The game itself?

May combine two claims.

Some Counter-Strike levels are infinitely more popular than others, and the most popular levels embody what Counter-Strike is as a game.

“In fact, it is more complicated; some Counter-Strike levels are infinitely more popular than others, and the most popular levels embody what Counter-Strike is as a game.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Others are predominantly textual (hyperfiction, Twine games) and others are hybrids that rely on text and mechanics equally (adventure games).

“Others are predominantly textual (hyperfiction, Twine games) and others are hybrids that rely on text and mechanics equally (adventure games).”

May combine two claims.

Dust 2 was not an original Counter-Strike map but became the most popular map; through this popularity, Dust 2 helped define what an ideal Counter-Strike map should be like.

“As the name suggests, Dust 2 (2001) was not an original Counter-Strike map but became the most popular map.Through this popularity and from then on, Dust 2 helped define what an ideal Counter-Strike map should be like (see [34]).”

• cites [34]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Some games are purely text-based (e.g., riddles, classic detective or crime mysteries), meaning that they contain their mechanical structures either implicitly or explicitly.

“Some games are purely text-based (e.g.riddles, classic detective or crime mysteries), meaning that they contain their mechanical structures either implicitly (detective story) or explicitly (choose your own adventure).”

May combine two claims.

In football, playing as a goalkeeper is a very different playing process than playing as a striker, but football is not two different games.

“On the other hand, in football (soccer, to Americans), playing as a goalkeeper is a very different playing process than playing as a striker, but it would be hard to claim that football is two different games.”

May combine two claims.

Most games are created gradually, in a creative testing loop, or even more slowly, over centuries or millennia, like chess and Snakes and Ladders.

“We might think of such a process as exceptional, but most games are created gradually, in a creative testing loop (cf.[29]; [46]; [42]) or even more slowly, over the centuries or millennia, like chess and Snakes and Ladders.”

• cites [29]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [46]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [42]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

World of Warcraft offers many different playing processes, from auction-house trade to battleground competitions; as players can devote themselves to one and not the other, these are two different games in the same virtual world.

“World of Warcraft [16] offers many different playing processes, from auction-house trade to battleground competitions.As players can easily devote themselves to one and not the other, these are, in fact, two different games in the same 'game' or virtual world.”

• cites [16]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

The quality of a game ontology determines a vital aspect of the quality of the analysis.

“The quality of this ontology, then, determines a vital aspect of the quality of the analysis.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: The quality of a game ontology determines a vital aspect of the quality of the analysis.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

When we approach a game for the first time, we typically already have a preconceived, ontological notion of what kind of game it is.

“When we approach a game for the first time, we typically already have a preconceived, ontological notion of what kind of game it is.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

There can be no ludo-hermeneutics as such.

“We argue that there can be no ludo-hermeneutics as such”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: A viable hermeneutic theory requires a stable ontology.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

A preconceived ontological notion of a game will guide or misguide the interpretation and may change in the gameplay experience, which may affect and even change the ontology itself.

“This preconceived notion will guide or misguide the interpretation and may change in the gameplay experience which may affect and even change the ontology itself.”

May combine two claims.

With the indefinable and problematic category of games, there exists no stable ontology, and therefore no viable ludo-hermeneutic theory has hitherto been created.

“With the indefinable and problematic category of games, however [9], there exists no stable ontology (although sub-ontologies are possible, say, for mancala games, or card games), and therefore no viable ludo-hermeneutic theory has hitherto been created.”

• cites [9]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: A viable hermeneutic theory requires a stable ontology.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Arsenault and Perron consider only the third spiral as hermeneutic whereas the other two spirals are labeled heuristic.

“It is problematically conspicuous that Arsenault and Perron consider only the third spiral as hermeneutic whereas the other two spirals are labeled heuristic.”

• cites [12]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

Every game interpretation rests in a particular game ontology, whether implicit or explicit.

“and that every game interpretation rests in a particular game ontology, whether implicit or explicit.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

The notion of games or even computer games is far too wide to comfortably fit into a single hermeneutic mold, whether textual or ludic.

