non·fic·tion games

• what is this site?

this site is an attempt at conceptualizing a distinction between (what i view as) two diametrically opposed philosophies of game design, of which most are not currently aware.



• what are "nonfiction games"?

let's consider the definition of nonfiction:



non·fic·tion - writing based on facts, such as biography or history


an easy way to process this is to think of it in terms of nonfiction stories, where the goal is to present a narrative account of something that actually happened.

however, there is more to the meaning of the word than just being based on real world events.

try to consider it along the same lines as the whitepapers that get published in scientific journals. often, these are papers that document scientific experiments which yield reproducible results. they can usually be fact-checked by anyone with the means to reproduce the experiment. as long as any of these papers are sufficiently reviewed, their content can be considered proven, true, or real. by any stretch of the imagination, these papers can also be considered nonfiction.

in the same way, a nonfiction game is a game in which the play is based on rules and outcomes that are necessarily true for all potential players.

for example: if someone plays a game of tetris and gets a particular score, any other player who happens to play the exact same game of tetris, in the exact same way, will get the exact same score as the first player. there is an inherent deterministic truth embedded in these outcomes, and it is the consistency of these outcomes on which the play of tetris is based. if two players could play the exact same game of tetris (same tetrominos and same rotation/placement) and end up not getting the same score, then keeping track of score serves no purpose. in this context, it is meaningless to compare results as they are not based on any sort of truth.

and just as in the scientific whitepapers, the results of the game can be (and are) checked. no peer-review process is necessary though, since all of the "peer-reviewing" is done in real time by the game's rules. assuming all players are playing on the same version of the rules (or code), and that no glitches occur, all results are guaranteed to be consistent with each other. the fact that nonfiction games are commonly used as platforms for competition is a direct result of this consistency. without it, there would be no point for players to compete.


• okay then, what is a fiction game?

just as before, consider a definition:



fic·tion - 1. literature, esp. short stories and novels, about imaginary events and people;
2. invention or fabrication, as opposed to fact


again, a very easy way to think of this is to just imagine a fictional story in which the author's goal is to present an imagined narrative to the reader. there is no need for any sort of derivative truth in this case, because it is understood that the author has fabricated a story for the purpose of entertaining the reader's imagination. the author gives us the truth (in the form of narrative assertions) that we need in order to comprehend what happens.

an author giving the reader these assertions can be likened to a game designer creating a game in which the play is based on the player experiencing the same kind of asserted narrative.

in this sense, a fiction game is a game in which the play is based on the player experiencing a narrative as asserted by its designer.

please note that even if the events in a fiction game really did happen (in a traditionally nonfictional sense), it does not take away from the fact that the intent of the designer is for the player to experience their narrative through the play of the game.

depending on how you view art, it may be the case that there are no wrong conclusions to be drawn about any given story. a story can mean any number of things to any number of people, and the result of this is that the outcomes of a fiction game are irrelevant for the purpose of any kind of factual comparison. the play is based on each player's own perspective of the given narrative.


• wait though, can't [insert game here] be considered both fiction and nonfiction?

you are absolutely right that by these definitions, there are some games which seem to be on both sides of the fence. while that may appear to be the case, what it comes down to is the intent of the design, from the perspective of the designer. were they trying to create an experience that is based on the player reacting to a narrative, or, were they trying to create a consistent and level playing-field for all those who participate in the game?

in the event that there is no definitive answer from the designer on any particular game, i would argue that it's a matter of debate among those interested to try to determine the designer's real intent. this would likely lead to many persistent arguments, and i fully anticipate that if this distinction ever caught on, there would be many "classic examples" of games that are just seemingly impossible to clearly classify.

i would also argue that this has little or no bearing on the validity of the distinction, as all games in the past were designed without said distinction in mind. we have never really had the technological capacity to create such immersive experiences as we do now with modern video games. because of this, the distinction has simply eluded us or has just been unnecessary.



• if the distinction was unnecessary in the past, why is it necessary now?

i view the perspective of the modern game designer as being comparable to a scientist holding a copy of On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies in one hand and The Cat in the Hat in the other, and trying to make the argument that these two writings are the same thing; that these two things should be thought about and judged under the same rubric. they may both be written works, but the scope of their intended goals is incompatible for any further comparison.

if it were actually the case that scientists were unable to recognize the distinction between a children's story and Special Relativity, how could science ever progress? the short answer is that it couldn't. in the same breath, we can look at an example comparison such as this and almost immediately realize how absurd it is because the distinction is so obvious to us. one is based on the reader gaining some insight into the universe — a fact-based observation that they can internalize as truth — and the other is something fantastical, not remotely based in reality and obviously created with the intention of entertaining children.

therefore, if we can agree that the same sort of fundamental distinction can be made toward video games, then we might conclude that the design of modern games suffers due to an oversight of such a distinction. if that is true, and we want game design to progress past that point, then it is a necessity that we recognize the difference, taking it into account when designing and considering games.



• what is the ultimate goal of making this distinction?

it is a given that games usually do not end up being so clearly distinct in the way that is described on this page. they absolutely can be (and sometimes are) used to do both of these things at once; to create an objective reality for their players, as well as to present a narrative as the content of the players' experience. but if we can learn to respect the designer's intent, as we should with such an inherently interactive medium, then we can learn to make the distinction that has been presented here. and if we can learn to make that distinction and come to recognize and define what both sides are best at, then we can maximize our ability to create effective game designs, since we will be playing to the strengths of each, rather than indiscriminately mashing it all together.

we should step back and realize what it is that we have been trying to do with games, if only so that we may focus our efforts more clearly in the future.

the only thing that can come from this newfound perspective (and what i view as the ultimate goal) is simple: better games.

get in touch: feel free to leave a comment below, send me a tweet, or send me an email