@inproceedings{Neitzel2008,
  author    = {Neitzel, Britta},
  title     = {Metacommunicative circles},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-24647},
  year      = {2008},
  abstract  = {The paper uses Gregory Bateson's concept of metacommunication to explore the boundaries of the 'magic circle' in play and computer games. It argues that the idea of a self-contained "magic circle" ignores the constant negotiations among players which establish the realm of play. The "magic circle" is no fixed ontological entity but is set up by metacommunicative play. The paper further pursues the question if metacommunication could also be found in single-player computer games, and comes to the conclusion that metacommunication is implemented in single-player games by the means of metalepsis.},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{JennettCoxCairns2008,
  author    = {Jennett, Charlene and Cox, Anna L. and Cairns, Paul},
  title     = {Being "in the game"},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-24682},
  year      = {2008},
  abstract  = {When people describe themselves as being "in the game" this is often thought to mean they have a sense of presence, i.e. they feel like they are in the virtual environment (Brown/Cairns 2004). Presence research traditionally focuses on user experiences in virtual reality systems (e.g. head mounted displays, CAVE-like systems). In contrast, the experience of gaming is very different. Gamers willingly submit to the rules of the game, learn arbitrary relationships between the controls and the screen output, and take on the persona of their game character. Also whereas presence in VR systems is immediate, presence in gaming is gradual. Due to these differences, one can question the extent to which people feel present during gaming. A qualitative study was conducted to explore what gamers actually mean when they describe themselves as being "in the game." Thirteen gamers were interviewed and the resulting grounded theory suggests being "in the game" does not necessarily mean presence (i.e. feeling like you are the character and present in the VE). Some people use this phrase just to emphasize their high involvement in the game. These findings differ with Brown and Cairns as they suggest at the highest state of immersion not everybody experiences presence. Furthermore, the experience of presence does not appear dependent on the game being in the first person perspective or the gamer being able to empathize with the character. Future research should investigate why some people experience presence and others do not. Possible explanations include: use of language, perception of presence, personality traits, and types of immersion.},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{Mitsuishi2008,
  author    = {Mitsuishi, Yara},
  title     = {Diff{\´e}rance at play : unfolding identities through difference in videogame play},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-24697},
  year      = {2008},
  abstract  = {This paper approaches the debate over the notion of "magic circle" through an exploratory analysis of the unfolding of identities/differences in gameplay through Derrida's diff{\´e}rance. Initially, diff{\´e}rance is related to the notion of play and identity/difference in Derrida's perspective. Next, the notion of magic circle through Derrida's play is analyzed, emphasizing the dynamics of diff{\´e}rance to understand gameplay as process; questioning its boundaries. Finally, the focus shifts toward the implications of the interplay of identities and differences during gameplay.},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{Juul2008,
  author    = {Juul, Jesper},
  title     = {The magic circle and the puzzle piece},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-24554},
  year      = {2008},
  abstract  = {In a common description, to play a game is to step inside a concrete or metaphorical magic circle where special rules apply. In video game studies, this description has received an inordinate amount of criticism which the paper argues has two primary sources: 1. a misreading of the basic concept of the magic circle and 2. a somewhat rushed application of traditional theoretical concerns onto games. The paper argues that games studies must move beyond conventional criticisms of binary distinctions and rather look at the details of how games are played. Finally, the paper proposes an alternative metaphor for game-playing, the puzzle piece.},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{Glashuettner2008,
  author    = {Glash{\"u}ttner, Robert},
  title     = {The perception of video games : from visual power to immersive interaction},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-24578},
  year      = {2008},
  abstract  = {This paper highlights the different ways of perceiving video games and video game content, incorporating interactive and non-interactive methods. It examines varying cognitive and emotive reactions by persons who are used to play video games as well as persons who are unfamiliar with the aesthetics and the most basic game play rules incorporated within video games. Additionally, the principle of "Flow" serves as a theoretical and philosophical foundation. A small case-study featuring two games has been made to emphasize the numerous possible ways of perception of video games.},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{Liboriussen2008,
  author    = {Liboriussen, Bjarke},
  title     = {The landscape aesthetics of computer games},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-24586},
  year      = {2008},
  abstract  = {Landscape aesthetics drawing on philosophy and psychology allow us to understand computer games from a new angle. The landscapes of computer games can be understood as environments or images. This difference creates two options: 1. We experience environments or images, or 2. We experience landscape simultaneously as both. Psychologically, the first option can be backed up by a Vygotskian framework (this option highlights certain non-mainstream subject positions), the second by a Piegatian (highlighting cognitive mapping of game worlds).},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{Liebe2008,
  author    = {Liebe, Michael},
  title     = {There is no magic circle : on the difference between computer games and traditional games},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-24597},
  year      = {2008},
  abstract  = {This text compares the special characteristics of the game space in computer-generated environments with that in non-computerized playing-situations. Herewith, the concept of the magic circle as a deliberately delineated playing sphere with specific rules to be upheld by the players, is challenged. Yet, computer games also provide a virtual playing environment containing the rules of the game as well as the various action possibilities. But both the hardware and software facilitate the player's actions rather than constraining them. This makes computer games fundamentally different: in contrast to traditional game spaces or limits, the computer-generated environment does not rely on the awareness of the player in upholding these rules. - Thus, there is no magic circle.},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{Ljungstroem2008,
  author    = {Ljungstr{\"o}m, Mattias},
  title     = {Remarks on digital play spaces},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-24602},
  year      = {2008},
  abstract  = {Most play spaces support completely different actions than we normally would think of when moving through real space, out of play. This paper therefore discusses the relationship between selected game rules and game spaces in connection to the behaviors, or possible behaviors, of the player. Space will be seen as a modifier or catalyst of player behavior. Six categories of game space are covered: Joy of movement, exploration, tactical, social, performative, and creative spaces. Joy of movement is examined in detail, with a briefer explanation of the other categories.},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{CalvilloGamezCairns2008,
  author    = {Calvillo-G{\´a}mez, Eduardo H. and Cairns, Paul},
  title     = {Pulling the strings : a theory of puppetry for the gaming experience},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-27509},
  year      = {2008},
  abstract  = {The paper aims to bring the experience of playing videogames closer to objective knowledge, where the experience can be assessed and falsified via an operational concept. The theory focuses on explaining the basic elements that form the core of the process of the experience. The name of puppetry is introduced after discussing the similarities in the importance of experience for both videogames and theatrical puppetry. Puppetry, then, operationalizes the gaming experience into a concept that can be assessed.},
  language  = {en}
}
@inproceedings{Pinchbeck2008,
  author    = {Pinchbeck, Dan},
  title     = {Trigens can't swim : intelligence and intentionality in first person game worlds},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:517-opus-27609},
  year      = {2008},
  abstract  = {This paper explores the role of the intentional stance in games, arguing that any question of artificial intelligence has as much to do with the co-option of the player's interpretation of actions as intelligent as any actual fixed-state systems attached to agents. It demonstrates how simply using a few simple and, in system terms, cheap tricks, existing AI can be both supported and enhanced. This includes representational characteristics, importing behavioral expectations from real life, constraining these expectations using diegetic devices, and managing social interrelationships to create the illusion of a greater intelligence than is ever actually present. It is concluded that complex artificial intelligence is often of less importance to the experience of intelligent agents in play than the creation of a space where the intentional stance can be evoked and supported.},
  language  = {en}
}