Games Without Rules

Abstract

It is widely assumed that all games essentially have rules. This paper challenges this apparent truism. We argue that rules are merely one means for generating obstacles: features that make success more difficult. We propose that obstacles, not rules, are essential to games. This shift comes with several theoretical benefits. It accommodates games that lack explicit prescriptions or proscriptions, such as mazes or certain videogames; it avoids stretching the notion of “rule” to include physical laws, affordances, or program limitations; it better captures the phenomenology of game‐playing; and it clarifies how obstacles shape game identity and the boundaries between games and toys. The upshot is that obstacles provide a better foundation for understanding what games are.