# Meta-Ontology of Game Worlds > [!Info] Conference Presentation > **Author**: Nikita Stulikov > **Conference**: International Conference on Games and Narratives (ICGaN) > **Location**: Waterloo, Canada > **Date**: 2023 > ![[ATTACHMENTS/PAPERS/ICGAN2023_Cover.jpg]] ### Slides ![[ATTACHMENTS/PAPERS/MetaOntologyGameWorlds_Slides.pdf]] ### Abstract **The game world concept: a comparative meta-ontological analysis** The presentation demonstrates a comparative meta-ontological analysis of the game world concept. Game ontology is the study of fundamental game elements. Today it is an especially topical theme, as the emergence and wide dissemination of computer games have prompted new debates on the nature of games. To argue, more game definitions have been elaborated in the last fifteen years than ever before (Stenros, 2016). Game researchers develop ontological questions about games in many different approaches and describe their results with game ontological models. It is a description that answers the questions: “What are games?” What do they consist of?”, “In which way their parts are connected?”, etc. (Aarseth, 2014, 484). The game world is often addressed as one of the most fundamental game components. In the framework of Van Inwagen’s (1998) meta-ontology, a game meta-ontological study should inquire about the meaning of game ontological questions themselves (1998). In this way, Aarseth and Grabarczyk (2018) consider the meaning of game ontological descriptions with their “ontological meta-model”. They developed it to connect, coordinate and compare different game ontological models. I use it to discuss a set of game ontologies, which contain a game world as their element. The first model I consider is Juul’s (2005) famous “classical game model” and its “fictional world”. The second is Salen & Zimmerman’s (2005) “magic circle”: a highly influential concept which has started heated debates inside the Huizingian tradition of game research. The third is Aarseth’s (2014) “simple game ontological model”. It contains a semiotic understanding of “the game world”. The fourth is Vella’s (2015) phenomenological modification of Aarseth’s concept of the game world. Finally, I discuss Sicart’s (2021) neo-materialistic conception of “the play-world”. With these ontologies, I track the theoretical development of the game world concept in game ontological research. #### References - Aarseth E. 1997. Cybertext: Perspectives on Ergodic Literature. Baltimore, MD, USA; London, England: The Johns Hopkins University Press. - Aarseth E. 2011. “‘Define Real, Moron!’ Some Remarks on Game Ontologies” in DIGAREC Keynote-Lectures 2009/10 edited by S. Günzel, M. Liebe, and D. Mersch, 50 - 69. Potsdam, Germany: Potsdam University Press. Deutschen National Bibliothek. https://d-nb.info/1218392606/34. - Aarseth, E. and Grabarczyk P. 2018. "An Ontological Meta-Model for Game Research.” Paper presented at the Digital Games Research Association Conference (DIGRA 2018), Turin, Italy, 25-28 July. Digital Games Research Association (DIGRA). [http://www.digra.org/wp-content/uploads/digital-library/DIGRA_2018_paper_247_rev.pdf](http://www.digra.org/wp-content/uploads/digital-library/DIGRA_2018_paper_247_rev.pdf) - Björk S. and Holopainen J. 2005. Patterns in Game Design. Hingham, MA, USA: Charles river media. - Calleja G. 2012 “Erasing the magic circle” in The Philosophy of Computer Games edited by J. R. Sagen, H. Fossheim and T. M. Larsen, 77 -  91. New York, NY: Springer. The University of Malta. https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/bitstream/123456789/26650/3/Erasing_the_magic_circle_2012.pdf. - Chan, J. T. C., Yuen, W. Y. F. 2008. “Digital game ontology: semantic web approach on enhancing game studies”. Paper presented at the 2008 9th international conference on computer-aided industrial design and conceptual design (Beijing, China), Beijing, China, 22-25 November. Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineering (IEEE). [https://doi.org/10.1109/CAIDCD.2008.4730603](https://doi.org/10.1109/CAIDCD.2008.4730603) - Juul J. 2005. Half-real: Video Games Between Real Rules and Fictional Worlds. — — Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press. - Salen K. and Zimmerman E. 2004. _Rules of Play. Game Design Fundamentals_. Cambridge, MA, USA: The MIT Press. - Sicart M. 2021. “Playthings.” _Games and culture_. 17 (1). [https://miguelsicart.net/publications/playthings.pdf](https://miguelsicart.net/publications/playthings.pdf) - Stenros J. 2016. “_T_he Game Definition Game: a Review.” _Game and Culture_. 16 (6). - Van Inwagen P. 1998. “Meta-ontology.” _Erkenntnis_. 48 (2). - Vella D. 2015a. “The Ludic Subject and the Ludic Self: Analyzing the ‘I-in-the-Gameworld’” Ph. D. diss. (IT University of Copenhagen). [https://en.itu.dk/~/media/en/research/phd-programme/phd-defences/2015/daniel-vella---the-ludic-subject-and-the-ludic-self-final-print-pdf.pdf?la=e](https://en.itu.dk/~/media/en/research/phd-programme/phd-defences/2015/daniel-vella---the-ludic-subject-and-the-ludic-self-final-print-pdf.pdf?la=e) - Vella D. 2015b. “No Mastery Without Mystery: Dark Souls and the Ludic Sublime.” Game Studies. 15 (1). http://gamestudies.org/1501/articles/vella