Hubbry Logo
Game classificationGame classificationMain
Open search
Game classification
Community hub
Game classification
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Game classification
Game classification
Game classification
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Game classification is the classification of games, forming a game taxonomy. Many different methods of classifying games exist.

Physical education

[edit]

There are four basic approaches to classifying the games used in physical education:[1]

Game categories
This is a classification scheme proposed by Nicols, who classifies games according to three major categories: the game's physical requirements (i.e. what the game requires in addition to the players — equipment, size and nature of playing field, and so forth), the structure of the game (i.e. number of players, groupings of players, strategies, and so forth), and the game's personal requirements (i.e. what the game requires of the player — motor skills, fitness levels, numeracy, social skills, and so forth).
Games for understanding
This is a classification scheme proposed by Werner and Alomond that classifies games according to their strategies. It divides games into target games (e.g. archery); net or wall games (e.g. tennis); striking and field games (e.g. cricket); and invasion games (e.g. football).
Core content
This is a classification scheme proposed by Allison and Barrett[2] that categorizes games by their form (i.e. whether they are novel games proposed by the teacher or children, or whether they are existing games already widely played), by the movement skills that they require, by the "movement concepts" and game tactics that they require, and by the educational results of the game.
Developmental games
This is a classification scheme proposed by Gallahue and Celand that classifies games into four developmental levels, as part of an overall educational strategy of applying, reinforcing, and implementing movement and sports skills. The levels, in ascending order, are "low-level", "complex", "lead-up", and "official sports".

Games further divided as per the physical activity are mainly divided into three categories: soft active sports, medium active sports, and highly active sports.

Video games

[edit]

There are several methods of classifying video games, alongside the system of video game genres commonly used by retailers and player communities.

Solomon[3] puts forward a "commonsense, but broad" classification of video games, into simulations (the game reflects reality), abstract games (the game itself is the focus of interest), and sports. In addition to these, he points out that games (in general, not just video games) fall into classes according to the number of players. Games with two players encompass board games such as chess. Games with multiple players encompass card games such as poker, and marketed family games such as Monopoly and Scrabble. Puzzles and Solitaire are one-player games. He also includes zero-player games, such as Conway's Game of Life, although acknowledging that others argue that such games do not constitute a game, because they lack any element of competition. He asserts that such zero-player games are nonetheless games because they are used recreationally.

Another method, developed by Wright,[4] divides games into the following categories: educational or informative, sports, sensorimotor (e.g. action games, video games, fighting and shoot 'em up games, and driving and racing simulators), other vehicular simulators (not covered by driving and racing), strategy games (e.g. adventure games, war games, strategic simulations, role-playing games, and puzzles), and "other".[5]

A third method, developed by Funk and Buchman,[6] and refined by others, classifies electronic games into six categories: general entertainment (no fighting or destruction), educational (learning or problem-solving), fantasy violence (cartoon characters that must fight or destroy things, and risk being killed, to achieve a goal), human violence (like fantasy violence, but with human rather than cartoon characters), nonviolent sports (no fighting or destruction), and sports violence (fighting or destruction involved).[5]

Classification by cause of uncertainty

[edit]
Causes of uncertainty in a game

Games can be categorized by the source of uncertainty which confront the players:[7][8]

Based on these three causes, three classes of games arise:

Game theory

[edit]
Main article: Game theory § Game types

Game theory classifies games according to several criteria: whether a game is a symmetric game or an asymmetric one, what a game's "sum" is (zero-sum, constant sum, and so forth), whether a game is a sequential game or a simultaneous one, whether a game comprises perfect information or imperfect information, and whether a game is determinate.

See also

[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Game.
Main article: Outline of games