“However, as the two examples show, the notion of games or even computer games is far too wide to comfortably fit into a single hermeneutic mold, whether textual or ludic.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

A human being understands how to be authentically when it manages to realize its very own possibilities to be.

“On the other hand, a human being understands how to be authentically when it manages to realize its very own possibilities to be.”

• cites [38]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Understanding as asserting means to thematize that which cannot be coped with and to find reasons for this, such as the game is too difficult, the player is not skilled enough, or the simulated platforms are too far apart in order to make Mario jump from one to the other.

“• Understanding as asserting, then, means to thematize that which cannot be coped with and to find e.g.reasons for this -such as the game is too difficult, the player is not skilled enough, or the simulated platforms are too far apart in order to make Mario jump from one to the other, etc.”

• cites [24]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

Computer gameplay normally does not consist of solving scientific problems; instead it consists of the practical challenge of playing.

“Computer gameplay normally does not consist of solving scientific problems, instead it consists of the practical challenge of playing.”

May combine two claims.

The problem with Karhulahti's double-hermeneutics is that it allows to understand driving a car as a double-hermeneutics, too, and thus, in the long run, turns hermeneutics as such into a double-hermeneutic process.

“The problem with this double-hermeneutics is furthermore that it allows to understand driving a car as a double-hermeneutics, too, and thus, in the long run, turns hermeneutics as such into a double-hermeneutic process.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

This happens when we realize that we cannot play Kaizo Mario in the self-presumed way in which we play Super Mario World.

“This happens when we realize that we cannot play Kaizo Mario in the self-presumed way in which we play Super Mario World.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

Even when faced with a new game, players typically have at least some knowledge of the gameplay from previous encounters with similar games.

“Even when faced with a new game, players typically have at least some knowledge of the gameplay from previous encounters with similar games.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

One of the central problems of previous discussions of game hermeneutics is that most approaches are not properly grounded in existing hermeneutic theories such as those by Heidegger and Gadamer.

“One of the central problems of previous discussions of game hermeneutics is that most approaches are not properly grounded in existing hermeneutic theories such as those by Heidegger and Gadamer.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Understanding as interpreting means to make sense of that which cannot be coped with on the first level of understanding.

“• Understanding as interpreting, then, means to make sense of that which cannot be coped with on the first level of understanding [24].”

• cites [24]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

No matter if the artwork itself is an object or a process, the interpreter engages with it from a third-person perspective and engages with it in a hermeneutic circle that has the form of the to-and-fro movement of a game at play.

“No matter if the artwork itself is an object (e.g. a painting) or a process (e.g. a theater play or interactive art), the interpreter engages with it from a third-person perspective and engages with it in a hermeneutic circle that has the form of the to-and-fro movement of a game at play [30].”

• cites [30]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

In Heidegger's hermeneutics understanding is first of all practical and it is the prerequisite of all theoretical understanding.

“In Heidegger's hermeneutics understanding is first of all practical and it is the prerequisite of all theoretical understanding -since humans first and foremost exist in their everyday copings with the world and not in a mode of scientific interpretation of their world.”

• cites [24]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

Until today hermeneutics is commonly regarded as a practice of text interpretation.

“Until today hermeneutics is commonly regarded as a practice of text interpretation.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

The medium of a game can be playing humans or animals, but also natural phenomena such as waves or light, or even the process of interpretation in a hermeneutic circle.

“This medium can be playing humans or animals, but also natural phenomena such as waves or light, or even the process of interpretation in a hermeneutic circle [30].”

• cites [30]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Heidegger distinguishes between three types of understanding: coping, interpreting, and asserting.

“Eventually, Heidegger distinguishes between three types of understanding: Coping, interpreting, and asserting [24].”

• cites [24]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Hermeneutics is now considered the central way of how humans exist in the world.

“Hermeneutics is now considered the central way of how humans exist in the world [20].”

• cites [20]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

Understanding how to hammer neither implies one's capacity to understand the cultural meaning of a hammer in a given discourse, nor the capacity to name its scientific characteristics.

