The Hotness
Games|People|Company
Dominion: Dark Ages
Total War
Mage Knight: Board Game
Fantastiqa
Libertalia
The Lord of the Rings: Nazgul
Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition)
Eclipse
Mice and Mystics
Doctor Who: The Card Game
Lords of Waterdeep
Star Wars: X-Wing Miniatures Game
Agricola: All Creatures Big and Small
Dungeon Fighter
Android: Netrunner
Virgin Queen
A Game of Thrones: The Board Game (Second Edition)
Glory to Rome
Infiltration
Collapsible D: The Final Minutes of the Titanic
Dominion
The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game
Twilight Struggle
City of Horror
Snowdonia
1989: Dawn of Freedom
Goa
Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective
Agricola
Among the Stars
7 Wonders: Cities
7 Wonders
The Swarm
Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization
Arkham Horror
Village
Ora et Labora
Battles of Westeros: House Baratheon Army Expansion
Race for the Galaxy
War of the Ring
Trajan
Kingdom Builder
The Castles of Burgundy
Zombicide
Twilight Imperium (third edition)
Space Alert
Dungeon Command: Sting of Lolth
Hacienda
Battlestar Galactica
Ground Floor

Pulsipher Game Design

This blog contains comments by Dr. Lewis Pulsipher about tabletop games he is designing or has designed in the past, as well as comments on game design (tabletop and video) in general. It repeats his blog at http://pulsiphergamedesign.blogspot.com/
Recommend
16 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up

What do we mean by "elegance"

Lewis Pulsipher
United States
Linden
North Carolina
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
When someone says a game is "elegant", what do they mean? I'm not sure, so I've done a bit of investigating.

Is it used much? In my Info Select database, which includes my own notes about game design and teaching, and material that I've scraped off the Internet about those same topics in the past seven years, there are 84 notes containing the word "elegant" and another 34 containing "elegance". Clearly the term is used a lot in conversations and writing.

What about dictionary definitions of the word?
dictionary.com
el·e·gant adjective
1. tastefully fine or luxurious in dress, style, design, etc.: elegant furnishings.
2. gracefully refined and dignified, as in tastes, habits, or literary style: an elegant young gentleman; an elegant prosodist.
3. graceful in form or movement: an elegant wave of the hand. [my emphasis]
4. appropriate to refined taste: a man devoted to elegant pursuits.
5. excellent; fine; superior: an absolutely elegant wine.
Synonyms: 1. See fine. 2. polished, courtly. [my emphasis]

World English Dictionary
elegant — adj
1. tasteful in dress, style, or design
2. dignified and graceful in appearance, behaviour, etc
3. cleverly simple; ingenious: an elegant solution to a problem [my emphasis]

Wikipedia
Elegance is a synonym for beauty that has come to acquire the additional connotations of unusual effectiveness and simplicity. It is frequently used as a standard of tastefulness particularly in the areas of visual design, decoration, the sciences, and the esthetics of mathematics. Elegant things exhibit refined grace and dignified propriety. [my emphasis]


So could we say, for games: "A solution to a design problem that is seen as ingenious or cleverly simple, polished, and effective?"


At some point I wondered what the difference is between "elegant" and "clever"? For me, something can be clever without being worth doing; something that is elegant is likely worth doing. So I might see a game and say "that's a clever juxtaposition of mechanics", and still not think the game was worth bothering with. I would tend to think of games that model something in interesting or intriguing ways as elegant, whereas games that don't model something may only be clever.

So one man's clever may be another man's elegant.
clev·er
adjective, -er, -est.
1. mentally bright; having sharp or quick intelligence; able.
2. superficially skillful, witty, or original in character or construction; facile: It was an amusing, clever play, but of no lasting value.
3. showing inventiveness or originality; ingenious: His clever device was the first to solve the problem.
4. adroit with the hands or body; dexterous or nimble.
Synonyms
ingenious, talented, quick-witted; smart, gifted; apt, expert.

There is no Wikipedia entry for the word "clever".


A last expression of the idea of elegance, from the point of view of design:
"A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." --Antoine de Saint-Exup'ery
When you achieve this "perfection", you also achieve elegance.



So what do you mean when (if) you describe a game, or part of a game, as "elegant"?
Twitter Facebook
20 Comments
Subscribe sub options Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:45 pm
Post Comment
Patrick Carroll
United States
Carver
Minnesota
flag msg tools
"If a thing is worth doing, it is worth doing badly." (GK Chesterton)
badge
"That's how the light gets in." (Leonard Cohen)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
So what do you mean when (if) you describe a game, or part of a game, as "elegant"?

I mean it's simple, ingenious, and effective--and I like it and think it's classy.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:50 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Brian Leet
United States
Montpelier
Vermont
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
To me "Clever" implies problem solving or showing off. You have a number of elements that don't quite work well together, so within that frame work you come up with a clever way to handle it. Or you have an idea that is particularly different or thematic and use it as such. A friend had a game prototype that used clear glass beads as a sort of magnifying glass to read the symbols on the player tracking mat. This was a clear example of a clever bit to the game.

