Serious Games and Innovation Gains E-Book
142,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
- Kategorie: Fachliteratur
- Serie: ISTE Invoiced
- Sprache: Englisch
Over the past thirty years or so, serious games, gaming and playful activities have come to occupy an important place in organizations. While this phenomenon is an ancient one, the use of games for serious purposes has become widespread over the last two centuries, and their development has been exponential, stimulated by that of information technologies.
As a result, it has become necessary to understand the specificities of these games and play activities in order to innovate and create value within organizations. For this reason, this book aims to enlighten the reader on their variety, their specific features and what they can bring to an organization.
Serious Games and Innovation Gains first uncovers the history of these kinds of games and play, their main characteristics and what they can bring in terms of a vision of the future. Above all, this book explores how these games and forms of play can be implemented, especially in areas such as progressive development, education, agility support, academic research, as well as military thinking, cyber defense or knowledge base building contexts.
Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:
Seitenzahl: 513
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2025
Ähnliche
Table of Contents
Cover
Table of Contents
Title Page
Copyright Page
Introduction A Brief History and Variety of Games for Serious Purposes
References
1 Serious Games: Human or Animal Invention?
1.1. Introduction
1.2. Biological approaches to play
1.3. Inter-species play frameworks
1.4. Serious Play in nonhuman animals?
1.5. Concluding discussion
1.6. References
2 The Neurotechnological Future of Video Games: The Contribution of Science Fiction to Prospective Thinking on the Post-Metaverse
2.1. Free Guy and the revolt of an artificial life in a video game
2.2. Artificial life and video games
2.3. The Frankenstein complex and fear of artificial intelligence
2.4. Ultimate Game and video games by nanoneurotechnologies
2.5. A telepathic video game in the Black Mirror series
2.6. Neuralink, a pioneer in neurotechnology
2.7. Neuroethics, video games and science fiction
2.8. Conclusion
2.9. References
3 Ludopedagogy Told by a Sponge
3.1. Introduction
3.2. Ludicization or when the sponge becomes a game
3.3. Sponge toy and playing with the sponge
3.4. The sponge goes from toy to game with rules
3.5. A sponge, a game and a utilitarian aim: several possibilities
3.6. The sponge, two sides for serious play
3.7. Gamified sponge
3.8. When the sponge absorbs the commercial license
3.9. Conclusion
3.10. References
4 Actual Plays: When the Tabletop Role-Playing Game Gains Media Coverage
4.1. Introduction
4.2. Materials and methods
4.3. “Spectating” role-playing
4.4. Conclusion
4.5. References
5 Tabletop Role-Playing as a Gamification of a Case Study in Management Control
5.1. Pedagogical issues
5.2. Description and application methodology
5.3. The benefits of edutainment practices
5.4. Synthesis and assessment of classroom feedback
5.5. Conclusion
5.6. References
6 Variety and Contribution of Agile Games to Organizational Innovation
6.1. Introduction
6.2. Agility and agile methods
6.3. Serious games and agile games
6.4. The agile games package
6.5. Description of the most frequent games
6.6. Conclusion
6.7. References
7 Serious Games as a Provocative Research Method?
7.1. Play as a research laboratory
7.2. Case study of play as a provocative method: putting participants in a situation of failure to assess their creativity
7.3. Discussion: mobilizing play as a provocative research method
7.4. Conclusion: the researcher as agent provocateur?
7.5. References
8 Serious Games and Decision-Making in the Context of Hospital Cybersecurity
8.1. Introduction
8.2. Introduction to cybersecurity challenges for hospital management
8.3. Introduction to hospital specific cybersecurity risks
8.4. Serious games for cybersecurity
8.5. Microgames methodology
8.6. Results
8.7. Conclusions
8.8. Limitations
8.9. Discussion
8.10. References
9 Wargames and Their Practices Within Military Organizations
9.1. Wargaming and wargames
9.2. History and main features of the wargame
9.3. Wargames and computing
9.4. The ongoing search for balance
9.5. References
10 A Tabletop Game Hijacked to Build Managerial Theories
10.1. Introduction
10.2. Game-based training for young cooperative training managers
10.3. The method: play first, theorize later
10.4. Benefits of the pedagogical system
10.5. Conclusion
10.6. References
11 Educational Innovation Through FLOSS Serious Gaming
11.1. Introduction
11.2. Serious gaming
11.3. Pedagogical uses of Minetest/Luanti
11.4. Results and discussion
11.5. Conclusion
11.6. References
12 Digital Games to Build a Knowledge Base
12.1. Introduction
12.2. Games to build lexico-semantic resources
12.3. The challenge is to attract players and ensure data quality
12.4. The JeuxDeMots project: acquisition and consolidation
12.5. The resource obtained and the playful ways in which it is built up
12.6. Conclusion
12.7. References
13 Games as a Basis for Automatic Analogy Analysis
13.1. Introduction
13.2. Analogical square
13.3. JeuxDeMots and Analogia
13.4. Intersector
13.5. Conclusion
13.6. Appendix: some representative analogies
13.7. References
14 Serious Games and Design Thinking: A Possible Combination?
14.1. Introduction
14.2. Flee the Skip
14.3. Onion Soup
14.4. Conclusion
14.5. References
List of Authors
Index
Other titles from iSTE in Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Management
End User License Agreement
List of Tables
Chapter 1
Table 1.1. Correspondence between stages of play development in humans and no...
Chapter 4
Table 4.1. Comparison of broadcasting elements of actual plays: Rôle’n Play, ...
Table 4.2. Comparative analysis of preparation elements for the French langua...
Table 4.3. Comparative analysis of interaction elements in the French languag...
Chapter 5
Table 5.2. Study structure
Chapter 9
Table 9.1. Main categories of wargames versus other forms of war games
Table 9.2. Two other sets of variables for categorizing wargames
Table 9.3. Other categories of wargames by intended purpose
Table 9.4. Other categories of wargames according to two modalities implement...
Table 9.5. Some categories of computerized military games according to the ex...
Chapter 11
Table 11.1. Structure of the two IS project management courses
Table 11.2. Results of student feedback. Values are on a four-level Likert sc...