“Hence, understanding how to hammer neither implies one's capacity to understand the cultural meaning of a hammer in a given discourse, nor the capacity to name its scientific characteristics.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Schleiermacher distinguishes between a narrow idea of hermeneutics as literary or text interpretation and a broad idea of hermeneutics which designates human understanding in general.

“In doing so Schleiermacher distinguishes between a narrow idea of hermeneutics as literary or text interpretation and a broad idea of hermeneutics which designates human understanding in general.”

• cites [10]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

While the primary epistemological mode of the natural sciences is to explain (erklären), the humanities' mode is understanding (verstehen).

“While the primary epistemological mode of the natural sciences is to explain (erklären), the humanities' mode is understanding (verstehen) (cf.[10] and [39]).”

• cites [10]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [39]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The problem Karhulahti is actually dealing with is that between the interpretation of a praxis (or a process) as something which is experienced from a first-person perspective versus the interpretation of an object which is present-at-hand as something which is looked at from a third-person perspective.

“We will later see that the problem Karhulahti is actually dealing with is that between the interpretation of a praxis (or a process) as something which is experienced from a first-person perspective versus the interpretation of an object which is present-at-hand as something which is looked at from a third-person perspective (cf.[41]).”

• cites [41]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

The former form of interpretation is involved in Heidegger's notion of dealing with something or the world in a ready-to-hand manner and the latter form of interpretation is involved in Heidegger's notion of dealing with something which is present-at-hand.

“The former form of interpretation is involved in Heidegger's notion of dealing with something or the world in a ready-to-hand manner and the latter form of interpretation is involved in Heidegger's notion of dealing with something which is present-at-hand [32, pp. 102-107].”

• cites [32]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Coping, when successful, is different from a heuristic in that it proceeds in an unreflected way.

“Clearly, coping, when successful, is different from a heuristic in that it proceeds in an unreflected way.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

This primordial practical understanding of the world is the condition of possibility of text interpretation or a scientific interpretation of the world.

“This primordial practical understanding of the world, then, is the condition of possibility of text interpretation (e.g. in terms of an allegoresis), or a scientific interpretation of the world.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

If there is more than one option to choose from then we can speak of a room for maneuver.

“If there is more than one option to choose from then we can speak of a room for maneuver.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

For Heidegger, a human being is always already understandingly-in-the-world in that humans always already tacitly understand their world, its specific affordances, limitations, and conditions by just dealing with it in their everyday lives.

“For Heidegger, a human being is always already understandingly-in-the-world in that humans always already tacitly understand their world, its specific affordances, limitations, and conditions by just dealing with it in their everyday lives.”

• cites [32]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

These three stages of understanding describe the process of how something which is first experienced as ready-to-hand changes its mode into being experienced as present-at-hand; i.e. it changes from being experienced in use (first-order experience or first-person experience) to being experienced while being looked at (second-order experience or third-person experience).

“In effect, these three stages of understanding describe the process of how something which is first experienced as ready-to-hand changes its mode into being experienced as present-at-hand; i.e. it changes from being experienced in use (first-order experience or first-person experience) to being experienced while being looked at (secondorder experience or third-person experience).”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

With Heidegger, we can distinguish between an authentic and inauthentic understanding.

“With Heidegger, we can furthermore distinguish between an authentic and inauthentic understanding.”

• cites [38]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Hermeneutics is rooted in the exegesis of biblical texts in order to analyze the word of God, and to apply it as a guideline for a life well-lived.

“From this perspective, hermeneutics is rooted in the exegesis of biblical texts in order to analyze the word of God, and to apply it as a guideline for a life well-lived.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Dilthey set out to characterize the German Geisteswissenschaften (humanities) and raises hermeneutics to the rank of its central method.

“Dilthey, a follower of Schleiermacher, set out to characterize the German Geisteswissenschaften (humanities) and raises hermeneutics to the rank of its central method.”

• cites [10]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [39]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

Most game players are already familiar with their computer games of choice, so the practical challenge of playing hardly exists as a problem to be solved.