"Elegant" is when prior assumptions have been adjusted to the point where you don't need that sort of problem solving. Games like Go, Zendo, or even Poker (in some incarnations) are elegant. The rules have been distilled and refined to the point where it all works in a very seamless way. Good elegant games often feature surprisingly complex game play and decisions as an emergent feature of simple rules sets.

Not surprisingly, I'm more likely to call an abstract or near abstract an overall elegant game, but I also use elegant and clever when thinking about the sub-parts of games.

Somewhat aside: I use the terminology in a similar way during the building design process. Coming up with a way to fit in the ductwork, lighting and sprinkler system may require a clever solution, but an elegant solution might manage to service the space without needing those systems at all.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Jan 27, 2012 3:55 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jason Little
United States
Eden Prairie
Minnesota
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Interesting thoughts, Lewis... In my experience, I've come to realize that I feel elegance is associated in some way with efficiency of action. An elegant game in my mind has just enough rules, just enough components, the barest necessities to accomplish its goal. When playing a game I would deem elegant, there doesn't seem to be wasted space, material, or opportunities.

It would also be interesting to see which games folks feel are elegant. When I think of elegant game design, the first game that comes to mind is Reiner Knizia's Samurai.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:23 pm
  • Posted Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:22 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Ken H.
United States
Amherst
Ohio
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

To me, it has to do with the ratio between how good the game mechanic is, and how many rules it takes to explain it. "Elegant" means the play value is significantly greater than the rules baggage.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Jan 27, 2012 4:33 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Russ Williams
Poland
Wrocław
Dolny Śląsk
Avatar
mbmbmb
"Elegant" has been used for a very long time in mathematics and computer science to describe things (proofs, concepts, algorithms, etc) which are simple yet effective with a kind of "aha!", "of course, in hindsight it's perfectly obvious", "beautifully simple" kind of sense to them, where something simple and minimalist gives rise to great effect (power, expressiveness, etc).

I've generally understood it to be the same with games.

I.e. "elegance" is sort of the opposite of "fiddly" or "chrome" or "complicated" or "lots of special cases", etc.

Games which attempt to simulate something in great detail are typically inherently not elegant, because the thing they are attempting to simulate is typically part of "the real world" (e.g. a war), which is inherently messy and complex and inelegant.

Abstract games are more likely to be elegant because they are not burdened with that anchor of simulating some messy real-world phenomenon. (But there exist inelegant abstracts too, of course.)

A complicated chrome-stuffed special-case-ridden fiddly game might still have elegant parts or subsystems, of course.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:48 pm
  • Posted Fri Jan 27, 2012 5:47 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jose San Miguel
Spain
Valencia
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Achieve the desired effect with minumum intervention.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Jan 27, 2012 6:33 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Cole Wehrle
United States
Austin
Texas
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Usually in my own diction it's synonymous with clever, principally something witty. Usually there involves an additional turn wherein the wit reveals itself e.g. "Oh, now I understand."

As long as we're talking definitions, I thought it would be interesting to plug our word into the only dictionary that really matters, the Oxford English Dictionary.

Among its many definitions which are not mentioned in most dictionaries, I thought the fifth was of particular note. Here it is with its usage history:
Quote:

5.
a. Of scientific processes, contrivances, etc.: ‘Neat’, pleasing by ingenious simplicity and effectiveness.

1668 N. Culpeper & A. Cole tr. T. Bartholin Anat. (new ed.) iv. ix. 166 An elegant Workmanship of Nature. 1803 Med. Jrnl. 10 336 Profound discoveries and elegant improvements in every branch of medical science. 1823 J. Badcock Domest. Amusem. 198 An elegant cement may also be made from rice-flour. 1844–57 G. Bird Urin. Deposits 146 An elegant mode of showing the composition of the deposit. a1891 Mod., An elegant chess problem. An elegant method of solving equations. 1952 G. Manley Climate & Brit. Scene iii. 32 We owe to Sir Geoffrey Taylor of Cambridge one of the most elegant discussions of the factors governing the depth and density of such fogs. 1966 ‘A. Hall’ 9th Directive viii. 74 This operation‥was sensitive and it was elegant. 1966 Listener 1 Sept. 304/1 MacNeish's demonstration is particularly elegant because he could trace the whole processes in a small, almost self-contained area.


I think the final usage citation really gets to how this word is used in the gaming world, and, somewhat unsurprisingly, it's all about containment. Games are usually meant to be self-contained and their ability to contain the vast world they portray often provides us with the most basic criteria for their worth.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:27 pm
  • Posted Fri Jan 27, 2012 11:17 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
J B
United Kingdom
Norwich
Norfolk
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In a game, elegance to me is the efficient use of game resources that begets an interesting mechanic. And by game resources I mean things like player pieces, decks of cards, markers etc - as opposed to some in game resource.
In a way elegance to me is close to efficiency - but its not just efficiency, something can be efficient but very dry and uninteresting. It has to be interesting and efficient and possibly clever.
Clever however does not always mean efficient. Something clever might take 2 hours to work through in a turn. Very smart. But not fun to play.