References

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Game classification

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Game classification is the systematic organization of games into categories based on shared attributes such as rules, objectives, mechanics, player roles, and cultural or social functions, serving as a foundational tool in (ludology) for analysis, design, and pedagogical purposes. This process distinguishes games from unstructured play by emphasizing structured constraints and tactical elements, while accommodating diverse forms from traditional board games to digital and physical activities. Early theoretical frameworks, such as Roger Caillois's typology, categorize games into four primary types— (competitive contests like sports), alea (games of chance like lotteries), (simulations and ), and ilinx (vertigo-inducing activities like spinning)—with paidia representing free-form play and ludus denoting rule-bound variants. In educational contexts, particularly , games are classified by tactical structures to promote transferable skills in strategy and movement; prominent systems include (e.g., , focusing on accuracy), net/wall games (e.g., , involving rallies), striking/fielding games (e.g., , emphasizing offense-defense transitions), and territorial/invasion games (e.g., soccer, centered on space control). These categories, evolving from early models by Mauldon and Redfern (1969) and refined by (1986), enable teaching of core principles like maintaining possession and exploiting space across activities. For digital and video games, classification often revolves around genres defined by gameplay mechanics and narrative elements, with common categories including action (hand-eye coordination tasks), (character progression), (resource management), and (real-world modeling), though hybrid forms challenge rigid boundaries. Systematic reviews of highlight over 25 such genres, noting inconsistencies in definitions and proposing user-generated tags (e.g., from platforms like ) for more nuanced, multidimensional taxonomies that capture evolving game complexity since the . Beyond medium-specific systems, broader classifications address components like player count, win conditions, and interaction types—such as versus competitive—or historical lineages, including race, , and alignment games in traditional table-based play. These approaches underscore game classification's role in bridging cultural, developmental, and technological dimensions, informing everything from systems to innovative .

Sociological and Cultural Classifications

Caillois' Framework

, a French sociologist, introduced a foundational classification system for play and games in his 1958 book Les jeux et les hommes (translated into English as in 1961), building upon but critiquing Johan Huizinga's earlier work (1938) by expanding the scope to include non-rule-based and chance elements of play that Huizinga overlooked. ' framework emphasizes the cultural and psychological dimensions of play, viewing it as a voluntary activity that mirrors societal structures and rituals while providing a temporary escape from everyday life. This system posits play as distinct from work or obligation, serving as a lens to analyze how games evolve from primitive diversions to sophisticated cultural institutions that reinforce or challenge social norms. Caillois defines play through six essential characteristics: it is (1) free and voluntary, not obligatory or coerced; (2) separate, confined to a specific time and space isolated from ordinary life; (3) uncertain, with outcomes unpredictable and not predetermined; (4) unproductive, creating no external wealth or utility; (5) rule-governed, adhering to conventional procedures that create an alternative reality; and (6) make-believe, involving fictions or illusions that participants collectively pretend to be real during the activity. These traits distinguish play from other human activities, highlighting its nature—done for its own sake—and its capacity to generate temporary social orders. Central to Caillois' classification are four fundamental categories of play, each representing distinct psychological impulses and social functions: (competition), alea (chance), (simulation), and ilinx (vertigo). Agon involves contests of skill and strategy on an equalized field, where participants vie for supremacy through personal prowess, as seen in athletic sports like or board games like chess. Alea relies on randomness and fate, relinquishing control to impartial chance mechanisms such as dice rolls or lotteries, exemplified by or coin flips, which appeal to the desire for passive acceptance of destiny. Mimicry entails and illusion, where players adopt alternate identities or simulate realities, like in theater performances, children's pretend play, or masquerades, blurring the line between self and . Ilinx induces altered through physical sensation or disorientation, such as the from spinning tops, carousel rides, or extreme activities like skydiving, evoking a primal thrill of vertigo. These categories are not mutually exclusive; many games combine elements, but each highlights a core attraction of play. Caillois further describes play along a spectrum from paidia to ludus, representing degrees of structure and regulation rather than separate types. Paidia embodies free-form, turbulent, and improvisational play, akin to a child's unstructured frolicking or unstructured exploration, emphasizing spontaneity and joy without rigid constraints. At the opposite end, ludus imposes arbitrary, binding rules that channel paidia into disciplined, organized forms, such as the codified strategies of chess or the regulations of team sports, fostering development and . This continuum illustrates how play matures from primal turbulence to cultural sophistication, with modern societies favoring ludus to instill values like discipline and fairness. Culturally, Caillois argues that these categories reflect and shape societal values: promotes and in competitive cultures, alea underscores in uncertain environments, facilitates identity exploration in ritualistic societies, and ilinx taps into ecstatic or shamanistic traditions. He traces their across civilizations—from ancient games in alea to medieval jousts in —suggesting that shifts in dominant play forms signal broader cultural transitions, such as from mythical to rational worldviews, while warning against the "corruption" of play into obsession or pseudoplay in modern life.