Table 11.3. Summative test results (out of 20)
Chapter 12
Table 12.1. List of project games, with their type, modality(ies) and purpose
Table 12.3. Evolution of the average number of challenges, on 12 terms presen...
List of Illustrations
Chapter 1
Figure 1.1. Sensory-motor play/eopaidia matrix
Figure 1.2. Mesopaidia/symbolic play matrix
Figure 1.3. Neopaidia/matrix of play with game rules
Chapter 3
Figure 3.1. A prehistoric population discovers a video game DVD-ROM and perce...
Figure 3.2. A prehistoric population discovering a sponge and then playing wi...
Figure 3.3. Left: a sponge designed for washing dishes; right: a toy sponge i...
Figure 3.4. Left: sponge pet toys; right: sponge bath toys (images generated ...
Figure 3.5. The game with rules (ludus) that can feature a scoring system or ...
Figure 3.6. Serious gaming involves hijacking existing games and toys to assi...
Figure 3.7. Left: a game with rules; right: a serious game with both rules an...
Figure 3.8. A sponge can be used to give the answer to a quiz in class. It is...
Figure 3.9. A dishwashing sponge can take the shape of a cat (image generated...
Figure 3.10. On the left, a sponge die for washing dishes; on the right, a sp...
Figure 3.11. On the left, a toy sponge cut into small pieces; on the right, a...
Figure 3.12. Examples of sponges based on videogame references such as Tetris...
Figure 3.13. In a supermarket, shelf labels can provide clues as to whether a...
Chapter 4
Figure 4.1. Top left: a map in Rôle’n Play (source: https://youtu.be/zw3l7XgH...
Figure 4.2. Costumed players in Donjons & Jambons (source: https://youtu.be/o...
Figure 4.3. Top left, the commentary area and IRC chat of a live episode of R...
Figure 4.4. Left: a StrawPoll in Aventures (source StrawPoll: http://www.stra...
Figure 4.5. Top left: fan art for Rôle’n Play (source: https://role-n-play.fa...
Chapter 5
Figure 5.2. The teams at work (images generated by ChatGPT)
Figure 5.3. The GM teacher in action: about to validate an answer... or not! ...
Chapter 6
Figure 6.1. Number of agile games referenced for this study, by source consul...
Figure 6.2. Redundancy distribution by source pair. For a color version of th...
Figure 6.3. Map of agile games referenced for this study. For a color version...
Figure 6.4. Venn diagram showing the 56 games present at least twice in the c...
Chapter 10
Figure 10.1. The educational system
Figure 10.3. The Miro collaborative space (screen shot). For a color version ...
Chapter 11
Figure 11.1. Minetest/Luanti’s Classroom mod is fully integrated into the sof...
Figure 11.2. Picture of the Team Building team in Minetest/Luanti. The object...
Figure 11.3. The university of the future imagined by the 37 German, Canadian...
Figure 11.4. Jordaan district in Amsterdam, reproduced in Minetest/Luanti by ...
Chapter 12
Figure 12.1. Example of a JDM game in which the player is asked to indicate p...
Figure 12.2. Result of JDM game regarding the French term for salmon (fish) w...
Figure 12.3. Sémintox game. The player has proposed a number of candidates, a...
Figure 12.4. End of Sémintox game (same target word as previous figure). Each...
Chapter 13
Figure 13.3. Simplified translated illustration of part of RezoJDM, the lexic...
Chapter 14
Figure 14.1. Flee the Skip (Orange Labs, 2008). For a color version of this f...
Guide
Cover Page
Table of Contents
Title Page
Copyright Page
Introduction
Begin Reading
List of Authors
Index
Other titles from iSTE in Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Management
Wiley End User License Agreement
Pages
iii
iv
xiii
xiv
xv
xvi
xvii
xviii
xix
xx
xxi
xxii
xxiii
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
271
272
273
274
275
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
Innovation in Engineering and Technology Set
coordinated byDimitri Uzunidis
Volume 9
Serious Games and Innovation Gains
Think Innovation through Games
Edited by
Stéphane Goria
First published 2025 in Great Britain and the United States by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms and licenses issued by the CLA. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms should be sent to the publishers at the undermentioned address:
ISTE Ltd27-37 St George’s RoadLondon SW19 4EUUK
www.iste.co.uk
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.111 River StreetHoboken, NJ 07030USA
www.wiley.com
© ISTE Ltd 2025The rights of Stéphane Goria to be identified as the author of this work have been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s), contributor(s) or editor(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of ISTE Group.
Library of Congress Control Number: 2024952943
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication DataA CIP record for this book is available from the British LibraryISBN 978-1-83669-014-6
IntroductionA Brief History and Variety of Games for Serious Purposes
Over the last 30 years, a special vocabulary has been coined. This refers to games or gaming activities designed or adapted to make organizations more competitive, take a different approach to work and make tasks less constraining or more motivating. The expressions used are very varied indeed, and among the most common are the following: serious games, game with a purpose, agile games, serious gaming, serious play and gamification. Their roots in society are currently very strong and multifaceted, which is why this book sets out to explore some of these various forms: examining them from the point of view of their originality and their contribution to innovation, as well as the added value they can bring to an organization, a user or a customer. In fact, this book offers a journey through the practices and designs of serious games which are hidden among the widespread serious video games designed for educational purposes.
So, if we think of play as the device that accommodates the game used to achieve a serious end, the oldest forms can only be found outside those linked to humanity. Indeed, animals play serious games, or at least have activities that can be likened to them (see Chapter 1). This is where the oldest forms of serious games can be found, and they can be dated back hundreds of thousands – even millions – of years.
