Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I know that this topic may be interesting eventually for those few who are interested in theoretical aspect of game design

But, I've finally been able to complete a couple of paper I've been working on and off for some time!

Long story short: in order to make a solid foundation for ludology, I've applied the same concept we already use in linguistic, semantic and modal logic to game (RPG in particular, but to games in general too). The idea is that a number of ideas (like "possible worlds") could be effectively applied to game too.

So, if you want to take a look and give me some feedback anyone will be much appreciated (since it's really a niche area, it's difficult to gain feedback).
The work is composed by a couple articles:

A Formal Study of Games is a foundational paper. You will fin there the considerations and primordial idea that connect linguistic and modal logic to games. It is a strictly technical paper, written for the most part using set theory, math and logic. It should be accessible even to who isn’t a scholar of the subject, but do not expect nothing particularly user-friendly. My goal here was mostly to provide a solid foundation and some logical principles that can be expanded further, debated or eventually proven wrong.
A Formal Study of Game Design is a much more practical and accessible article. It shows a limited number of application of the principles described above, and offers a number of suggestions, idea and guidelines for game design that is innovative (because depends from an innovative view on what games are).

I won't put them here directly because I'd like to keep track on how many people read them, but you can find both either on my blog here or on my ResearchGate profile. But I will gladly discuss them here too.

Thank you for any feedback ^^.

Have you ever listened to the Ludology podcast?

Thank you Nurglich, good suggestion!
No, in fact, I haven't. I'm more of a book guy, but I'll gladly listen to them soon (I can't right now because I've got a very slow connection here). It doesn't surprise me anyway: there are literally thousand of website, groups, podcast and stuff on the topics of game theory and game design. And the rise of gamification since 2012 made things even more fractured.

From what I've seen, it seems anyway that they keep an approach that I don't really approve (which is almost universally applied in game science): which is to define "games" by themselves building ludology as a separate science (please correct me if I'm wrong).

I think instead that games are somehow "meta-activities", so we should refer at least in the beginning to other branch of knowledge in order to define them (or, at least, their principles part).

I'll leave a few comment here as soon as I'll listen them anyway ^^

Wow, too deep for my feeble mind to comprehend.

I am too far away from College/University to follow....

... I am envious.