ABSTRACT
We can agree that World of Warcraft, which offers a wide range of play practices enabled through the game’s design, becomes a varied and unpredictable space for play. Play, however, is always varied and unpredictable, even within the most tightly designed games. As Salen and Zimmermann point out, the act of play, whether within a game, with a toy or with the imagination, is ‘free movement between a more rigid structure’ (2004: 304). To ensure some measure of grip on the wide variety of play practices found in World of Warcraft, I turn to philosopher Hans-Georg Gadamer. He defines play ontologically as a movement that has no goal that, when reached, brings it to an end. Play, instead, has a structure of oscillation, a constant to-and-fro movement, which keeps play active by constantly renewing itself (1985: 93). For Gadamer, this is the essence of play and it is through this movement that games can be defined. The rules and structures through which the to-and-fro movement are controlled describe the particular nature of a game (1985: 96). Here we can see that play on a very basic level needs at least some structuring to become a game. Literary theorist Wolfgang Iser has further elaborated on Gadamer’s ideas of play as a to-and-fro movement. Iser calls play in games that have a particular goal ‘instrumental play’. Here, play ends when the pre-set goals are achieved (1993: 237). On the other side of the spectrum lies ‘free play’, the form of play that is without endings and keeps play in motion (ibid. 237). Iser looks at ilinx, Roger Caillois’ category of games which is all about inducing vertigo (Caillois 1961: 24), for ‘free play at its most expansive’ (Iser 1993: 262). Ilinx-based games like bungee-jumping, downhill racing or swinging (if you would call these games at all), are all about inducing vertigo by destroying the stability of perception (Caillois 1961: 23).
