On the Architecture of Game Science
On the Architecture of Game Science
复制标题
论游戏科学的架构
DOI：
10.1177/1046878118762534
复制
发表时间：
2018
影响因子：
2
通讯作者：
J. Klabbers
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Klabbers
Background. Game studies show a high diversity of university departments that contribute to the field. They offer a cross-disciplinary image that includes a range of professions. Game science is responsive to the needs of government institutions, to industry, and to individuals vis-à-vis institutions. That pragmatism makes the field issue-oriented, representing a post-normal science approach in a context of political pressure, values in dispute, high decision stakes and high epistemological and ethical systems uncertainties. The body of knowledge is not yet in the form of a cohesive structure: a game science paradigm. Thematic diversity, theoretical and methodological pluralism, and a strong focus on the instrumentality of games are weak credentials within academia, arranged according to analytical science (normal science) principles. Moreover, within the conventional academic settings, game science faces serious limitations, due to the fragmented positioning in different departments and faculties (Klabbers, 2009). Aim. A comprehensive and coherent view on game science is needed that connects three levels of inquiry: the philosophy of science level, the science level, and the application level. Advances in physics have impacted on the philosophy of science, on modernism and postmodernism, and as a consequence, on game science. Being able to understand the current position of game science requires that we are aware of its scientific roots, and future options for research and professional practice. Method. Literature review with emphasis on theories of knowledge (epistemology) that focuses on game architecture, and the player’s experience. The analytical science approach to game science is insufficient to deal adequately with key questions societies nowadays are facing. Therefore, in addition to the analytical science, the design science approach to gaming is needed to be able to address issues that apply to various zones of practice, and related questions about social problem solving. Results. A coordinating frame-of-reference – a game science paradigm – is presented, independent of the instrumentality of games - taking into account the great variety of forms of play, and gaming applications. Conclusion. To advance game science, well-equipped game centers are needed that cover the three levels of inquiry: the philosophy of science level, the science level, and the application level. They should pursue a long term coherent research and educational policy, in line with the natural sciences tradition, offering both continuity and innovation.
使用隐蔽通道分析机制和 EJB 构建信息过滤器（2006）。
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2006
期刊：
SCIS2006 3C3-3
影响因子：
--
作者：
酒井剛典;森住哲也;畔上昭司;小松充史;稲積泰宏;木下宏揚
通讯作者：
木下宏揚
硼桥芳香族发色团的光化学性质 (4)
DOI：
--
发表时间：
2007
期刊：
影响因子：
--
作者：
作田絵里;Islam Saiful;山内清語;喜多村昇;作田 絵里;作田 絵里;作田 絵里;作田 絵里
通讯作者：
作田 絵里