Other Sociological Approaches

In addition to ' influential framework, other sociological perspectives on game classification emphasize the broader cultural and communicative roles of play. , in his seminal work (1938), conceptualized games as forming a ""—a temporary, voluntary sphere of activity detached from , where participants engage in rule-bound actions that are absorbing, timeless, and spatially enclosed. argued that such play is not merely recreational but essential to the development of , as it fosters creativity, order, and cultural forms through its ritualistic and rule-governed nature. Building on communicative aspects, anthropologist introduced the concept of in play during his 1955 essay "A Theory of Play and Fantasy," later included in Steps to an Ecology of Mind (1972). Bateson described play as a framed interaction where participants signal that their messages and actions are "not serious," creating a paradoxical context that simulates real-world behaviors without real-world consequences. This metacommunicative frame allows games to serve as safe spaces for exploring , , or , distinguishing play from earnest communication and enabling its as a distinct mode of human interaction. Brian Sutton-Smith extended these ideas in The Ambiguity of Play (1997), proposing seven "rhetorics of play" as cultural lenses through which societies justify and classify games: the rhetoric of fate (emphasizing chance and luck), power (focusing on competition and dominance), communal identity (highlighting group solidarity), frivolity (viewing play as trivial amusement), progress (linking play to learning and adaptation), the imaginary (stressing fantasy and creativity), and the self (centering personal fulfillment). Sutton-Smith contended that these rhetorics reflect ideological ambiguities in how play is valued, often adapting to cultural contexts to legitimize games' social functions rather than imposing a universal typology. Anthropological approaches further classify games within indigenous rituals as mechanisms for social bonding and cultural transmission. Among Northwest Coast First Nations, potlatch ceremonies—elaborate feasts involving gift-giving, speeches, dances, singing, and theatrical demonstrations—function as rituals to affirm social hierarchies, redistribute , and reinforce ties, dating back centuries as to governance and spiritual life. Similarly, in various African societies, board games like or nsolo serve as communal activities that promote social bonding, particularly among men, by facilitating conversation, strategy-sharing, and intergenerational knowledge exchange in daily or ritual settings. In contemporary extensions, emerges as a cultural phenomenon analyzed through , where participants derive group belonging and self-concept from shared gaming experiences. Studies show that fosters collective identities among players and fans, enhancing team strategies and community cohesion when gamer roles become salient, thus classifying competitive digital play as a modern ritual of affiliation akin to traditional sports. This perspective highlights how , as a global socio-cultural practice, reinforces social bonds through and cultural participation.

Educational and Physical Classifications

Classifications in Physical Education

Classifications of games in have roots in the 19th-century German Turnen movement, initiated by in the early 1800s as a patriotic system of emphasizing and national unity through outdoor exercises and apparatus work. This approach influenced curricula worldwide, particularly in the United States, where German immigrants established Turnverein associations in the mid-19th century to integrate into programs, promoting structured physical activities for youth development. By the post-1960s era, evolved toward inclusive models, driven by legislative changes like the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, which mandated accommodations for students with disabilities and shifted focus from rigid to diverse, game-based learning for holistic development. A primary method of classifying games in curricula is by objective, often aligned with the Teaching Games for Understanding (TGfU) framework developed in the early 1980s, which groups activities to facilitate tactical awareness and skill transfer. emphasize accuracy in propelling an object toward a goal, such as or , where success depends on precision rather than opposition. Net/wall games involve sending an object over a net or against a wall to an opponent's side, fostering oppositional play, as seen in or . Striking/fielding games require striking a stationary object and retrieving it in the field, like or , to promote batting and defensive skills. Territorial invasion games focus on penetrating an opponent's territory to score, exemplified by soccer or , which develop spatial awareness and teamwork. Age-appropriate grouping ensures games match developmental stages, with low-organization games (LOGs) prioritized for young children to build fundamental motor skills through simple, inclusive play without complex rules. Variants of tag, such as freeze tag or shadow tag, serve as LOGs for elementary students, encouraging chasing, fleeing, and basic coordination while minimizing elimination to maintain engagement. For adolescents, classifications shift to higher-organization games with strategic elements, such as modified games that introduce and positional play, aligning with cognitive and physical maturation. Inclusive adaptations in physical education extend these classifications to students with disabilities, drawing from Paralympic categories that group athletes by impairment type—such as physical (e.g., limb deficiency), visual, intellectual, or sensory—to ensure equitable participation. For instance, target games like are adapted for users with motor impairments, while net/wall activities like accommodate visual impairments through auditory cues. These modifications, guided by standards for , involve rule adjustments, equipment alterations, or to integrate students into general classes, promoting without segregation. The benefits of these classifications in include enhanced motor skills, teamwork, and fitness, as outlined in America's 2013 National Standards and Grade-Level Outcomes, which emphasize physical literacy through game-based activities for health and social interaction. Dodgeball, classified as a target game, develops evasion and throwing accuracy while fostering in team defenses. Similarly, basketball as a territorial game promotes cardiovascular endurance and strategic passing, contributing to overall when adapted for diverse abilities.

