Juul Response

I think the hardest thing to follow about this reading is just how many pieces the idea of a game gets cut up into, and there - for me at least - it gets really hard to put the pieces back together. Even her definition seems especially choppy, more of bringing together different points about games then a definition itself. Though I guess that is her point - that games may have all these separate pieces that make them different but their must be some sort of string of logic that we can follow about them, so we can discuss them.

I really liked her point about why we play games instead of why we simply 'play'. She has a good point when it comes to context; while play obviously gives us some sense of fulfillment, or else we would not have a drive to play, but playing a game gives us a context for the drive and for that fulfillment. Running around in the back yard with my sister is fun, but playing tag is even better, because there is a stronger understanding between the two of us what is happening.

The only image I found helpful was actually the one about tic tac toe. The idea that it was fun as a kid because their seemed to be so much challenge and mystery around where you should put your x or o, but now as an adult I see the logic behind it. I could understand the basics she was trying to get across with the circular image - what works as game and what doesn't - but I understood it better presented just as her text, though I did have to read it twice. Also, I totally missed something, because I have no idea what the numbers were for in that image (I thought of D&D stats when I first saw them).