“And typically, this challenge hardly exists as a problem to be solved since most game players are already familiar with their computer games of choice.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

Gadamer makes the play element in hermeneutics productive.

“It is Gadamer who makes this play element in hermeneutics productive as we will show in a bit.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Hermeneutics ranges from an interpretation involved when practically doing something (like playing a game) to interpretation in the sense of deriving theoretical meaning from some object or text.

“As we will point out, hermeneutics ranges from an interpretation involved when practically doing something (like playing a game) to interpretation in the sense of deriving theoretical meaning from some object or text (interpreting a text, or interpreting a game's textual meaning).”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

With Heidegger's Being and Time, hermeneutics takes a new turn and is no longer merely considered the epistemological method of the humanities or a method of text interpretation.

“With Heidegger's Being and Time [32] hermeneutics takes a new turn, and is no longer merely considered the epistemological method of the humanities or a method of text interpretation.”

• cites [32]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [20]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

If there is any doubly-interpretational process going on, then it is the simultaneous self-interpretation of the player and the player's interpretation of the game process which mutually influence each other.

“If there is any doubly-interpretational process going on, then it is the simultaneous self-interpretation of the player and the player's interpretation of the game process which mutually influence each other.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

For Gadamer, a game is first and foremost a form that needs a medium to perform its characteristic movement.

“As a matter of fact, a game for Gadamer is first and foremost a form that needs a medium to perform its characteristic movement [30].”

• cites [30]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Gadamer makes the concept of play central and productive in his hermeneutics.

“Following this, Gadamer makes the concept of play central and productive in his hermeneutics.”

• cites [30]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

Arsenault and Perron seem to think of hermeneutics merely in terms of textual interpretation, and use heuristics for solving practical problems and tasks like understanding how a game works.

“Hence, Arsenault and Perron seem to think of hermeneutics merely in terms of textual interpretation, and use heuristics for solving practical problems and tasks like understanding how a game works.”

• cites [12]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

A human being understands how to exist inauthentically when only realizing those options which are pre-interpreted as the most common way to exist.

“A human being understands how to exist inauthentically when only realizing those options which are pre-interpreted as the most common way to exist [38].”

• cites [38]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

For Gadamer, the subject of a game is not merely the human player but the game itself.

“For Gadamer, the subject of a game is not merely the human player but the game itself [30].”

• cites [30]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

Arsenault and Perron's notion of hermeneutics is much too narrow compared to its contemporary denotations, which cover all sorts of practical understandings of the world in addition to text hermeneutics.

“First, their notion of hermeneutics is much too narrow compared to its contemporary denotations, which cover all sorts of practical understandings of the world in addition to text hermeneutics.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Influencing the interpreted while interpreting only means that an interpreter interprets a process (which she is part of) rather than an object.

“Influencing the interpreted while interpreting only means that an interpreter interprets a process (which she is part of) rather than an object.”

May combine two claims.

Karhulahti seems not to account for the fact that the interpreter herself is part of the interpreted and mistakes this for a double hermeneutic which can easily be misunderstood.

“In addition, Karhulahti seems not to account for the fact that the interpreter herself is part of the interpreted and mistakes this for a double hermeneutic which can easily be misunderstood.”

• cites [35]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

For Gadamer, the artwork only comes into existence when it is appreciated or interpreted by an observer; i.e. when it is part of a hermeneutic process.

“For Gadamer, the artwork only comes into existence when it is appreciated or interpreted by an observer; i.e. when it is part of a hermeneutic process.”

• cites [30]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

In both scholar and critic cases, the method will be dictated by the motive, and will therefore be as idiosyncratic as the motive itself.

“In both these types of cases, the method will be dictated by the motive, and will therefore be as idiosyncratic as the motive itself.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Scholars hardly ever interpret just for the sake of interpretation; there is always an ulterior motive, typically in the shape of a research question. Critics are motivated by normativity.

May combine two claims.

The crucial difference between World of Warcraft and football is that in football the players work together on the same project and in the same process, whereas in WoW they do not.