That said, from the point of view of human history, based on current knowledge, play has been redirected, at least occasionally, for serious purposes since Antiquity. First and foremost, we have gambling and betting. Indeed, dice have been found in numerous archaeological excavations, the oldest of which was found in a tomb in Ur, Mesopotamia, which dates back to 4,500 BCE [BOT 08]. Similarly, it is hard not to think of competitions such as the Panhellenic Games, including the Olympic Games and the Pythian Games, which were not only dedicated to athletic competitions, but also to musical ones. These games dedicated to the gods were also a time of peace and reunion between members of enemy cities. Moreover, to stay within the Hellenistic world, the metaphor was employed very early on by philosophers such as Plato (e.g. in his allusion to games of the city by analogy with the political city) [BER 11]. Of course, military transpositions in the form of games have also come down to us. Among these are games such as Wei Hai (the Chinese forerunner of Go) and Chaturanga (the Indian forerunner of Chess). Other games have come down to us, such as the Egyptian Senet and the Greek Petteia, but it is difficult to attribute a serious use to them directly, even if the latter cannot be excluded from this reasoning. In a similar vein, we can also mention games such as Mancala or Wari, including Awalé, which can be used to teach mathematical calculation [NUM 23], as well as algorithmics, since, like the game of Go, it was not until the beginning of the 21st century that an artificial intelligence beat the best players. In this way, the use of games for pedagogical purposes is very old and manifold, since we have sources and relics of alphabetical letters, such as toy soldiers made of various materials (including ivory), which enable children to play and learn [DEG 95]. We also note, in the use of Mancala, for example, that this game was directly integrated into a funerary ritual, since it was, in this context, intended to entertain and amuse the spirit of the deceased before departure from the earthly world [GRU 77].
Over the centuries, the approach to pedagogy through play, or ludopedagogy, at least with children, gradually became more refined, until the 18th century, when several mature, dedicated forms such as games (card and board games, puzzles, etc.) could be identified, including those proposed by Pastor Jean-Frédéric Oberlin [THO 10]. The games proposed at the time already bore a strong resemblance to those used today for utilitarian purposes, including pedagogy. For example, the forms and uses of some of Oberlin’s games are very similar to those of current edutainment games such as the geographic puzzle. This work on games for children’s education continued throughout the 19th century, with notable contributions such as those of Friedrich Froebel and his educational games (construction games, ball games, ring games, etc.) [THE 02]. Parallel to this evolution, in the military field, a first notable turning point in the consideration of games for serious purposes, as forms designed precisely for these needs, took place between the 18th and 19th centuries, both in the fields of pedagogy and military reflection. Indeed, the first wargames (data-based war or battle simulation games) were developed, such as the naval combat system based on wooden sticks or warship figurines proposed in Great Britain by John Clerk [CLE 27] and the first Prussian Kriegsspiels or wargames on map, including those by Johann Christian Ludwig Hellwig [HEL 80], Georg Venturini [VEN 98] and the von Reisswitz family [VON 12, VON 24]. Since then, their use in armies has become established; they have spread throughout the world and have endured to this day (see Chapter 9), including in their form as tabletop games [APP 20].
Similarly, while military wargames were gradually developing in Prussian general staffs up to 1870, and then in the other powers of the time, an acceleration of game proposals for educational purposes, but not only for children or the military, took place between the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century [PER 11], even if older forms probably preceded them. Business games and other simulations used for educational purposes concerning the management of a company also emerged [TOU 17], such as Vital Roux’s simulated business operations [ROU 00], Adolf Galliker’s business games [LOS 38] and Mary Mironova Birshtein’s simulation games (designed to train industrial managers in the USSR) [GAG 87].
Even if its uses were numerous and still enduring, for more than a century, play used for serious purposes was limited to pedagogy or military reflection. For example, another form of play was experimented with in the early 20th century for medical purposes, such as the Therapeutic Theater proposed by sociologist and psychiatrist Jacob Levy Moreno [CHA 08]. This type of play was more or less at the origin of the first roleplaying for business activities [MIL 51], which are still used today. It can also be seen as a source of inspiration for the team-building or T-grouping activities that developed in the 1960s [HIG 02], and which are very much in evidence in current management practices.
Thus, even before the First World War, multiple forms of games for utilitarian purposes were already present in many areas of society. This phenomenon became more pronounced after the Second World War and the start of the Cold War, with the spread of corporate roleplaying games [KAU 60], including business wargames, inspired by wargames [ORI 08], complementing the corporate games already mentioned. These were wargames without maps, with the exception of dashboards. They emulated the principle of closed wargames (or three-table wargames). In these games, at least two teams competed without meeting each other, each in a different room, and communicated their decisions to a refereeing team which liaised with all the teams and informed them of the results obtained and other changes taking place during the course of the game.
With the emergence of computer science, a new, serious use of games appeared, aimed at testing and improving the calculation and reasoning capabilities of the first computer programs. Games such as Morpion (Tic-Tac-Toe), Nim, checkers and chess foreshadowed research that continues into the 21st century, involving a wider variety of games [ALV 12].
In 1970, Clark Abt [ABT 70] first used the expression “serious games” in a book of the same name and in the sense in which it is used today, except that the games he presented were not digital. In this respect, this decade saw the first successful sales of video game consoles and the first personal computers, which were accompanied by the first attempts to develop serious games. For example, the US Army continued to invest in games for serious purposes, and simulation orders were placed with video game designers such as Ralph Baer, who developed an anti-tank fire training system for this client [WYC 11]. This type of military investment continued and was refined on the basis of real data over the following decades [VAN 13]. Naturally, it was accompanied by the development of serious civilian video games, including numerous educational games, and complemented by attempts at advergames such as Atari’s Tooth Protectors (a kind of adaptation of the Space Invaders game, in which teeth have to be protected from food attacks), developed in response to a request from the pharmaceutical company Johnson and Johnson [BOG 07]. This type of game inspired the creation of persuasive games in the 2000s, which are games whose main objective is to convey a message and influence their players in order to raise awareness or convince them to change their beliefs or behavior in relation to a given situation [BOG 07]. In the same vein, we can mention expressive games, which are true roleplaying games, but whose adventure content also encourages reflection on a real-life problematic situation [GEN 16]. These games can also be described as empathic games, and Martine Mauriras-Bousquet’s definition [MAU 74] of corporate roleplaying games seems to fit them if we generalize the context, as these games are designed to help managers put themselves in their subordinates’ shoes, understand their problems and see things from their point of view. Forgotten for several decades, these games have once again been the subject of research and have reappeared under this name, even if it is also used to refer to pure leisure games with a very strong emotional interactive content [CAB 14].
The 1990s saw a further increase in serious gaming activities, as well as the development or adaptation of games for utilitarian purposes, such as the SimCity game designed to raise awareness of urban planning issues [ALV 12]. Beyond the digital field, this was also the decade in which Lego Serious Play [BLA 16], a collaborative thinking method based on Lego bricks, was conceived and still very much in vogue in companies and training centers, as well as the first games that would later be called agile, such as Estimation Poker (see Chapter 6).
That said, it was once again the US Army that was behind the first major success of serious games in the early 2000s. Based on the development engine of a first-person shooter and a multiplayer game (Unreal Tournament), the US Army designed and offered America’s Army free of charge, in order to boost its recruitment capabilities [SMI 09]. The game was first accessible via dedicated arcade terminals, then online, and finally transformed into a format for e-sport competitions. Following this highly publicized success, a movement to encourage the design of serious games and related research developed internationally. Since then, a large number of serious video games have been released on a regular basis, some of them very successful. Among these, a particular type of serious game known as “game with a purpose” (GWAP) (see Chapters 12 and 13) stands out. Foldit software is one of the most successful of this category of serious games. It was developed to take advantage of crowdsourcing (i.e. a system whereby as many people as possible are asked to contribute, usually free of charge, to a complex or time-consuming task) by using games to solve protein folding problems [EST 12]. Its first aim was to find suitable protein positions to prevent the spread of a virus such as AIDS. More recently, it has been adapted to search for foldings that prevent the development of Covid-19.
This craze for the development of serious video games has also benefited other approaches that were struggling to find their audience. This is the case for serious activities using a game or toy, generally referred to as serious gaming, serious modding, serious diverting [BOU] or serious play, of which Lego Serious Play is perhaps the best-known form. These activities can be based on a variety of edutainment techniques [LEP 19] and may involve the diversion of games for the general public (see Chapters 10 and 11). However, as mentioned above, these digital, analog or hybrid games can also be used to achieve non-pedagogical objectives by tackling a problem in a different way, as a tool for simulation, mediation, exchanging views on a situation, stimulating creative and/or collaborative skills, etc. [BLA 16]. The design and use of tabletop games inspired by professional military wargames and other serious board games [ABT 71] has also given rise to numerous adaptations. These involve a form of simplified simulation and/or the use of tabletop gaming as a tool for mediation between experts or trainers and learners, including in more or less complex contexts such as learning theories (see Chapter 10) or cyberterrorism (see Chapter 8). Moreover, gaming can also be a tool for conducting research, and not just being the object of it. We tend to forget this possibility, even though it is both interesting and innovative in its own right (see Chapter 7).
The range of opportunities offered by games as a mobilizable device for carrying out utilitarian tasks has also given rise to other names and practices, including gamification. The latter term has given rise to much discussion and controversy, as well as numerous applications and scientific publications. Gamification can be approached as a design process employing game elements to develop or modify non-game systems or artifacts (see Chapter 3). These criticisms focus on the fact that many applications, particularly digital ones, are essentially based on the acquisition of points or badges to motivate people to complete a task and, in this way or another, can be likened to tools for manipulating people. Some authors even refer to them as exploitationware [BOG 14]. However, this type of design method based on the integration of game elements, when carried out ethically, is not akin to a kind of gamewashing and can therefore be a source of innovation. A design process that takes gamification into account can be integrated with design thinking methods (i.e. user-centered design and rapid prototyping) or, conversely, the design of these devices can fall within the scope of design thinking approaches (see Chapter 14). It is difficult to be exhaustive about the variety of games used, modified (modding) [ALV 12, SOU 21], hijacked or transformed, as there are so many and new forms are constantly emerging.
Nevertheless, we would like to mention the case of play activities that started out as purely ludic, but have evolved into serious forms. This transformation of a ludic activity into a utilitarian form differs from author to author: laborization [DIP 16, SIN 21], deludicization (or degamification, disengamement, ungamification) [BRO 21, GOR 23], playborization [ROS 15] or workification [TÖR 19, BOL 22]. There are nuances between these terms. For example, playborization is used to describe a work process or task performed as a complement to a game or in a playful environment, without the latter being considered as work in itself. On the other hand, workification and laborization are proposed to qualify tasks that are supported by a gaming activity, but which have become work for the players concerned. In this way, professional e-sports brings together various forms of workification of gaming activities. This is also the case for all game shows (for example, TV shows), where the host and the production and supervisory staff are paid (the players are less often, depending on the type of show and their participation time). Professional video game streaming activities may be part of this transformation. On the playborization side, we have activities of this type, as long as they can still be considered non-professional. The case of tabletop role-playing games (see Chapter 4) is very interesting in this respect. At the start of these practices, the aim was to show how to play this type of game to a general public who had no idea what a tabletop role-playing game was (the best-known being Dungeons & Dragons). Little by little, certain groups of players are becoming professionalized in terms of video editing, scenery and other animation effects. This phenomenon, which is underway in many countries and applies to other types of games, is a good illustration of what voluntary laborization can mean. To speak of the workification of certain players, they must be forced to play, or at the very least employed, or even recruited, in order to play games for video broadcast. These tabletop role-playing games remain tools that can be mobilized, adapted or designed more easily than their digital equivalents, at least if this type of resource is not accessible by those wishing to exploit it. For example, a tabletop role-playing game can be adapted to teach a foreign language and encourage participants to exchange ideas [LEP 23], or used as a teaching aid to experience an adventure close to a real-life simulation, allowing, for example, to ascertain whether skills have been acquired in terms of principles and situations of use (see Chapter 5).
This book aims to answer a number of questions that readers may have concerning serious games, serious gaming activities and some of their variants. Its chapters can be read independently of one another. They question and shed light on both the nature of the game or serious gaming activity and its potential impact on the emergence of different kinds of pedagogical innovations, processes, products or services. It focuses on games and game-related activities. It also shows the contributions that these types of games can make to organizations, but does not delve into the case of gambling. By extension, however, it does address the future of these games, at least in their digital form (see Chapter 2). Indeed, as video games have almost limitless development prospects, we thought it would be interesting to explore the inspiring, forward-looking visions of the future that science-fiction films could provide for serious video games. By the same token, video games and science fiction films are also sources of reflection as well as inspiration, shedding light on the way in which the future of serious gaming and society can be thought of.
