Cited by 17Digital Games and MediaArtificial Intelligence in GamesEducational Games and Gamification

Kaboom! is a many-splendored thing: an interpretation and design methodology for message-driven games using graphical logics

Treanor, Mike, Mateas, Michael, Wardrip-Fruin, Noah·2010·Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games

Abstract

This paper describes an explicit model for how to interpret and create simple 2D games that reasonably communicate messages through a game's representational layer in a manner that is consistent with its processes.A few prominent experimental games (e.g. Kabul Kaboom, Passage) have demonstrated that when the rhetorical implications of a game's processes and its representational layer are in harmony, worthwhile and coherent messages can be communicated. This paper reports the findings of an extensive analysis of Activision's Kaboom! (1981) [1] that explores its rhetorical design space in the service of developing a general method for the interpretation of simple message-driven games. The paper then shows how the application of this method to even a simple game like Kaboom! reveals an unexpected range of coherent potential messages. The paper concludes with a description of a design process and assistant tool that enables those who are not game designers, or even procedurally literate, to create simple games that present editorial and expressive statements. We see this project as a concrete step forward, both analytically and in enabling production, in the field of procedural rhetoric.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/1822348.1822378

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • When applying textual theory to games, visual representation needs to be addressed.

    “Furthermore, when applying textual theory to games, the addition of visual representation needs also to be addressed (Treanor et al., 2010, pp. 225-226).”

    From Real-time hermeneutics: meaning-making in ludonarrative digital games (2018) · cites this paper as Treanor et al., 2010, pp. 225-226

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Treanor, M., Mateas, M., & Wardrip-Fruin, N.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
  • University of California, Santa Cruz, CA
Venue
Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games
Publisher
ACM
Published
2010-06-19
Pages
224-231
OpenAlex
W1966069106
Cited by
17
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.74
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games (FDG) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Digital Games and Media
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Artificial Intelligence in Games
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
Keywords
procedural rhetoric, 2D games, game design, passage

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review