Interminable game: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "{{a|design|}}Call this the {{author|James P. Carse}} fan fiction, or the expanded universe. Carse introduced the world to his conception of “finite games..." |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
| {{bg|green}}'''Infinite''' || {{bg|pink}}Finite || {{bg|pink}}Finite || {{bg|pink}}[[Interminable game]] <== This is what happens most of the time. | | {{bg|green}}'''Infinite''' || {{bg|pink}}Finite || {{bg|pink}}Finite || {{bg|pink}}[[Interminable game]] <== This is what happens most of the time. | ||
|} | |} | ||
{{sa}} | |||
*{{Finite and Infinite Games}} | |||
*[[Game theory]] |
Revision as of 15:03, 5 April 2022
The design of organisations and products
|
Call this the James P. Carse fan fiction, or the expanded universe.
Carse introduced the world to his conception of “finite games” — fixed rules, boundaries, duration and an agreed zero-sum objective of victory — and “infinite games” — no fixed rules, boundaries, duration, or objective other than keeping going. Boxing on one hand, community building on the other.
That great populariser of his work, Simon Sinek, observes the folly of trying to play an infinite player with finite tactics: where you play to win by reference your own pre-determined criteria and your opponent is playing to survive on whatever terms she can, you will get bogged down, dispirited, demotivated and eventually give up, while she will flourish against all odds: as happened to the Americans in Vietnam and, we like to imagine, is happening to Vladimir Putin in the Ukraine about now.
But there are some other permutations. When you play a finite game with infinite tactics, we suppose for the simple reason that such a player would quickly get sent off, and in any case would lose (maybe inventing the game of rugby union on the way to an early bath) — nor what would happen if both participants in an infinite game use “finite” tactics.
Of course, to use finite tactics in what could be a collaborative environment betrays a lack of perspective, a failure of imagination, and an obsession with what has gone before at the expense of what might yet be. So it should be no wonder that that’s what most people do most of the time.
Game Type | Player 1 Tactics | Player 2 Tactics | Outcome |
---|---|---|---|
Finite | Finite | Finite | Magnificent gladiatorial contest. Someone loses, but honour is kept, stories are told, legends forged etc. |
Infinite | Infinite | Infinite | Imaginative world-building. Collaboration. Hacky-sack, man! |
Finite | Finite | Infinite | Player 2 picks up ball and runs with it (therefore gets sent off) or sits in a corner playing with daisies (therefore gets walloped. |
Infinite | Infinite | Finite | Player 2 Gets bogged down and gives up. |
Finite | Infinite | Infinite | Players abandon game and do something else (like playing an infinite game) |
Infinite | Finite | Finite | Interminable game <== This is what happens most of the time. |