Since serious games and the corresponding activities form a complex whole, some chapters present detailed application cases, as well as a description of the games covered, enabling the reader to put them into practice. For example, the mobilization of open source digital games for educational or other purposes requires only the creation of an account on a dedicated platform, before moving onto the phase of reflection on its use (see Chapter 11).
Similarly, it is often possible to hijack a board game by using a digital tool that is easy to access and use (see Chapter 10). Similarly, serious games used can be very easy to implement, both in terms of time and materials, such as microgames (see Chapter 8) or agile games (see Chapter 6). Furthermore, if you have a longer time frame and are familiar with tabletop role-playing games, you can adapt this type of game to involve learners, even those with no previous experience of this type of game (see Chapter 5).
Whether you are an expert, an enthusiast or simply curious, you will find plenty of examples in this book to help you put serious gaming into practice. Furthermore, to paraphrase James Dunnigan, a successful wargame designer, once you have played games in a category, you are in a position to design them (“if you can play them, you can design them” [DUN 00, p. 354]). While digital games require specific skills, the analog games presented in the book compensate for this problem for non-computer using readers. Similarly, the chapter dedicated to the relationship between design thinking and serious games gives the reader some basic principles concerning the rapid prototyping of this type of game (Chapter 14).
Once you have read through this book, you will have a global, historical and up-to-date view of these games, and, above all, if you wish, you will be able to envisage their implementation in the innovation context that interests you. If necessary, the accompanying bibliography will enable you to delve deeper into specific aspects, as required.
References
[ABT 70] ABT C.,
Serious Games
, University Press of America, New York, 1970.
[ALV 12] ALVAREZ J., DJAOUTI D.,
Introduction au Serious Game
, Questions Théoriques, Quercy, 2012.
[APP 20] APPLEGET J., BURKS R., CAMERON F.,
The Craft of Wargaming: A Detailed Planning Guide for Defense Planners and Analysts
, Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, 2020.
[BER 11] BERRY V., “Jouer pour apprendre : est-ce bien sérieux ? Réflexions théoriques sur les relations entre jeu (vidéo) et apprentissage”,
Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie
, 37(2), 1–14, 2011.
[BLA 16] BLAIR S., RILLO M.,
Serious Work: How to Facilitate Meetings & Workshops Using the Lego Serious Play Method with Conscious Incompetence
, ProMeet, London, 2016.
[BOG 07] BOGOST I.,
Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Videogames
, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2007.
[BOG 14] BOGOST I., “Why gamification is bullshit”, in WALZ S.P., DETERDING S. (eds),
The Gameful World: Approaches, Issues, Applications
, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 65–79, 2014.
[BOL 22] BOLDI A., RAPP A., TIRASSA M., “Professionals, streamers and amateur players: An ethnography for exploring organizational behaviours in different work-play conditions”, in PRACANA C., WANG M. (eds),
Psychological Applications and Trends
, Gima, Lisbon, 410–414, 2022.
[BOT 08] BOTERMANS J.,
The Book of Games: Strategy, Tactics and History
, Sterling Publishing, New York, 2008.
[BOU 16] BOUKO C., ALVAREZ J., “Serious gaming, serious modding and serious diverting… are you serious?!”, in JOYCE L., QUINN B. (eds),
Mapping the Digital: Cultures and Territories of Play
, Brill, Leiden, 101–113, 2016.
[BRO 21] BROUGERE G., “Paradoxes of Gamification”, in LE LAY, S., SAVIGNAC, E., LÉNEL P. et al. (eds),
The Gamification of Society?
, ISTE Ltd, London and John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1–18, 2021.
[CAB 14] CABALLERO V., “Empathic games are here to stay! What’s next”, in
Presentation at the Game Developers Conference
, March 17–21, San Francisco, 2014.
[CHA 08] CHAMBERLAND G., PROVOST G.,
Jeu, simulation et jeu de rôle
, Presses de l’Université du Québec, Quebec, 2008.
[CLE 27] CLERK J., RODNEY G.B.,
An Essay on Naval Tactics, Systematical and Historical. With Explanatory Plates. In Four Parts
, Adam Black, Edinburgh, 1827.
[DEG 95] DE GRANDMONT N
.
,
Pédagogie du jeu. Jouer pour apprendre
, De Boeck Supérieur, Issy-les-Moulineau, 1995.
[DIP 16] DIPPEL D.A., FIZEK S., “Ludification of work or labourisation of play? On work-play interferences”, in
Proceedings of the 1st Joint International Conference of DIGRA and FDG
, Dundee, 1–6, 2016.
[DUN 00] DUNNIGAN J.,
Wargame Handbook: How to Play and Design Commercial and Professional Wargames
, Club Press, New York, 2000.
[EST 12] ESTELLÉS-AROLAS E., GONZÁLEZ-LADRÓN-DE-GUEVARA F., “Towards an integrated crowdsourcing definition”,
Journal of Information Science
, 38(2), 189–200, 2012.
[GAG 87] GAGNON J.H., “Mary M. Birshtein: The mother of Soviet simulation gaming”,
Simulation & Games
, 8(1), 3–12, 1987.
[GEN 16] GENVO S., “Defining and designing expressive games: The case of Keys of a gamespace”,
Kinephanos, Journal of Media Studies and Popular Culture
, Special Issue, April, 90–106, 2016.
[GOR 23] GORIA S., “Knowledge management as a prism to better distinguish useful forms derived from or inspired by games or play activities”, in GARCÍA MÁRQUEZ F.P., SÁNCHEZ LOJA R.V. (eds),
From Theory of Knowledge Management to Practice
, IntechOpen, London, 165–192, 2023.
[GRU 77] GRUNFELD F.V.,
Games of the World
, Ballantine Books, New York, 1977.
[HEL 80] HELLWIG J.C.L.,
Versuch eines aufs schachspiel gebaueten taktischen spiels von zwey und mehrern personen zu spielen
(
Attempt to Play a Tactical Game Based on Chess by Two or More People
), Siegfried Lebrecht Crusius, Leipzig, 1780.
