Mary Flanagan’s definition of a game in Critical Play is a lot broader and more socially focused than Crawford’s and Salen’s & Zimmerman’s. They stick to more formal definitions where games are structured systems with rules, goals, conflict, and some kind of measurable outcome like winning or losing. Flanagan pushes back on that a bit by treating games less like fixed systems and more like cultural tools. For her, games aren’t just about rules or competition they can also be a way to reflect on society, communicate ideas, and even critique real-world issues.
An activist game is designed to highlight social or political issues through gameplay, encouraging players to think critically, build empathy, or engage in discussion about real-world problems. Instead of just being entertainment, it uses play as a way to spark awareness or inspire change.
Games like checkers, tic-tac-toe, and Othello also have perfect information because all game states are visible to both players and nothing is hidden or random.
Ancient cultures often saw chance-based games as a way to communicate with fate, gods, or spiritual forces. Random outcomes were interpreted as divine will or guidance, making gambling and dice games part of rituals or decision-making.
One of the earliest tensions comes from medieval and early religious bans on gambling and dice games, often seen as immoral or sinful. Modern examples include bans or moral panic around games like Dungeons & Dragons and violent video games like Grand Theft Auto, (even pinball at one point).
A fox game is an asymmetrical game where one player (the “fox”) has different powers or goals than the other players. Something like Dead by Daylight, would be a modern example where one powerful player hunts multiple weaker players. Even though I can never seem to win as either the killer or the survivors.
Mansion of Happiness was one of the earliest American board games and was designed as a moral instructional tool. The goal was to teach players Christian virtues and good behavior as a path to happiness and salvation.
Fluxus and Surrealists used games to break rules, challenge logic, and explore creativity outside traditional art forms. Surrealists believed games could tap into the unconscious mind and reveal hidden thoughts, making creativity more universal and less controlled.
Changes in cultural values, politics, and technology often reshape games. During WWII, pinball was remarketed in the U.S. as a game of skill rather than gambling to avoid being banned, shifting its perception from luck-based gambling to controlled play.
By altering games like Monopoly and ping pong, Fluxus artists criticized capitalism, competition, and rigid rule systems. They turned familiar games into absurd or reflective experiences to question everyday structures and social norms.
Artists like Lillian Ball, Duchamp, Saito, Yoko Ono, Orozco, and Catlow use war or conflict-based game structures to critique violence, power systems, and political logic. Instead of promoting competition, they often subvert rules or slow gameplay down to make players reflect on the ethics and consequences of conflict.
Player agency is important because it forces players to actively participate in meaning-making rather than passively receive a message. When players make choices, the ideas of the game feel more personal, reflective, and impactful.