Gameworld Interfaces as Make-Believe

Part of the Human–Computer Interaction Series book series (HCIS)


Make-believe is an important part of our engagement with many aspects of our lives and is often seen as central to our engagement with representational media. When playing video games, players must make sense of a range of information, and gameworlds include a selection of signs that either point to the game system, or to the fictional aspects of the game. The combination of health meters, experience bars, and symbols floating around in the world, with a recognizable environment featuring anthropomorphic inhabitants with intentions and motivations may appear paradoxical, but players tend to accept this contradiction without any confusion. With reference to Kendall Walton’s (Mimesis as make-believe. On the foundations of the representational arts. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1990) theory of make-believe where virtually anything has the potential of being props in the imaginative process, the aim of this chapter is to expand the understanding of make-believe by exploring how it is employed when players interact with gameworlds.


  1. Apter MJ (1992) The dangerous edge. The psychology of excitement. The Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Bartle R (2004) Designing virtual worlds. New Riders, IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
  3. Beaudouin-Lafon M (2000) Instrumental interaction: an interaction model for designing post-WIMP user interfaces. In: CHI’00: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, New York, pp 446–453Google Scholar
  4. Bethesda Game Studios (2011) The elder scrolls 5: skryim. Bethesda Softworks [Xbox 360]Google Scholar
  5. Blizzard North (2000) Diablo 2. Blizzard entertainment [PC]Google Scholar
  6. Bolter JD, Grusin R (1999) Remediation: understanding new media. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  7. Byrne RMJ (2005) The rational imagination: how people create alternatives to reality. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  8. Caillois R (1958) Man, play and games. University of Illinois Press, ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  9. CD Project RED (2015) The witcher 3: the wild hunt. Namco Bandai Entertainment [Xbox One]Google Scholar
  10. Crytek (2007) Crysis. EA games [PC]Google Scholar
  11. Gendler T (2013) Imagination. In: Zalta EN, Nodelman U, Allen C, Perry J (eds) Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford University Press, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  12. Jørgensen K (2011) The user interface continuum: a study of player preference. In: Gamasutra, April 12. Available via Accessed 1 Mar 2016
  13. Jørgensen K (2012) Between the game system and the fictional world. A study of computer game interfaces. Game Cult 7(2):142–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jørgensen K (2013) Gameworld interfaces. MIT Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Juul J (2005) Half-real. Videogames between real rules and fictional worlds. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  16. Kirsh D (2010) Thinking with external representation. AI Soc 25:441–454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Klevjer R (2007) What is the Avatar? Fiction and embodiment in avatar-based, single-player games. PhD dissertation, University of BergenGoogle Scholar
  18. Lauesen S (2005) User interface design. A software engineering perspective. Addison-Wesley, HarlowGoogle Scholar
  19. Mithen S (2007) Seven steps in the evolution of human imagination. In: Roth I (ed) Imaginative minds. Oxford University Press for The British Academy, Oxford, pp 3–29Google Scholar
  20. Piaget J (1962) Play, dreams and imitation in childhood. Norton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  21. Rollings A, Adams E (2003) Andrew rollings and Ernest Adams on game design. New Riders, IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
  22. Ryan M-L (2001) Narrative as virtual reality: immersion and interactivity in literature and electronic media. Johns Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  23. Ryan M-L (2008) Fictional worlds in a digital age. In: Schreibman S, Siemens R (eds) A companion to digital literary studies. Blackwell, Cambridge, pp 250–266Google Scholar
  24. Scaife M, Rogers Y (1996) External cognition: how do graphical representations work? Int J Hum-Comp Stud 45:185–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sicart M (2008) Defining game mechanics. Game Stud 8:2Google Scholar
  26. Stenros J (2015) Play, playfulness and games. A constructionist ludology approach. PhD dissertation, University of TampereGoogle Scholar
  27. Stevenson L (2003) Twelve conceptions of imagination. Br J Aesthet 43(3):238–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Suits B (2006) The grasshopper: games, life and utopia. Broadview Press, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  29. Toon A (2010) Models as make-believe. In: Frigg R, Hunter M (eds) Beyond mimesis and convention, Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 71–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Turner P, Harviainen JT (2016) Introduction. In: Turner P, Harviainen JT (eds) Digital make-believe. Springer, ChamGoogle Scholar
  31. Walton K (1990) Mimesis as make-believe. On the foundations of the representational arts. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Information Science and Media StudiesUniversity of BergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations