret as “having combat.” These requirements are eventually fulfilled via operational logics, which tie the game’s observ- able behavior (including its instantial assets) to play expe- riences and cultural knowledge, creating what we refer to as a “combat model.” In addition to establishing a com- prehensive model of combat, making it possible to discuss combat across game genres, this work is the first to describe how complex playable models are constructed from composi- tions of operational logics working in concert; we also define two families of logics which are novel in the literature. This broad model of combat has already proved useful in practice, yielding insights in the analysis of the art game Unmanned; it also promises exciting computational applications in areas such as game design support tools and general game playing.

Conclusión

In this work, we have developed a comprehensive descrip-
tion of combat in games that spans diverse game genres and
gameplay styles. Discussing combat as a concept separate
from its concrete game-mechanical implementation enabled
a novel analysis of the art game Unmanned. The tools we
deployed to characterize combat in this way were built on
proceduralist readings, which we informally extended to ex-
plicitly account for compositions of operational logics.
An obvious next step is to formalize and further opera-
tionalize the theory of operational logics and this model of
combat. Specifically, understanding exactly how logics com-
pose with each other to support sophisticated readings—not
just that they compose—remains for future work. As a part
of this process, it must be determined whether there are
elements of a game such as cutscenes or rules of visual com-
position that cannot be adequately explained through op-
erational logics, and if so to what extent operational logics
should be expanded to cover them.
It is also important to apply this model to explain more
instances of combat (and non-combat) in games (especially
radically different games) to test its limits and validate its
assumptions. Likewise, this line of reasoning can be used
to determine the interpretive obligations of modeling other
systems; a library of such models would be extremely useful.

Mis notas

• En este paper, los autores intentan definir los sistemas de combate como interacciones entre elementos. Sin embargo, habla más de usabilidad que de progresión.

• Lo que sí es interesante es que a partir de estos análisis, se puede sacar un modelo abstracto de combate.

De esta manera, un sistema de combate se define cuando:

• Hay un espacio en el que varios agentes intercambian acciones violentas o no violentas entre ellos
• Hay una manera de determinar qué acciones posee un agente, las condiciones para su efectividad, y la cuantificación de esa efectividad
• Efectos observables de todas las acciones de combate, que son visibles para, al menos, el agente iniciador y el agente objetivo
• Circunstancias por las que los agentes entran o salen de la pelea y condiciones de final de combate.

Esto va a ser tremendamente útil para modelar el sistema de combate, y relacionarlo con los sistemas de progresión.