Games by Skill and Physical Demands

Games are often classified by the types of skills they demand, encompassing fine motor precision, gross motor coordination, and integrated cognitive-physical challenges that combine mental strategy with bodily movement. Fine motor skills involve small muscle groups for accurate, controlled actions, such as manipulating objects with hands or feet, exemplified in games like or tosses where players must achieve precise hand-eye or foot-eye coordination. , by contrast, engage larger muscle groups for broader movements requiring strength, balance, and locomotion, as seen in running relays that emphasize speed and through full-body . Cognitive-physical games further blend these with , such as obstacle courses that demand spatial awareness, quick problem-solving, and adaptive movement to navigate hurdles and pathways. Physical demands in games can be categorized by energy systems and movement qualities, including aerobic activities that build sustained through oxygen-dependent , anaerobic bursts for high-intensity efforts relying on stored , and flexibility or balance-focused pursuits that enhance mobility and stability. Aerobic games, like extended tag variants or endurance relays, promote cardiovascular by maintaining moderate-to-vigorous effort over longer durations, typically 5-30 minutes. Anaerobic games, such as short sprints or explosive jumps in , involve rapid, power-based actions lasting seconds to two minutes, targeting fast-twitch muscles for strength and speed. Flexibility and balance games, inspired by poses adapted into partner challenges or animal mimicry activities, require controlled and equilibrium, often at low-to-moderate intensity to improve without high cardiovascular strain. Competitive structures in physical games vary from purely cooperative formats that foster without winners or losers, to direct competitions emphasizing individual or team , and hybrid models that mix with contest elements. Cooperative games, such as the where participants interlink arms and untangle without breaking contact, prioritize collective problem-solving and trust-building through shared physical effort. Competitive games, like straightforward races, focus on outperforming opponents via speed or , heightening through clear conditions. Hybrid cooperative-competitive games, including races where teams alternate runners to achieve a group goal, combine intra-team support with inter-team to balance social bonding and performance drive. Traditional indigenous games illustrate these classifications through culturally rooted activities that hone via specific physical attributes. , a Southeast Asian game involving volleys with a ball using only feet, headers, or knees, demands high , precision, and lower-body strength for acrobatic kicks and dives. The Inuit blanket toss, where a person is launched skyward on a blanket held by a circle of participants, emphasizes core strength, balance, and coordinated team lifting to simulate scouting for game in environments. From a health perspective, are further distinguished by impact levels, with low-impact options minimizing joint stress for and , versus high-impact ones that involve forceful landings or collisions for greater intensity. Low-impact , such as walking relays or gentle tossing circles, engage moderate activity without pounding forces, making them suitable for diverse ages and fitness levels to support cardiovascular benefits with reduced risk. High-impact , like contact variants of rugby tag or jumping challenges, incorporate abrupt stops, tackles, or leaps that elevate and power but require proper conditioning to avoid strain. Post-2020 developments in analog fitness have integrated game-like elements into non-digital physical activities to sustain amid pandemic-related shifts toward outdoor and home-based play, such as circuit challenges with point systems or partner relays scored for completion time and . These approaches, drawing on traditional structures, encourage consistent participation by awarding "achievements" through group feedback rather than screens, as seen in community-led tag evolutions with tiers.