“Perhaps the crucial difference between these two examples is that in football the players work together on the same project and in the same process, whereas in WoW they do not.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

As long as we can describe the mechanical system independently of the textual or diegetic elements, we can maintain the difference between textual representation and mechanics, and the functional distinction between text and game is preserved.

“As long as we can describe the mechanical system independently of the textual or diegetic elements (e.g., as a system of formal connections), we can maintain the difference between textual representation and mechanics, and the functional distinction between text and game is preserved.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

The identification of the game's ontological nature is the first step of ludo-hermeneutics, and the only step that implicitly or explicitly is necessary.

“This is the first step of ludo-hermeneutics, and the only step that implicitly or explicitly is necessary.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

There can be no ludo-hermeneutic method as such, only pragmatic methods serving particular purposes.

“There can be no ludo-hermeneutic method as such, only pragmatic methods serving particular purposes.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

Game hermeneutics is the meeting of a particular game and a particularly motivated player, and, depending on the motive, will result in a particular, critical enunciation.

“Game hermeneutics, then, is the meeting of a particular game and a particularly motivated player, and, depending on the motive, will result in a particular, critical enunciation.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

This holds true for players, critics, and theorists alike.

“This holds true for players, critics, and theorists alike.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

There is a to-and-fro movement between the abstract and the particular, where playing leads to increased ontological understanding.

“As we saw in the Journey example in the introduction of this paper, there is of course a to-and-fro movement between these two aspects, the abstract and the particular, where playing leads to increased ontological understanding.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Each game (or game genre) comes with its own implied hermeneutics.

“Each game (or, depending on how we delimit games, game genre; see [31]) comes with its own implied hermeneutics.”

• cites [31]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

The same goes for all other artworks: If they fail to keep their audience engaged in a process of ongoing interpretation they cease to be artworks.

“The same goes for all other artworks: If they fail to keep their audience engaged in a process of ongoing interpretation they cease to be artworks.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

A hermeneutics of ludic objects and processes presumes an ontological basis.

“A hermeneutics of ludic objects and processes, like any other hermeneutics, presumes an ontological basis as mentioned above.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

A particular process of interpretation cannot take place without an underlying ontological model, however weak it may be initially.

“A particular process of interpretation cannot take place without an underlying ontological model, however weak it may be initially.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

For scholars, the process of asserting the results of the investigation becomes the main effort of the investigation itself; interpretation becomes the formulation of that interpretation, rather than the interpretation itself.

“For them, and unlike, say, a musician interpreting a musical score or an actor interpreting a role on stage, the process of asserting the results of the investigation becomes the main effort of the investigation itself.Thence, interpretation becomes the formulation of that interpretation, rather than the interpretation itself.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

This hermeneutics is its own circular process or interpretive 'feedback loop' [2], by which we play, learn and grasp.

“This hermeneutics is its own circular process or interpretive”

• cites [2]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

In cases where we cannot describe the mechanical system independently (detective novels and verbal role-playing games), we invoke the ontological category of fiction-based games, or games of mimicry.

“In the few cases we cannot do this (detective novels and verbal role-playing games) then we simply invoke the ontological category of fiction-based games, or games of mimicry [21].”

• cites [21]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

The game encountered by the player is not the hermeneutic process, but its ontological result-its here-and-now.

“Ironically, however, the game encountered by the player is not the hermeneutic process, but its ontological result -its here-and-now.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

The universal method that can be formulated here is the identification of the game's ontological nature.

“The universal method that can be formulated here is the identification of the game's ontological nature.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

A game is a type or family of phenomena that may use texts and semiotic codes for ludic purposes, but in different ways depending on the game's ontology.

“A game is a type or family of phenomena that may use texts and semiotic codes for ludic purposes, but in different ways depending on the game's ontology.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Games have the existential requirement that their players keep them at play by interpreting the tasks provided by the game in a way that maintains the game.

“Consequently, for a game to come to itself it is necessary that its players understand how to keep a game at play, and therefore games have the existential requirement that their players keep it at play by interpreting the tasks provided by the game in a way that maintains the game.”

