Spoilsports and Cheaters - Not playing along vs. not playing fair

It's not difficult to find a game that you can cheat on or be a spoilsport. You can cheat on any game that has rules to be broken, spoken or unspoken. If the rules are programmed into the interface it might be more difficult. People can cheat in single-player games, but the act is more subversive if cheating against fellow players. I think that being a spoilsport requires that a game involves more than one person, so any multi-player game can be susceptible to spoilsports.

I'm ashamed to admit it but the last time I myself was a spoilsport was only a few months ago. My friend Marcus wanted to play Monopoly, and even though I have never enjoyed that game I went along with it. Marcus is a good friend. After about half-an-hour of gameplay I was already really hard on Monopoly cash and was having pretty bad luck (plus I am most definitely an awful Monopoly player). Then something in my brain switched and I simply gave up on the game. I kept playing but not with any effort to win. I just went through the motions of rolling the dice and moving my piece. Marcus noticed almost at once. The game was no longer fun for either of us. The magic circle was broken. I wish I would have tried a little harder to take the game more seriously so at least one of us could have enjoyed the game.

Here being a spoilsport was as simple as not playing to win. It seems that most if not all games are basically pointless if the players are not in agreement about the goal of the game. The goal doesn't necessarily have to be to win. When I was a kid I would play a lot of Super Smash Bros with my sisters, but sometimes we would just mess around and make up or own games within games that didn't have to do with blasting each other off the level. But it was not spoilsporting, as we were in agreement about ignoring the explicit goal of the game. The game was not what it was supposed to be, but there was still an illusion of gameplay that made it enjoyable for us.

"Favorite" game - Chrononauts

I want to begin by saying that I am no gamer. The height of my gaming career was during the days of the Nintendo GameCube when I binged on Super Smash Bros Melee with my sisters, but even then it wasn't that serious. Asking me what my favorite game is kind of like asking a dog person about their favorite breed of cat.

Don't get me wrong, I do enjoy playing games! But I would argue that I enjoy mainly multiplayer games, and usually not for any specific aspect of the game itself, but for the game's byproducts: the

joking, the debates, the unrelated discussions - that is to say the social interactions. I see a good game as an impetus for bringing people together (preferably in one physical place) and getting them to laugh, argue, lie, deceive, banter, and so on. I can't stand playing a game with someone who gets so absorbed in the mechanics of the game, who takes the goals of the game so seriously that the more dynamic, social, lighthearted side effects of gaming are blocked out by their competitiveness, their calculating.

With that said - a "favorite" game: Chrononauts. I've only played it once, and it was a few years ago. How can this be my favorite game? Well, it stands out in my memory as being a really fun experience (and there just aren't so many good gaming experiences to compete with it). The premise is that each player is a Time Traveler with a secret identity and a secret mission. The game is complicated enough that I didn't feel like I totally got it on the first couple rounds, but I got the impression that you could play it many more times without it getting boring. It has an engaging historical narrative, and it got us talking about history in a way I hadn't done in a long time. It's mechanics allow for a multitude of different outcomes and strategies. When I played with a few friends it felt like we achieved the "magic circle" of the game experience, but still remained present in our own social interactions outside the game, not getting too sucked up in the competition.

What was it about the game that enabled this kind of experience? Let's try an MDA (Mechanics, Dynamics, Aesthetics) analysis.

Mechanics:

* Read a much more in depth description of the rules here. This is just a summarization of the core mechanics.
- Players: 1-6

At the beginning of the game, each player gets an Identity Card and a secret Mission Card  that describes two types of goals that player can win by.

- 3 different ways to win. 1) Going home - alter the timeline so that the three key events on your identity card appear on the timeline; 2) Completing your mission - collect the three artifacts listed on your mission card; 3) Achieving power and success - have 10 cards in your hand at the end of your turn.

The timeline is made up of 32 cards laid out chronologically in a grid on the table. They each have a year and event, and there are two types, Ripple Cards and Linchpin Cards. Linchpin cards can be flipped to an alternate event by a player using an Inverter card on it. This causes ripples in the timeline, flipping the Ripple Cards that are dependent on that Linchpin and revealing a Paradox. These Paradoxes can and should be fixed by using a Patch Card that corresponds to that year, for if there are 13 Paradoxes at any time on the timeline, everyone loses :(

Quite a complex game now that I review it! But I felt that the instructions on the cards were clear and the concept of the game as a whole really held it together, making it easy to learn.

Dynamics:

- Having two secret missions to shoot for and three ways to win make the game endlessly exciting. Which one should I commit to? Is it in conflict with someone else's secret mission? Am I making it obvious what my mission is?

- Gadget Cards are special items that can help you later on and can come in really handy. They allow for longer strategies.

- Memos from your future self are a neat card that can be played at any time during the round. Playing a Memo cancels and discards the card just being played. They work as a good interactive moment between two players, maybe causing some conflict. They also require that players are especially attentive even when it isn't their turn.

- Keep track of other people's cards. If someone plays an artifact card that you are collecting, you must alter your strategy and adapt! (Or maybe use a certain Action Card to steal it).

There are many more dynamics to this game, these are just a few I recall.

Aesthetics:

The game creates an atmosphere that is secretive and sneaky which I really like. The whole game concept with the Identities, Missions, Timewarps, Paradoxes and so on work well to create a cohesive story of the game play. The actions players make start to feel like they have a deeper meaning, that we are actually Time Travelers changing history. There is a small chance factor in drawing the right cards, but I would say that winning nearly always requires quite a bit of strategizing. I remember that I won one game by Going home, and it was exquisitely satisfying. I also remember getting a Memo that wrecked my plans on making a winning move, and that was super frustrating but which was balanced out by the sneaky vengeance of doing the same thing back to my friend.

Reading up on Chrononauts makes me want to go buy the game, a very rare feeling for a non-gamer like me. Highly recommended!