Abstract
This chapter describes one of the most well-known and cited concepts in the gaming literature, the “cone of abstraction”. The cone of abstraction and game design methods are related. During the design process, it is important to develop game artefacts with an appropriate level of abstraction, complexity and aggregation. The original concept of Dick Duke is being discussed, and it is shown how it is understood by its main progenitors, among other key individuals in gaming simulation. Literature is used in which the cone of abstraction is discussed and illustrated through figures. In addition, ten interviews with veterans in the field of gaming simulation were conducted. They give ideas and arguments for enhancement, consolidation, critique, and practical advice.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Capaul, R., & Ulrich, M. (2003). Planspiele. Simulationsspiele für Unterricht und Training. Tobler.
Duke, R. D. (1974). Gaming, the future’s language. Sage.
Duke, R. D. (1998). The gaming discipline as perceived by the policy and organization sciences. In J. Geurts, C. Joldersma, & E. Roelofs (Eds.), Gaming/simulation for policy development and organizational change (pp. 21–28). Tilburg University Press.
Duke, R. D., & Geurts, J. (2004). Policy games for strategic management. Dutch University Press.
Duke, R. D., & Kriz, W. C. (Eds.). (2014). Back to the future of gaming. W. Bertelsmann Verlag.
Geurts, J., Joldersma, C., & Roelofs, E. (Eds.). (1998). Gaming/simulation for policy development and organizational change. Tilburg University Press.
Klabbers, J. H. G. (2009). The magic circle: Principles of gaming & simulation (3rd and Revised ed.). Sense Publishers.
Klabbers, J. H. G. (2018). On the architecture of game science. Simulation & Gaming, 49(3), 207–245.
Peters, V., & van de Westelaken, M. (2008). The management approach: Thinking in systems. In L. De Caluwé, G. J. Hofstede, & V. Peters (Eds.), Why do games work? In search of the active substance (pp. 151–164). Kluwer.
Rizzi, P. (2014). On the nature of gaming simulation. Scriptum.
Tsuchiya, S. (2012). Policy exercise for organizational transformation: A double-loop learning perspective. Japan Journal of Gaming Simulation, 22, 69–76.
Wenzler, I. (2008). Is your simulation game blue or green? In L. De Caluwé, G. L. Hofstede, & V. Peters (Eds.), Why do games work? In search of the active substance (pp. 41–50). Kluwer.
Acknowledgement
I thank Jan Klabbers and Toshiko Kikkawa for their feedback and improvement of this chapter. I thank the named colleagues that were interviewees for this chapter.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kriz, W.C. (2022). Knowledge from the Great Ancestors: The “Cone of Abstraction”—Revisiting a Key Concept Through Interviews with Gaming Simulation Veterans. In: Kikkawa, T., Kriz, W.C., Sugiura, J. (eds) Gaming as a Cultural Commons. Translational Systems Sciences, vol 28. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0348-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-0348-9_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-19-0347-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-19-0348-9
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)