game vs experience

So, in thinking about my game taxonomy I'd hit on an awkward snag. I see four core game archetypes but then social engagement felt like a needed add-on. This was because i think of archetypes are the core features that make a game worth playing and there are certainly games where the social aspect is what makes the game what it is. But it is hard to think of social interaction as piece of game design (excluding ice-breaker games, but those usually suck). Initially, this came about when thinking about the colossal success of LoL but it also extend to the most basic games like charades and tag.

Now, I have come to think that social is not a feature of the game but a feature of the game experience. A game may dominate the experience or the game can be a small piece of the experience but they are not the same. The social interaction around the game can hugely color the experience but so can technological, physical, and timing features. Drinking games are often fairly simple games but they may offer rich gaming experiences. A well designed MMO without people will fail to deliver a satisfying experience and so will fail as an enterprise.

All of this to say, that when thinking about a game I propose to think about the design of the game, and the experience that is afforded by engaging with the game. I believe that this offers a stronger platform from which to critique games.