Classifications by Medium and Genre

Traditional and Analog Games

Traditional and analog games encompass a wide array of non-digital pastimes that rely on physical components such as boards, cards, dice, or minimal materials, often rooted in cultural and historical practices spanning millennia. These games are typically classified by their format, which determines the core mechanics and interaction style, including board games that use a fixed grid or path for strategic movement, such as chess, where players maneuver pieces on an 8x8 checkered board to capture the opponent's king. Card games, another prominent format, frequently involve trick-taking mechanics, as seen in bridge, where four players in two partnerships bid and play hands from a standard 52-card deck to score points through contract fulfillment. Dice games emphasize chance elements, exemplified by , which combines dice rolls with board movement to race pieces around a track while blocking opponents. Abstract strategy games form a subset focused on pure logic without thematic elements, such as Go, played on a grid where players place stones to encircle territory. The cultural origins of these games highlight their deep historical significance, with many tracing back to ancient civilizations. , one of the earliest known board games, originated in around 3100 BCE during the Predynastic Period and remained popular through the Late Period, often depicted in tomb art as a metaphor for the journey to the afterlife. The earliest known boards date to approximately 6000 BCE in (), with the game emerging and becoming widespread in through ancient trade and cultural exchange, involving sowing seeds or stones into pits for strategic capture. In , developed during the (1644–1912 CE), using 144 tiles for a rummy-like matching game that reflects combinatorial skill and social play. Regional adaptations, such as African boards carved from wood or stone, underscore how these games evolved within local traditions to incorporate environmental materials and social norms. Classifications by player interaction further delineate these games, ranging from solitary pursuits to group engagements. Solitaire games, designed for single players, such as various card layouts where one arranges suits into sequences, emphasize personal puzzle-solving without opponents. Two-player duels, like chess or , foster direct confrontation on equal footing, requiring anticipation of rival moves. Multiplayer formats, including like , involve larger groups in collaborative or competitive improvisation, often using verbal or gestural cues to guess phrases, promoting social bonding among 4 or more participants. These interaction models adapt to group size, with many traditional games scalable from intimate duels to communal events. Material-based classifications highlight the accessibility of analog games, utilizing everyday or natural items to minimize barriers. Paper-and-pencil games, such as , involve drawing lines on a grid to claim squares, requiring only writing tools for strategic play. Outdoor games like , played by tossing markers into chalked court sections and hopping to retrieve them, leverage open spaces and simple ground markings for physical coordination. Folk games, including marbles, use small or stone spheres rolled into circles for aiming and knocking, often passed down orally in communities without formal rules. These categories emphasize , with materials drawn from household or natural sources to sustain play across diverse settings. Preservation efforts recognize traditional games as vital cultural heritage, with organizations like UNESCO designating them as intangible assets. In 2022, the Korean board game yutnori (also known as yunnori) was designated as a national intangible cultural heritage by South Korea, celebrated for its role in family gatherings during holidays like Lunar New Year, where players throw sticks to advance pieces on a board. Such listings promote global awareness and safeguarding of regional variants, ensuring transmission to future generations through documentation and community programs. The evolution of traditional games reflects societal shifts from prehistoric survival simulations to refined social entertainments. Prehistoric examples, dating back over 5,000 years, included throwing games with or stones mimicking hunting pursuits, as evidenced by artifacts from ancient and that suggest early ritualistic play. By the (1837–1901 CE), games transitioned to parlor settings with manufactured boards and cards, such as elaborate editions of or new inventions like Authors, emphasizing and intellectual diversion among the . This progression illustrates how games adapted from communal, resource-based activities to structured, commercialized pastimes, influencing modern analog designs.