[HIG 02] HIGHHOUSE S., “A history of the T-group and its early applications in management development”,
Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice
, 6(4), 277–290, 2002.
[KAU 60] KAUFMANN A., FAURE R., LE GARFF A.,
Les jeux d’entreprises
, Presses Universitaires de France, Paris, 1960.
[LEP 19] LÉPINARD P., VANDANGEON-DERUMEZ I., “Apprendre le management autrement : la ludopédagogie au service du développement des soft skills des étudiant.e.s”, in
Actes de la XXVIIIe Conférence Internationale de Management Stratégique
, Dakar, 1–24, 2019.
[LEP 23] LEPINARD P., “L’apprentissage expérientiel par le jeu pour l’acquisition des connaissances théoriques managériales”,
Recherche en Sciences de Gestion
, 5, 489–516, 2023.
[LOS 38] LOSEY E., La maison de commerce fictive dans l’enseignement commercial, Report, Neuchâtel, 1938.
[MAU 74] MAURIRAS-BOUSQUET M., “An educational technique of great potential: Simulation games”,
Prospects
, 4(4), 555–578, 1974.
[MIL 51] MILLER D.C., “Introductory demonstrations and applications of three major uses of role playing for business and government administrators”,
Sociometry
, 14(1), 48–58, 1951.
[NUM 23] NUMA-BOCAGE L., “Apprendre à compter avec le jeu d’Awalé”,
Présence Africaine
, 204, 165–172, doi: 10.3917/presa.204.0165, 2023.
[ORI 08] ORIESEK D., SCHWARZ J.O
., Business Wargaming: Securing Corporate Value
, Gower, Aldershot, 2008.
[PER 11] PERLA P.,
The Art of Wargaming: A Guide for Professionals and Hobbyists
, in CURRY J. (ed.), Lulu Press Inc., Morrisville, 2011.
[ROS 15] ROSSITER N., ZEHLE S., “The aesthetics of algorithmic experience”, in MARTIN R., PETERSON V.J. (eds),
The Routledge Companion to Art and Politics
, Routledge, Oxfordshire, 214–221, 2015.
[ROU 00] ROUX V.,
De l’influence du gouvernement sur la prospérité du commerce
, Fayolle, Paris, 1800.
[SIN 21] SINA C., FENG L., “A study on the phenomenon of “ digital labour” based on the media exposure behaviour of older people – WeChat app “Xiao Nian Gao +” as an example”,
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Publications (IJMRAP)
, 6(1), 108–113, 2021.
[SMI 09] SMITH R.D.,
Military Simulation & Serious Games: Where We Came from and Where We are Going
, Modelbenders Press, 2009.
[SOU 21] SOUSA M., “Gamifying serious games: Modding modern board games to teach game potentials”, in DHAR U., DUBEY J., DUMBLEKAR V. et al. (eds),
Gaming, Simulation and Innovations: Challenges and Opportunities: 52nd International Simulation and Gaming Association Conference
, Springer, Berlin, 254–272, 2021.
[THE 02] THÉVENAZ-CHRISTEN T., “Approche didactique des enjeux du jeu à l’école première”,
Les Dossiers des Sciences de l’Education
, 7(1), 83–93, 2002.
[THO 10] THOUROUDE L., “L’école maternelle : une école de l’entre-deux”,
Carrefours de l’éducation
, 2, 43–55, 2010.
[TÖR 19] TÖRHÖNEN M., HASSAN L., SJÖBLOM M. et al., “Play, playbour or labour? The relationships between perception of occupational activity and outcomes among streamers and YouTubers”, in
Proceedings of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 2019 (HICSS-52)
, Hawaii, 2058–2067, 2019.
[TOU 17] TOUZET L., ““Gamification” et formation à la gestion : une approche des relations entre monde économique et monde ludique”, in SAVIGNAC, E., ANDONOVA, Y., LÉNEL, P. et al. (eds),
Le travail de la gamification : enjeux, modalités et rhétoriques de la translation du jeu au travail
, Peter Lang, Brussels, 35–54, 2017.
[VAN 13] VAN CREVELD M.,
Wargames: From Gladiators to Gigabytes
, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2013.
[VEN 98] VENTURINI G.,
Beschreibung und Regeln eines neuen Krieges-Spiels zum Nutzen und Vergnügen: besonders aber zum Gebrauch in Militair-Schulen (Description and Rules of a New War-Game for Use and Enjoyment: Especially for Use in Military Schools)
, JG Röhss, Schlesmig, 1798.
[VON 12] VON REISWITZ G.L.,
Taktisches Kriegs-Spiel oder Anleitung zu einer mechanischen Vorrichtung um taktische Manoeuvres sinnlich darzustellen (Tactical War-Game or Instructions for a Mechanical Device for the Sensual Representation of Tactical Maneuvers)
, Gädicke, Berlin, 1812.
[VON 24] VON REISSWITZ F.G.H.L., GRABOWSKA K.,
Anleitung Zur Darstellung Militairische Manover Mit Den Apparat Des Kriegs-spieles (Instructions for the Presentation of Military Maneuvers with the Apparatus of the War-Game)
, Gädicke, Berlin, 1824.
[WYC 11] WYCKOFF E.B.,
The Guy Who Invented Home Video Games: Ralph Baer and His Awesome Invention
, Enslow Elementary, Bekerley Heights, 2011.
Note
Introduction written by Stéphane GORIA.
1Serious Games: Human or Animal Invention?
The aim of this chapter is to determine whether the Serious Game is a human invention. To answer this question, we propose to check whether both Serious Game and Serious Play can be found in the animal kingdom. If such a census proves negative, then we can conclude that the Serious Game could indeed correspond to a human invention. If this were not the case, then Serious Play would be better regarded as inter-species activities. This would then lead us to study whether it is possible to identify common aspects and specificities between species. If, at the same time, it is possible to identify animals that also used objects to play for utilitarian purposes, then we could see the Serious Game not as an invention, but rather as the object of human innovation. To carry out this study, we will conduct a hypothetico-deductive analysis combining readings from ethology, biology and the humanities.