• cites [30]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

What has been called game hermeneutics is rather the player's hermeneutics: the process of becoming-a-player.

“What has been called game hermeneutics (see [11], [36]), is rather the player's hermeneutics: the process of becoming-a-player.”

• cites [11]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

• cites [36]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

May combine two claims.

Heidegger's hermeneutics is focusing on the point of view of an interpreting human subject whereas in Gadamer's hermeneutics the subject of interpretation is the game or the game of interpretation itself.

“With this in mind, it appears that Heidegger's hermeneutics is focusing on the point of view of an interpreting human subject whereas in Gadamer's hermeneutics the subject of interpretation is the game or the game of interpretation itself.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Ludo-hermeneutics, at best, must be a family of hermeneutic theories or models rather than one.

“This should warn us that ludo-hermeneutics, at best, must be a family of hermeneutic theories or models rather than one.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Games are not one type of phenomenon.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

The player's hermeneutics is also the uncovering of the game's ontology; the realization of what it takes to be a player of that particular game, and of getting to know the game's here-and-now.

“This is also the uncovering of the game's ontology; the realization of what it takes to be a player of that particular game, and of getting to know the game's here-and-now.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

The rest depends on game type and player motivation.

“The rest depends on game type and player motivation.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

A different way to keep a game at play than preventing it from a premature game-over is to keep exploring for its possibilities to unfold.

“A different way to keep a game at play than preventing it from a premature game-over is to keep exploring for its possibilities to unfold.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

As the game is played, it becomes itself and changes itself in an endless double hermeneutic feedback loop between the player and the game; both are played by the other, and both change-the player more quickly, the game more slowly.

“As the game is played, it becomes itself and changes itself in an endless double hermeneutic feedback loop between the player and the game; both are played by the other, and both changethe player more quickly, the game more slowly.”

May combine two claims.

Game types form interpretive communities and interpretive communities motivate players to develop specific methods of interpretation, assertive or not.

“Game types form interpretive communities [28] and interpretive communities motivate players to develop specific methods of interpretation, assertive or not.”

• cites [28]Not matched

  Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

An analysis that places all weight on the textual aspects will not be able to address the hermeneutic dimension of playing, or what it means to be a player of that game.

“An analysis that places all weight on the textual aspects will not be able to address the hermeneutic dimension of playing, or what it means to be a player of that game.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

There is no universal gameplay that pertains to every kind of game, and there is no hermeneutic method of game analysis as such; only game-specific or genre-specific depending on how we conceive of the game/genre (token/type) demarcation.

“There is no universal gameplay that pertains to every kind of game, and there is no hermeneutic method of game analysis as such; only gamespecific or genre-specific depending on how we conceive of the game/genre (token/type) demarcation.”

May combine two claims.

Even though Counter-Strike existed as a game before Dust 2 was made, it became more itself as a result of Dust 2.

“Even though Counter-Strike existed as a game before Dust 2 was made, it became more itself as a result of Dust 2.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

A synthesis of the alternatives (a family of hermeneutic theories vs. a high-abstraction theory covering all games) is a general, high-level template that can be expanded into several targeted hermeneutic models in each ludic subdomain.

“A synthesis of these two alternatives is a general, high-level template, which can be expanded into several targeted hermeneutic models in each ludic subdomain.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

The game itself has, or better, is a hermeneutic method, whereby it becomes itself via repeated play.

“The game itself has, or better, is a hermeneutic method, whereby it becomes itself via repeated play.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The practices of ludo-hermeneutics presume a specific ontological basis, either explicitly or implicitly.

“The practices of ludo-hermeneutics presume a specific ontological basis, either explicitly or implicitly.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

A game, understood as a mechanical system and not a social process, is not a text.

“A game, then -understood as a mechanical system and not a social process -is not a text.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

The primary locus of ludic meaning is the player's hermeneutic behavior-the process of making sense of the game.

“Instead, we are addressing and analyzing the uninformed spectator's view, the game's textual/audiovisual output, and not engaging with the primary locus of ludic meaning, which is the player's hermeneutic behavior -the process of making sense of the game.”