Oyun Mekaniklerinde Aristotelesçi Varlık Bilimi: Hiyerarşik Bir Yapı

Abstract

Bu çalışma; oyun mekaniği kavramının yalnızca işlevsel ya da deneyimsel bir unsur olarak değil, aynı zamanda oyun dünyası içinde ontolojik bir varlık olarak ele almayı amaçlamaktadır. Oyuncu eylemlerini ve oyunun bu eylemlere verdiği tepkileri tanımlayan mekanikler, dijital ve analog oyunların temel yapı taşlarıdır. Deneysel teknolojilerle geliştirilen oyunlarda da önemli bir rol üstlenirler. Ne var ki mevcut sınıflandırmalar çoğunlukla mekaniklerin ne yaptığına odaklanırken, onların varlık türü olarak ne olduklarını göz ardı etmektedir. Bu çalışma, Aristoteles’in ontolojik hiyerarşisinden esinle, oyun mekaniklerini fiziksel, toplumsal ve metafizik katmanlar çerçevesinde yeniden düşünmeyi önermektedir. Bir oyun mekaniği ne zaman fiziksel bir eylem olur, ne zaman toplumsal bir ilişkiye dönüşür ve hangi koşullarda sembolik ya da metafizik bir anlam kazanır? Bu sorularla yola çıkan araştırma, mekaniklerin yalnızca etkileşim döngülerini kuran yapılar değil, aynı zamanda anlam üretiminde ve oyun dünyasının felsefi mimarisinde etkin rol oynayan varlıklar olduğunu savunmaktadır. Oyun mekaniğinin yalnızca oynanışı şekillendiren bir unsur değil, anlam üretimi ve oyun dünyasının inşasında da yapısal bir rol oynadığı ileri sürülmektedir.

Keywords

• Dijital Oyun Tasarımı
• Görsel Tasarım
• İletişim Tasarımı
• Felsefe
• Oyun Çalışmaları

Aristotelian Ontology in Game Mechanics: A Hierarchical Framework

Abstract

This study approaches game mechanics not merely as functional or experiential tools, but as ontological entities within constructed game worlds. Mechanics, which define player actions and how the game responds, are fundamental to both digital and analog game design, and play a significant role in experimental games using new technologies. While previous frameworks often classify mechanics based on function or player interaction, they frequently overlook the deeper question of what a mechanic is ontologically. Drawing on Aristotle’s ontological hierarchy, this research proposes a new way to understand game mechanics as existing across physical, social, and metaphysical layers. It asks: when does a mechanic act as a physical system, when does it become a form of social interaction, and under what conditions does it acquire symbolic or metaphysical significance? By exploring these questions, the study argues that game mechanics are not just tools for gameplay loops, but structures that contribute to meaning-making and the philosophical architecture of game worlds. Thus, the study calls for a more refined classification that considers the ontological function of mechanics in the internal logic and philosophical architecture of games.

Keywords

• Digital Game Design
• Visual Design
• Communication Design
• Philosophy
• Game Studies

References

1. Baranowski, M. T., Lieberman, P. D., Buday, R., Peng, W., Zimmerli, L., Wiederhold, B., & Kato, P. M. (2013). Videogame mechanics in games for health. Games for Health Journal, 2(4), 194–204. https://doi.org/10.1089/g4h.2013.0617
2. Björk, S., & Holopainen, J. (2005). Patterns in game design. Charles River Media. https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=IFQfyODK4wAC
3. Brakas, J. (2011). Aristotle’s "Is Said in Many Ways" and its relationship to his homonyms. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 49(1), 135–159.
4. Caillois, R. (2001). Man, play and games. University of Illinois Press.
5. Cherniss, H., & Rackham, H. (1937). Aristotle. The Athenian Constitution, the Eudemian Ethics, on Virtues and Vices. The American Journal of Philology, 58(1), 110. https://doi.org/10.2307/290174
6. Dixon, D. H. (2021). The linguistic environments of digital games: A discriminant analysis of language use in game mechanics. CALICO Journal, 39(2), https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.20860
7. Dunn, P. M. (2005). Aristotle (384–322 BC): Philosopher and scientist of ancient Greece. Archives of Disease in Childhood – Fetal and Neonatal Edition, 91(2), F75–F77.
8. Hunicke, R., LeBlanc, M., & Zubek, R. (2004). MDA: A formal approach to game design and game research. In Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop on Challenges in Game AI (Vol. 4, No. 1).

9. Huizinga, J. (2016). Homo ludens: A study of the play-element in culture. Angelico Press.
10. Kosmadoudi, Z., Lim, T., Ritchie, J., Louchart, S., Liu, Y., & Sung, R. (2013). Engineering design using game-enhanced CAD: The potential to augment the user experience with game elements. Computer-Aided Design, 45(3), 777–795. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cad.2012.08.001
11. Laurel, B. (1991). Computers as theatre. Addison-Wesley.
12. Loriaux, D. L. (2016). Aristotle (384–322 BCE). In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2016 Edition).
13. Lundgren, S., & Björk, S. (2003). Game mechanics: Describing computer-augmented games in terms of interaction. Proceedings of TIDSE.
14. Machado, A., & Silva, F. J. (2007). Toward a richer view of the scientific method: The role of conceptual analysis. The American Psychologist, 62(7), 671–681.
15. Mateas, M., & Stern, A. (2005). Build it to understand it: Ludology meets narratology in game design space. In Proceedings of DiGRA 2005 Conference: Changing Views: Worlds in Play. https://dl.digra.org/index.php/dl/article/view/172
16. Maranhão, D. M., Moreira Mendonça Júnior, G., Franco, A. O. R., & Maia, J. G. R. (2016). Towards a comprehensive model for analysis and definition of game mechanics. In SBC – Proceedings of SBGames 2016 (pp. 581-590). https://www.sbgames.org/sbgames2016/downloads/anais/157623.pdf
17. McDaniel, K. (2017). Ways of being. In The ontology of everything (Chap. 2). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198719656.003.0002
18. Murray, J. H. (1997). Hamlet on the holodeck: The future of narrative in cyberspace. MIT Press.
19. Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2003). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. MIT Press.
20. Schell, J. (2008). The art of game design: A book of lenses. Morgan Kaufmann.
21. Shields, C. (2016). Aristotle. Routledge.
22. Sicart, M. (2008). Defining game mechanics. Game Studies: The International Journal of Computer Game Research, 8(2).
23. Soulliere, D. M., Britt, D. W., & Maines, D. R. (2001). Conceptual modeling as a toolbox for grounded theorists. The Sociological Quarterly, 42(2), 253–269.
24. Terekhov, D. A. (2024). An introduction to the structural analysis of video game gameplay. Vestnik Tomskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta Kul Turologiya i Iskusstvovedenie, (55), (pp. 87–97). http://doi.org/10.17223/22220836/55/8
25. Thalheim, B. (2009). Towards a theory of conceptual modelling. In J. Trujillo, S. Duquennoy, & A. Abelló (Eds.), Advances in conceptual modeling: Challenging perspectives (pp. 45–54). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04947-7_7
26. Yu, J. (2001). What is the focal meaning of being in Aristotle? Apeiron, 34(3), 205–232.