Digital and Video Games

Digital and video games represent a distinct category within game classification, characterized by and software that enable interactive entertainment through digital interfaces. Unlike traditional analog games, which rely on physical components, digital games leverage power for dynamic environments, real-time feedback, and scalable complexity. Classifications in this domain primarily revolve around genres, platforms, modes, and content ratings, reflecting both technological affordances and audience considerations. These systems have evolved significantly since the medium's inception, adapting to advancements in hardware and software. The evolution of digital games began with arcade titles like , released by in 1972, which introduced simple two-player paddle-based gameplay and marked the commercial viability of video gaming. By the early 2000s, the landscape shifted toward online multiplayer experiences, culminating in esports phenomena such as , launched by in 2009, which formalized competitive gaming as a with professional leagues and global tournaments. This progression from standalone arcade machines to interconnected digital ecosystems underscores how classifications have expanded to accommodate networked play and virtual economies. Genre classifications organize digital games based on core gameplay mechanics, narrative structures, and player objectives, providing a framework for developers and consumers to navigate the medium's diversity. Common genres include action-adventure, exemplified by Tomb Raider (1996), which combines exploration, puzzle-solving, and combat in third-person perspectives; role-playing games (RPGs) like the Final Fantasy series (1987 onward), emphasizing character progression, storytelling, and strategic decision-making; simulations such as The Sims (2000), focusing on life management and emergent behaviors; puzzle games like Tetris (1984), centered on spatial reasoning and pattern matching; and strategy titles including Civilization (1991), involving resource management and long-term planning. These genres often overlap, with hybrid forms emerging to blend elements like action with RPG mechanics, reflecting the fluidity of digital classification systems. Platform-based classifications differentiate games by the hardware or ecosystem on which they run, influencing design constraints, distribution, and community features. Console games, such as PlayStation exclusives like The Last of Us (2013), prioritize optimized graphics and controller-based controls for home entertainment; PC games support extensive modding communities, as seen in titles like The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (2011), allowing user-generated expansions; mobile games emphasize casual, touch-based accessibility, with examples like Candy Crush Saga (2012) dominating short-session play; and virtual reality (VR) or augmented reality (AR) platforms offer immersive experiences, highlighted by Pokémon GO's 2016 launch, which overlaid digital elements on real-world environments via mobile AR. Each platform shapes interactivity and accessibility, with cross-platform compatibility becoming more prevalent in recent years. Interactivity levels in digital games are classified by player engagement modes, ranging from solitary experiences to collaborative or competitive networks. Single-player narrative games, such as The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild (2017), focus on individual progression through story-driven worlds with predefined outcomes; in contrast, multiplayer online games, particularly massively multiplayer online (MMO) titles like World of Warcraft (2004), enable persistent shared universes where players interact socially, form alliances, and engage in real-time events. This dichotomy highlights how digital technology facilitates scalable social dynamics, from isolated immersion to global communities. Content rating systems classify digital games based on age-appropriateness and thematic elements, aiding parental guidance and regulatory compliance. In the United States, the (ESRB) assigns ratings from E (Everyone) to AO (Adults Only), incorporating descriptors for violence, language, and other content since its establishment in 1994. Europe's (PEGI) system uses age bands from 3+ to 18+, evaluating factors like discrimination and fear-inducing elements, and has been mandatory in several countries since 2009. Globally, the (IARC), formed in 2013, streamlines ratings for mobile and digital apps across platforms, enabling self-assessment tools for developers to assign consistent international labels. Post-2020 developments have introduced new classification dimensions, particularly for games and AI-generated content. games, such as Fortnite's evolving virtual events platform (post-2021) and (with expansions since 2020), are categorized by their persistent, user-owned virtual worlds that integrate social, economic, and elements across platforms. Meanwhile, AI-generated content classifications address techniques, where algorithms create dynamic assets like environments or narratives in real-time, as in games using generative adversarial networks (GANs) for textures or levels, raising considerations for originality and ethical use in design. These innovations extend traditional genres into hybrid forms, emphasizing and algorithmic .

Theoretical and Mathematical Classifications

By Cause of Uncertainty

Games are classified by the causes of that underpin their mechanics and player interactions, distinguishing between inherent in the rules, unpredictability from opponents, and incomplete knowledge of game states. This classification emphasizes how generates tension and engagement, differentiating games along a spectrum from deterministic outcomes to highly unpredictable experiences. Seminal work in this area traces back to historical analyses of board games, where sources were categorized to understand their and appeal across cultures. The main types of uncertainty include aleatory, strategic, and informational varieties. Aleatory uncertainty stems from elements, such as dice rolls or card shuffles, which introduce irreducible randomness governed by probability distributions rather than player control. Strategic uncertainty arises from the unpredictable actions of opponents, where players must anticipate and respond to others' decisions in competitive settings. Informational uncertainty occurs due to hidden elements, like concealed cards or unknown positions, forcing players to infer or bluff based on partial . These categories often overlap, but their presence shapes the core dynamics of a game. A foundational classification along the chance-skill spectrum was proposed by H.J.R. Murray in his analysis of board games, dividing them into those of pure skill (relying solely on player ability without random elements), pure chance (determined entirely by luck), or a combination of both. For instance, exemplifies pure chance, as outcomes depend wholly on physical randomness without strategic input. represents pure skill under perfect information, where optimal play always leads to a draw or win, eliminating uncertainty beyond initial errors. Mixed games like Monopoly blend dice-based aleatory uncertainty with strategic decisions on property acquisition and trading. Bridge illustrates informational uncertainty through hidden card distributions, requiring inference and partnership signaling, while chess embodies strategic uncertainty alone, with no chance elements and full visibility of the board. Psychologically, uncertainty serves as a key driver of player engagement, aligning with flow theory, where balanced challenges and unpredictable outcomes foster immersion and optimal experience. In studies of chess players, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi observed that the tension from uncertain results—neither too easy nor overwhelmingly difficult—induces a state of flow, enhancing enjoyment and focus during play. This principle underscores why games with calibrated uncertainty sustain motivation, preventing boredom or anxiety. In modern digital games, aleatory uncertainty is often implemented via pseudo-random number generators (PRNGs), which algorithmically produce sequences mimicking true to simulate dice, loot drops, or while ensuring for testing and fairness. These systems, seeded by system like timestamps, maintain the excitement of chance without physical components, though they must be cryptographically secure to avoid predictability in multiplayer contexts. Such applications extend historical classifications into computational realms, where uncertainty enhances replayability and strategic depth. builds briefly on these uncertainty sources by modeling them mathematically to predict equilibria, but the classification here focuses on their experiential origins in rules and play.

