Suit introduces the nature of games and game-playing and describes the relationship between games and game rules. He also substantiates his understanding of the nature of the game with many games example common to readers, such as poker games, golf, and racing (see Suit, for example). In this paper, first, I will summarize Suit's nature of games from my personal perspective and describe my opinion on his definition. Then I will explain my understanding of this article and indicate some of my own ideas combined with my game-playing experience.
In conclusion, the game defined by Suit is a kind of inefficient activity voluntarily selected by players, which is guided by specific rules. Besides, the existence of rules makes games difficult to some extent, which also makes the game possible. However, the game rules are the route that guides the goals and does not act as ultimately binding (see Suit, for example).
First, I think his view is understandable and reasonable. The emergence of game rules makes games existent. Game rules specify the goal of a game while restricting the game to an operation mode. Besides, when players choose to play games, they do not select the quickest and most efficient way but choose a relatively inefficient one. Because game rules mostly suggest players choose this inefficient mode of operation. For instance, when playing soccer, the goal is to let the ball enter the other party's goal. If play as the quickest way, players can hold the ball with their hands and form a group to rush directly into the opponent's goal. Conversely, the rules limit players to kick the ball with their feet only, with standing and functional distribution. These rules make the game more challenging. If players don't abide by the rules, the referee will issue a yellow card or red card, which warns the player to follow the rule or send the player off. Therefore, game rules are essential elements of a game. They specify the goal of the game and limit a specifically inefficient operation mode.
Furthermore, rules do not act as ultimately binding. I think the game rules seek a balance between rules and morality. Suit use a racing game as an example. When a baby crawls out on the track in the path, the racer can choose to stop and keep racing (Suit 152). In my view, if the racer chooses to continue driving and causes the baby to die, he obeys the game rules but does not comply with the regular code of ethics. Because in the morality of the real world, human life is more important than the victory of the racing game. However, if it appears in video games, such as Grand Theft Auto (Rockstar Games/ Rockstar North, 1997), players can rely on hitting people to get points to achieve game goals. The balance between morality and rules in the game world may be different, so players in video games will have other choices in this situation. Game rules are not ultimately binding, but the worldview, values, morality, and laws of the world in which players live are the initial rules to guide players' behavior.
Additionally, it is possible to argue that the author has missed some ideas about the game and the rules in his paper. Initially, I have some comments about the author's description of the inefficient game mode guided by game rules. The author emphasizes the inefficiency of the game rules but ignores the interesting and challenging nature brought by game rules. Because whether to conduct a game activity is players' independent choice. If a game is inefficient but not enjoyable, players are wasting time. For example, in poker games, people can only win the game quickly by proper operation of the cards drawn, rather than by hitting other players' heads (Suit 148). Every time the player draws a card, there is a certain probability of a win, and it is possible to draw useless cards or key cards. This probability can bring excitement and fun. In addition, game rules are one of the necessary elements to get a fair game environment for all game players. Using the previous poker game example again, if a player wins the game by hitting another player's head, then the game is unfair to all players. Because other poker gamers use probabilities and permutations to win the game, which also the game mode advocated by the rules. Other more "effective" and "simple" ways to win games, such as hitting other players, are unfair. Therefore, players who follow the rules only use a relatively inefficient means to obtain the pleasure and excitement brought by games while maintaining a fair game environment.
Generally speaking, game rules are low efficiency means created by game makers to guide gamers toward a goal, and games depend on the existence of game rules. Playing games are player's independent choices of an inefficient way to carry out an activity, but this inefficient way can bring interesting and exciting sensory experiences. Meanwhile, under general conditions, game rules can bring a fair and safe game environment. However, rules do not act as ultimately binding. If it is to comply with laws or ethics, players may choose to violate the game rules. Therefore, Suit's definition of the game and the game rules is reasonable and understandable. I believe that My understanding of the game rules does not oppose his views, but some additions and supplements.
Bernard Suits, “What is a Game?” Philosophy of Science, Jun., 1967, Vol. 34, No. 2 (Jun., 1967), pp. 148-156
Grand Theft Auto. PC version, Rockstar Game, 1997