Interpreting Games: Meaning Creation in the Context of Temporality and Interactivity

Open access


The concept of interpretation applied to texts, videos, pictures, posts and all other types of media is varied. Objects are open to different forms of interpretation and games, as objects of meaning, are no exception. Explicating meaning creation in games will create a better understanding of game functions and their effects. This study explores how games alter the process of meaning creation through investigating their detailed properties and differentiation from other forms of media as objects of interpretation. This study argues that understanding meaning creation in games entails more than an examination of the presentation layer by a deeper analysis that considers interactivity and temporality. It contends that due to the interactive nature of games, the role of player participation is vital because gamers influence the operative mechanics of games and hence their meanings.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Aarseth E. (2003 May). Playing research: Methodological approaches to game analysis. Proceedings of the Digital Arts and Culture Conference (pp. 28-29).

  • Aarseth E. J. (1997). Cybertext: Perspectives on ergodic literature. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.

  • Al-Mohammadi S. & Derbel E. (2013). The effects of embedding information technologies within ELT on EFL learners’ motivation and interest. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature 3(1) 181-186.

  • Al-Mohammadi S. & Derbel E. (2015). “To whom de we write? Audience in EFL composition classes”. In R. Al-Mahrooqi V. S. Thakur & A. Roscoe (Eds). Methodologies for effective writing instruction in EFL and ESL classrooms. (pp. 197-208). Hershey PA USA: IGI Global.

  • Al-Mohammadi S. (2014). “Integrating reading and writing in ELT”. In R. Al-Mahrooqi & A. Roscoe (Eds) Focusing on EFL reading: theory and practice (pp. 260 - 274). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

  • Avedon E. M. & Sutton-Smith B. (1971). The study of games. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

  • Bogost I. (2007). Persuasive games: The expressive power of videogames. Cambridge: MIT Press.

  • Crookall D. Oxford R. & Saunders D. (1987). Towards a reconceptualization of simulation: From representation to reality. Simulation Games for Learning. 17(4) 141-171.

  • Gadamer H. G. (2004). Truth and method. USA: Bloomsbury Publishing.

  • Genette G. (1987). Narrative discourse: An essay in method. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

  • Grondin J. (1994). Introduction to philosophical hermeneutics. New Haven: Yale University Press.

  • Iser W. (1980). Interaction between text and reader. In J. Corner & J. Hawthorn (Eds.) Communication studies. An introductory reader (pp. 1673-1682). London: Edward Arnold.

  • Jensen J. F. (1998). ‘Interactivity’ tracking a new concept in media and communication studies. Nordicom Review 19 185-204.

  • Juul J. (2004. Introduction to game time. In N. Wardrip-Fruin & P. Harrigan (Eds.) First Person: New media as story performance and game (pp. 137-149). Cambridge: MIT Press.

  • Juul J. (2005). Half-real: video games between real rules and fictional worlds. Cambridge: MIT Press.

  • Kiousis S. (2002). Interactivity: a concept explication. New Media & Society 4(3) 355-383.

  • Kress G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. London: Routledge.

  • Kucer S. B. (1987). The Cognitive Base of Reading and Writing. In J. Squire The Dynamics of Language Learning (pp. 27-51). Urbana: National Conference.

  • Manovich L. (2002). The language of new media. Cambridge: MIT Press.

  • McCloud S. (1993). Understanding comics: The invisible art. New York NY: HarperPerennial.

  • McLuhan M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. New York: MIT Press.

  • Mhamdi C. (2016). Transgressing media boundaries: News creation and dissemination in a globalized world. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. 7(5) 272-277.

  • Mhamdi C. (2017). Framing “the Other” in Times of Conflicts: CNN’s Coverage of the 2003 Iraq War. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. 8(2) 147-153.

  • Rosenblatt L. M. (1982). The literary transaction: Evocation and response. Theory into Practice 21 268-277.

  • Salen K. & Zimmerman E. (2004). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. Cambridge: MIT press.

  • Tierney R. J. & Pearson P. D. (1994). Learning to Learn From Text: A Framework for Improving Classroom Practice . Language Arts 569-580.

  • Wardrip-Fruin N. (2009). Expressive Processing: Digital fictions computer games and software studies. Cambridge: MIT press.

  • Weberman D. (2000). A new defense of Gadamer’s hermeneutics. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 16(1) 45-65.

  • Wiener N. (1965). Cybernetics: or control and communication in the animal and the machine. Cambridge: MIT Press.

  • Zagal J.P. & Mateas M. (2010). Time in videogames: A survey and analysis. Simulation & Gaming. 14(6) 844-868.