1.1. Introduction
The current Serious Game movement took off with the advent of America’s Army in 2002. During the 2000s, the term Serious Game was mainly associated with the video game modality [SAW 02, CHE 05, ZYD 05, FRA 01]. Then, gradually during the 2010s, Serious Games reintegrated other modalities such as outdoor games, board games, role-playing games and escape games [ALV 16]. This broader approach to Serious Games, while including computer games, was already enshrined in the texts of Clark Abt back in the 1960s [ABT 70]. In this sense, we cannot claim that the Serious Game is an invention of the 21st century, but rather a rediscovery. Furthermore, an exploration of board games through the ages enables us to identify games that are identifiable as Serious Games, such as wargames with miniatures as early as 1773 [GOR 12]. But wargames can be traced as far back as the fifth-century BCE, if we consider them to be derivatives of Go and Chess [GOR 19]. If we consider all types of games, some paleontologists also suspect the existence of gaming artifacts as far back as the prehistoric period [DAV 55]. Given that games have a utilitarian potential, it is possible that Serious Play, which concerns both the artifact (Serious Game) and the activity (Serious Play) [ALV 19], could date back to the prehistoric period. On the basis of this observation, we could be tempted to view the Serious Game as a very old invention, whose current movement is merely a rediscovery tinged with innovations brought about by the digital modality and its various incarnations, such as video games, virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR) and mixed reality (MR).
This observation leads us to question the advent and origins of the Serious Game. Where and when did the first Serious Games appear? What forms did they take?
Trying to answer such questions on the basis of ancient artifacts can lead us down a blind alley. Indeed, paleontologists are faced with numerous questions when estimating the origin and period of appearance of ancient game artifacts. Mancala, for example, is the subject of contradictory conclusions as to its origin and date of appearance [LOM 17]. Moreover, playing a game does not necessarily mean setting up a dedicated material artifact. Indeed, games can be played with pebbles or a simple stick [HEN 69], or even without any material at all, as in the case of guessing games.
Against this backdrop, where the very origins of the first games seem hard to pinpoint, are we in a position to date the advent of the Serious Game? To answer such a question, we propose to take a step to the side and try another approach. We propose to focus on ethology and biology rather than paleoethology. Indeed, if it turns out that some animals do play Serious Games, then we can deduce that this is not necessarily a human invention. This hypothesis would be reinforced by the discovery of serious gaming practices in animal species that predate the advent of Homo sapiens. This would lead us to deduce that Serious Play has probably accompanied our ancestors since the dawn of time. At the same time, it would open up new philosophical perspectives.
To conduct this study, we will adopt a hypothetico-deductive analysis based on readings studying play in animals, in particular those by Claude Bensch. We will then try to match his writings with those of sociologists and other researchers who have studied play in humans.
1.2. Biological approaches to play
1.2.1. Biological functions of play
Claude Bensch’s publications are based on a collection of scientific studies focusing on play in animals, notably monkeys, rats and birds [BEN 00]. Based on proven indicators in the field of biology, Bensch hypothesizes that play necessarily represents an evolutionary utility for the species studied, as it is maintained over generations. Bensch sees two main biological functions associated with play. The first is to be found in the post-natal period. Based on solo play (individual play), under the protection and invitation of its mother, the animal would play in order to self-stimulate from an informational point of view and thus promote neuronogenesis (central structuring). At this stage, play fulfills the role of both “stimulant and comburant” (p. 231). Then, little by little, the animal plays with its congeners. This is what Bensch calls the advent of social play. Initially, social play is built around genetically programmed functions – feeding, defense and reproduction – with the idea that actions are spontaneous, short and unfinished. For Bensch, the notion of unfinished action is illustrated by the example of play-fighting, in which the aim is not to attack or injure the partner. Moreover, roles are reversed. The dominant of one round becomes the dominated of the next. These are “complex, ritualized behaviors regulating relations with the Other for apparently diverse purposes”. Then, little by little, these social games become more complex, integrating acquired experience. For Bensch, the second function of social play is to stimulate epigenetic development. Finally, in adulthood, play becomes more “a tool rather than an essential function”. Bensch remains cautious, but believes that these same functions of play can also be found in humans.
1.2.2. Play and genetic coding
Bensch’s publications suggest that during the “central structuring” phase, play is biological in nature, that is, genetically encoded. In fact, scientific experiments on young rats show that, after a period of isolation, they play more for a certain period of time in the presence of other rats. It is as if they are missing something. In addition, the stimulation or inhibition of play could also be achieved with the administration of antagonistic chemicals such as opium and naloxone. According to Bensch, the nature of play could be sex specific. Male rats are more inclined to play-fighting, while female subjects are more inclined to grooming. Testosterone is thought to be involved in this differentiation. Thus, by administering this hormone or stopping its production at certain stages of ontogeny, we have observed increases or decreases in play fighting in male and female rats. These findings, which are not exhaustive, led Bench to suggest that there is a genetically encoded play circuit in rats. By extension, such a circuit could be found in other mammals, including humans. While this has yet to be scientifically proven, a number of indicators seem to corroborate this hypothesis. Until we learn more, we can assume that the first play activities are biologically programmed, including in humans.
1.2.3. Paidia and child development stages
Bensch establishes a link between this biological game and the notion of “paidia” proposed by Caillois. The latter corresponds to the “primary power of improvisation and joy” [CAI 58, p. 75]. Caillois illustrates paidia with the following examples of play: “the infant laughing at his rattle”, “causing a construction to collapse”, “sticking out one’s tongue, making faces” and “hopping” (pp. 77–78). What these examples by Caillois have in common is that they are all games for young children. We also note that these examples, arranged in this way, seem to mark a parallel evolution in games, which are becoming more complex in the sense that they require more psychomotor skills. This would seem to reflect Caillois’ intention to show a link between children’s maturation and the games they play. This brings us back to the work of Jean Piaget, who classified games according to the child’s development into three main stages: “exercise games”, “symbolic games” and “rule games” [PIA 45, pp. 110–153].1
The first corresponds to the child’s development from birth, when they focus on observing, finding and manipulating objects. The second corresponds to the stage when the child, aged 2–3, attaches a symbolic dimension to objects: for example, a cardboard box representing a house, a stick acting as a gun, etc. Finally, the last is associated with the period when the child, aged 5–6, introduces rules into games. For Caillois, this corresponds to the introduction of ludus, the “taste for gratuitous difficulty” [CAI 58, p. 75]. Although the child seems to be linked primarily to paidia, as Kellner points out, this does not mean that paidia is a prerogative: “paidia designates that which belongs to the child, but is not limited to children’s play” [KEL 00, p. 66]. Henriot explains that the sensory-motor category does not disappear in children at the age of 2. It certainly fades away, but remains, even in adulthood, integrated with the other categories [HEN 69, p. 35]. We find the same idea in Bensch’s work, who describes the evolution of paidia in three distinct stages linked to the subject’s three stages of maturation: for immature play, we speak of “the eopaid stage, or eopaidia, then for puberty, the medopaid stage, or mesopaidia, and finally, for adulthood, the neopaid stage or neopadia” [BEN 00, p. 223].
