Game classification

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

Contents

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

game categories
This is a classification scheme invented by Nicols, which 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 invented 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 invented by Allison and Barrett that categorizes games by their form (i.e. whether they are novel games invented 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 invented 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".

There are several methods of classifying electronic games (i.e. video games and computer games).

Solomon[2] puts forward a "commonsense, but broad" classification of electronic games, in particular computer 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 electronic games) fall into classes according to numbers 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, divides games into the following categories: educational or informative, sports, sensorimotor (e.g. action games, arcade 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".[3]

A third method, developed by Funk and Buchman, 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, in order 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).[3]

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.

  1. ^ David P. Swain, David L. Gallahue, and Frances Cleland Donnelly (2003). Developmental Physical Education for Today's Children. Human Kinetics, 571–573. ISBN 0736033882. 
  2. ^ Eric Solomon (1984). Games Programming. Cambridge University Press, 10—11. ISBN 052127110X. 
  3. ^ a b Victor C. Strasburger and Barbara J. Wilson (2002). Children, Adolescents and the Media. Sage Publications, 122–123. ISBN 0761921257. 

Advanced Search
Included Web Search Engines


Safe Search

close

Top Matching Results

Occasionally Search.com will highlight specialized results that are based on the context of your query. Examples of specialized results include specific links to news, images, or video.

Top Matching Results may highlight information from other Search.com pages, content from the CNET Network of sites, or third party content. The listings are based purely on relevance. Search.com does not receive payment for listings in this section but our partners that provide this data may get paid for listing these products.

Sponsored Links

This section contains paid listings which have been purchased by companies that want to have their sites appear for specific search terms and related content. These listings are administered, sorted and maintained by a third party and are not endorsed by Search.com.

Search Results

Search.com sends your search query to several search engines at one time and integrates the results into one list which has been sorted by relevance using Search.com's proprietary algorithm. You can customize the list of search engines included in your metasearch from the preferences.

The search engines that are used in your metasearch may allow companies to pay to have their Web sites included within the results. To view the Paid Inclusion policy for a specific search engine, please visit their Web site. Search.com does not accept payment or share revenue with any search engine partner for listings in this section.