game of life
What is a game?
It’s the age-old question and one I’ve long contemplated.
Hate to spoil it for you, but I don’t yet have the answer. Wait, before you leave…I do have something to share that explores this very question.
But first, this:
Since I’ve been delving into game design more these days, I’ve decided to dedicate part of this site to that very thing.
This post is a bit of a bridge between my works on the theory of general creativity (see what I did there?), which I’m now calling “Creative Life” and my discussions on game design, which I’ve titled “Moving Pieces.”
While I expect some crossover, I think it best to keep them separated, like two betta fish that look so lovely on their own but cause quite a stir when mingled.
Now, the other thing:
This spanning-the-gap post is dedicated to the late John Horton Conway, a brilliant mathematician and a game designer in his own way who passed away last month due to complications from COVID-19.
Whether he liked it or not, John Conway is often known for his Game of Life.
No, it’s got nothing to do with the 1860s Milton Bradley board game, Life (besides the name). You can learn more about John’s game from the short (and great) video below:
Game of Life
There is so much I find fascinating here. Like many folks who have made numerable contributions to society, John wishes he’d been famous for something else.
That’s the thing isn’t it? We don’t get to choose how we’re remembered or recognized. Often, it comes as a surprise what others latch on to.
I remember hearing how the musician Chris Rice lamented being known for a silly song he’d made about cartoon characters singing praises.
If nothing else, it goes to show that you might want to take care what you put out into the world since you never know what’ll stick to you.
Now, as far as the game itself, it’s worth wondering whether the Game of Life is even a game at all. Isn’t it more of a simulation or an automation? The only thing a “player” actually controls is the initial setup. From there, the “game” runs itself, though it takes a dedicated person or computer to continue running it.
I won’t go into it further here, but there is much to be said about the difference between a game and a simulation, though I’ve found plenty of room for crossover between the two.
The other thing I love is how many discoveries and possibilities have come from something with such simple rules. I think that’s one of the marks of a great game.
There’s a simplicity that leads to complexity, creating opportunity for discovery. It’s the magic that happens when a game takes on a life of its own (see what I also did there).
It reminds me a little of the Mandelbrot set, whose results when graphed lead to infinitely complex fractal patterns that emerge from a relatively simple formula. Look it up, it’s way better when someone shows it to you.
I’ve heard it said that life is a game. I can’t say I entirely agree. However, there are some really cool places where both game and life converge, building upon one another and opening doorways to new possibilities.
As I delve into game design, those are the spaces I wish to discover and then, once I do, to stay for a while and have a look about.
Update:
I found this nifty site where you can play the Game of Life for yourself:
Though there’s no way to win or lose, it certainly feels more like a game to me this way.