Game Theory Classifications

Game theory offers a mathematical framework for classifying games based on their strategic structures, including the number of participants, payoff dependencies, and information availability, allowing for the prediction and analysis of rational decision-making under interdependence. This approach treats games as models of conflict and , where players select strategies to maximize their outcomes given others' choices. Foundational classifications emerged from and Oskar Morgenstern's seminal work, Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (1944), which formalized the analysis of strategic interactions through concepts like expected and equilibrium. These categories apply broadly to abstract games and real-world scenarios, such as auctions or negotiations, emphasizing logical deduction over empirical observation. Games are first classified by the number of players involved. Two-person games feature exactly two decision-makers, as in chess, where each player's moves directly oppose the other's in a . N-person games involve more than two players, scaling complexity through interactions like alliances or competitions, exemplified by multiplayer auctions where bids influence multiple outcomes simultaneously. Within these, games divide into cooperative and non-cooperative types: cooperative games permit binding agreements among players, enabling joint strategies enforceable by external mechanisms like contracts, whereas non-cooperative games restrict players to individual actions without enforceable coalitions, focusing on self-interested equilibria. This distinction, central to von Neumann and Morgenstern's framework, highlights how communication and commitment alter strategic possibilities. Payoff structures further classify games by how outcomes distribute gains and losses among players. Zero-sum games are those where one player's gains exactly equal another's losses, creating pure opposition; exemplifies this, as the winner captures all points while the loser forfeits them entirely. Non-zero-sum games allow for variable total payoffs, where mutual cooperation or defection can yield collective gains or losses; the , formalized by in 1950, illustrates this through two suspects who face incentives to betray each other despite a better joint outcome from silence. These structures influence equilibrium analysis, with zero-sum games often solvable via theorems and non-zero-sum requiring more nuanced solution concepts. Information structures classify games by the knowledge players possess about actions, rules, and payoffs. games provide full visibility of all prior moves, as in chess, where each player observes the entire board history to inform decisions. Imperfect information games involve hidden elements, such as bluffing in poker, where concealed cards force probabilistic reasoning. Additionally, assumes all players know the game's rules and payoff functions, while incomplete information introduces uncertainty about opponents' types or preferences, complicating predictions. These distinctions, rooted in von Neumann and Morgenstern's models, underpin solution methods like for scenarios. Such classifications often integrate causes of uncertainty, like chance events, as inputs to broader theoretical models. Key concepts in these classifications include dominant strategies and , which identify stable outcomes. A dominant strategy yields a higher payoff for a player regardless of others' choices, simplifying analysis by eliminating inferior options iteratively. In zero-sum games, a saddle point represents an equilibrium where the row player's maximum of minimum payoffs equals the column player's minimum of maximum payoffs, ensuring no unilateral deviation improves results; von Neumann proved such points exist under mixed strategies. These tools, formalized in the 1944 treatise, enable the reduction of complex games to solvable forms. Games are also represented in extensive and normal forms to capture timing and simultaneity. The normal form uses payoff matrices to depict simultaneous-move games, listing strategies and outcomes in a grid for quick equilibrium computation. The extensive form employs diagrams for sequential games, branching nodes for moves and sets for , revealing structures and histories. This duality, as analyzed in modern treatments, allows conversion between forms while preserving strategic essence, with extensive forms particularly suited to dynamic analysis. Post-2000 developments in behavioral have refined these classifications by incorporating psychological insights, revealing systematic deviations from rational predictions in experiments. Pioneered by Colin Camerer and others, this approach models , fairness, and learning, as seen in quantal response equilibria where noisy choices replace strict optimization. Unlike classical theory's assumption of hyper-rational agents, behavioral extensions use empirical to adjust parameters, enhancing for real human play in both and non-cooperative settings.