1.2.3.1. Eopaidia
Eopaidia, situated at the very beginning of “the first stages of postnatal life, is the abundance of solitary motor acts, ‘solo play’”. For Bensch, this may be the “only authentic play behavior. The only one for which a specific essential function should be sought”. The latter, according to Bensch, is dedicated to neuronogenesis, to central structuring via “neurostimulating and neurostructuring influences”. Solo play initially presents characteristics that are
Crude, rough, bumpy, incomplete [...] with its sudden starts and ends without cause, the actor being outside reality, feeding on perceptions of his own internal creations, proprioceptive flows generated by the motor component of the process and perceptive analysis of the varied sensorialities then brought into play [BEN 00, pp. 227 and 228].
This is an innate behavior, initiated by an internal behavior that finds its patterns in a stock of equally innate strategies: defense, reproduction and feeding. The evolution in the complexity of children’s play observed in the texts of Caillois and Piaget is also found in Bensch’s publications on the animals studied:
The more the central epigenetic structuring is completed, the more the phenomenon will be elaborated, and the motor skills coherent and adapted. As the memory heritage is acquired, enriched and organized, the play framework will become more binding, more complex and more realistic, eventually encompassing as accessories the elements of the environment, first imaginary, then real (p. 228).
1.2.3.2. Mesopaidia
Mesopaidia is marked by play with the Other, as in the prepubescent or pubescent subject. According to Bensch, this is a developmental stage aimed at integrating the Other and, by extension, the group. The aim is to ensure the survival of the group and, by extension, the species. As a result, the frequency of solo play diminishes in favor of social play. The aim of these games is to encourage social interaction and socialization. Bensch points out that when a subject has been “deprived of play, it is not play that has been deprived, but contact with others, and, as soon as he is freed, he will use play as a pretext and means to resume and, above all, intensify his contacts” (p. 239). We thus return to the idea of play as “stimulation and comburant”, but whose aim is now “behavioral ontogenesis”.
1.2.3.3. Neopaidia
Neopaidia is found in mature subjects. It is defined by Bensch as a “behavioral ontogenetic phase characterized by the use of eo- and mesopodial play behaviors in complex social interactions, sometimes with ritualization and, also, integration into concatenated chains” (p. 291). In concrete terms, play in a mature subject could be a means of learning to position ourselves in society or of ensuring internal equilibrium (homeostasis) in the face of tension or stress.
1.3. Inter-species play frameworks
1.3.1. Matching
It is now tempting to match Piaget’s stages of play maturation with Bensch’s: sensory-motor play and eopaidia, symbolic play and mesopaidia, rules and neopaidia. While this seems to be the case for the first and last stages, we can nevertheless question the second correspondence between symbolic play and mesopaidia. Piaget’s idea is of a process of assimilation based on a situation that can be the object of a game, for example, playing mom and dad. As Henriot explains, symbolic play is not about imitating a situation in order to reproduce it, but rather about representing this situation with a starting point and a frame of reference [HEN 69, pp. 36–37]. Thus, playing at mom and dad will not necessarily correspond to the reproduction of parental activities perceived by the child, but will rather constitute a basis for playing and imagining situations on this theme. What about Bench’s experience of mesopaidia? For him, the idea is to turn toward the Other. In the particular case of playing mom and dad, the child takes into account the Other, in this case their parents, or at least the representation they may have of them. Of course, symbolic games are not limited to situations based on the Other. They can also refer to objects, places, elements of the landscape, etc. This implies perceiving the environment around us to identify situations that will serve as a frame of reference for play. This consideration of the environment for play is also found in animals after the stage of sensory-motor play, as Bensch explains:
Little by little, as the subject becomes more autonomous, these motor activities take the environment into account: space, geographical features (hill, stretch or current of water, rock...) and structural features (walls, trees, obstacles...), as well as the objects, inert or living, that furnish or populate it, and the actor often incorporates elements of his own body into his action: horn, hair, tail, paws, thumb [...] Finally, the other, the closest living being will, in turn, be concerned; parents first, then siblings, peers and adults, intra- and extraspecific [BEN 00, p. 46].
Thus, we can establish a correspondence between symbolic play in humans and the mesopaid stage in animals, with a corresponding shift from self-centred to allocentric play.
We can now look for common elements and invariants shared by the different species that play, with a view to representing more objectively what the game could be, at least as a basic framework. We can start with the game’s various stages of development.
Table 1.1 highlights the identical development of three stages of play in humans and animal species capable of playing alone or with others. We have established these correspondences based on the publications of Caillois, Piaget and Bensch.
Table 1.1.Correspondence between stages of play development in humans and nonhuman animal species that can play alone or with others
Humans
Nonhuman animals
Ways of playing (Caillois)
Piaget’s stages
Bensch’s stages
Type of play
Focus on the player
Schemes
0–2 years
Immature
Paidia
Sensory-motor games
Eopaidia
Solo play
Self-centered (subject’s body)
Instinctive games based on innate patterns (genetics)
2–4 years
Puberty
Symbolic games
Mesopaidia
From 5/6 years
Adult
Ludus
Games with rules
Neopaidia
Social play
Allocentric (the Other, the group, the environment)
Games based on patterns of lived experience (epigenetics)
Table 1.1