References

  1. https://www.gamestudies.org/0301/walther/
  2. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17408989.2022.2061938
  3. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11195997/
  4. https://thebiggamehunter.com/classification-of-games/
  5. https://voidnetwork.gr/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Man-Play-and-Games-by-Roger-Caillois.pdf
  6. https://www.museumofplay.org/app/uploads/2022/01/3-2-article-cailloiss-man-play-and-games.pdf
  7. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1555412019853080
  8. https://ejcj.orfaleacenter.ucsb.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/1972.-Gregory-Bateson-Steps-to-an-Ecology-of-Mind.pdf
  9. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674005815
  10. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/potlatch
  11. https://events.ceu.edu/2017-03-07/traditional-games-africa-history-and-politics-mancala-ethiopia
  12. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10100611/
  13. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/382231542_Popularity_and_Cultural_Significance_of_E-Sports_in_the_21st_Century
  14. https://www.movementhealth.com.au/news/german-turnen-gymnastics-brief-history/
  15. https://physicalculturestudy.com/2020/12/18/guest-post-a-brief-history-of-german-gymnastics-in-us-public-schools-and-its-relevance-for-pe-teachers-today-2/
  16. http://ophea.net/playsport/teaching-games-understanding-tgfu-approach
  17. http://web.uvic.ca/~thopper/WEB/principlesofplay.htm
  18. https://sites.google.com/hanoverschools.org/cedarschoolphysicaleducation/what-are-games
  19. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10011656/
  20. https://tacsports.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/LOG-and-Sport-specific-modified-games-additional-resource-handbook-1.pdf
  21. https://ecommons.udayton.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3830&context=graduate_theses
  22. https://www.weareteachers.com/elementary-pe-games/
  23. https://www.paralympic.org/classification
  24. https://www.paralympic.org/athletics/classification
  25. https://www.pescholar.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Dodgeball-variations.pdf
  26. https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/articles/gross-motor-skills
  27. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0291782
  28. https://www.physio-pedia.com/Anaerobic_Exercise
  29. https://www.responsiveclassroom.org/cooperative-games-for-younger-students/
  30. https://ultimatecampresource.com/camp-games/cooperative-games/
  31. https://www.thepespecialist.com/crosstheriver/
  32. https://sportsmatik.com/sports/sepak-takraw
  33. https://beyondpenguins.ehe.osu.edu/issue/peoples-of-the-arctic/arctic-survival-skills-traditional-inuit-games
  34. https://mana.md/high-impact-and-low-impact-exercise/
  35. https://www.garagegymreviews.com/workout-gamification
  36. https://coopboardgames.com/guides/types-of-board-games/
  37. https://www.toytag.com/blogs/news/exploring-the-different-types-of-board-games-real-examples-2018
  38. https://www.metmuseum.org/essays/board-games-from-ancient-egypt-and-the-near-east
  39. https://www.ancientgames.org/
  40. https://www.britishmuseum.org/blog/top-10-historical-board-games
  41. https://playingcarddecks.com/blogs/all-in/the-very-best-two-player-card-games
  42. https://www.playworks.org/resource/fun-paper-and-pencil-games-to-play/
  43. https://thebiggamehunter.com/playing/pencil-paper-games/
  44. https://www.korea.net/NewsFocus/Culture/view?articleId=221648
  45. https://www.forbes.com/advisor/t/history-of-board-games/
  46. https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/learn/histories/board-games/
  47. https://www.blog.udonis.co/mobile-marketing/mobile-games/history-video-games
  48. https://www.siue.edu/esports/about/history.shtml
  49. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344834063_An_Operational_Study_of_Video_Games%27_Genres
  50. https://inlingogames.com/blog/the-most-popular-gaming-platforms/
  51. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8892273/
  52. https://www.esrb.org/ratings-guide/
  53. https://pegi.info/page/pegi-age-ratings
  54. https://www.globalratings.com/about.aspx
  55. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268401222000767
  56. https://ai.engineering.columbia.edu/ai-applications/ai-video-games/
  57. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemic-game/
  58. https://archive.org/details/historyofboardga0000murr_p4b9
  59. https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/context/art108/article/1006/viewcontent/Random_Numbers_and_Gaming_by_Sinjin_Baglin.pdf
  60. https://books.google.com/books/about/Beyond_Boredom_and_Anxiety.html?id=afdGAAAAMAAJ
  61. https://math.osu.edu/sites/math.osu.edu/files/What_is_2018_Game_Theory.pdf
  62. https://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/academic/class/15859-s05/www/ferguson/coal.pdf
  63. https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~15451-f18/lectures/lec12-zerosum.pdf
  64. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4612-1654-4_3
  65. https://people.maths.ox.ac.uk/griffit4/Math_Alive/3/game_theory_notes.pdf
  66. https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/14-12-economic-applications-of-game-theory-fall-2012/b90ef0b930888cc7a1828d5eaf91f5c9_MIT14_12F12_chapter3.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.