Personally speaking, I find a lot of the Fantasy Flight big box games are the poster child for inelegant design. Why have one deck of cards when you can have a dozen. Per person. For each type. With 10 different markers. For each step. Blah. Starcraft drove me into fits of apoplexy with its flabby inelegance ( after enduing and grumbling about TI3. It was after that point I really started to appreciate elegant game mechanics/design.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Sat Jan 28, 2012 4:41 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Russ Williams
Poland
Wrocław
Dolny Śląsk
Avatar
mbmbmb
Since "clever" is mentioned several times:

To me, "clever" is not the same as "elegant". Many (most?) elegant things may be clever, but there are also many inelegant clever things. E.g. all kinds of modern technology (computers etc) are "clever" but not at all "elegant". (I suspect there are however some elegant things which seem sufficiently "obvious" that we don't think of them as "clever".)

So in a sense the set of "elegant" things is mostly a proper subset of the set of "clever" things.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Sat Jan 28, 2012 7:09 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Lewis Pulsipher
United States
Linden
North Carolina
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jomazael wrote:
Personally speaking, I find a lot of the Fantasy Flight big box games are the poster child for inelegant design. Why have one deck of cards when you can have a dozen. Per person. For each type. With 10 different markers. For each step. Blah. Starcraft drove me into fits of apoplexy with its flabby inelegance ( after enduing and grumbling about TI3. It was after that point I really started to appreciate elegant game mechanics/design.


Recent FFG games often reek of atmosphere, and they're willing to add complexity to reinforce the atmosphere. How good the gameplay is, I don't know, maybe some of them are more like puzzles than games, and complexity makes the puzzle more difficult. I agree, elegance of design is not an objective here. (I refer to Saint Exup'ery.)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:24 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Lewis Pulsipher
United States
Linden
North Carolina
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
russ wrote:
Since "clever" is mentioned several times:

To me, "clever" is not the same as "elegant". Many (most?) elegant things may be clever, but there are also many inelegant clever things. E.g. all kinds of modern technology (computers etc) are "clever" but not at all "elegant". (I suspect there are however some elegant things which seem sufficiently "obvious" that we don't think of them as "clever".)

So in a sense the set of "elegant" things is mostly a proper subset of the set of "clever" things.


Hmmm.... is something that is elegant, always also clever? If it's elegant design, I'm inclined to say yes. If it's elegance of appearance or something other than design, that may not be clever at all.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Sat Jan 28, 2012 3:26 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Justus Pang
United States
Houston
Texas
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Hmmm.... is something that is elegant, always also clever? If it's elegant design, I'm inclined to say yes. If it's elegance of appearance or something other than design, that may not be clever at all.


Elegance of the physical gaming artifact is one thing, mechanism elegance is something quite different. In this case I agree with you. I think that for the game play design to be elegant, there must be a level of clever manipulation to make it work. In the vein of the Saint Exup'ery quote, it takes a ton of clever editing to make a game work with the minimal amount of crap.

That is not necessarily the same case for the physical game artifact because one can judge it as a matter of personal taste concerning aesthetic beauty. Someone may say a game looks amazing from afar, but when they sit down they realize how the graphic design actually hampers the gameplay. In this case, I'd say the artwork is elegant/pretty, but the gameplay graphic design is awful/inelegant. But then again, but there are times when the graphic designer comes up with great moments of cleverness that both look great and help facilitate smooth gameplay.

One vernacular example of game artifact elegance/cleverness, is the use of the non-playing cards in euchre for keeping track of scoring, however I come in as an architect so I truly enjoy minimalist design and it doesn't get more minimal than this. Of course, another architect who doesn't play games would not notice the visual elegance of that system, they would just see cards on a table. I know this cause I try to expound on the elegance of great game design and I generally get a blank stare in return from my coworkers.



Lewis, I usually disagree with you on your basic view of gaming, but I always come back because you bring up interesting topics. Cheers!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Sun Jan 29, 2012 5:10 am
  • Posted Sun Jan 29, 2012 5:08 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Russ Williams
Poland
Wrocław
Dolny Śląsk
Avatar
mbmbmb
lewpuls wrote:
russ wrote:
Since "clever" is mentioned several times:

To me, "clever" is not the same as "elegant". Many (most?) elegant things may be clever, but there are also many inelegant clever things. E.g. all kinds of modern technology (computers etc) are "clever" but not at all "elegant". (I suspect there are however some elegant things which seem sufficiently "obvious" that we don't think of them as "clever".)

So in a sense the set of "elegant" things is mostly a proper subset of the set of "clever" things.


Hmmm.... is something that is elegant, always also clever? If it's elegant design, I'm inclined to say yes. If it's elegance of appearance or something other than design, that may not be clever at all.

Thinking out loud...

Another problem is that "elegant" pretty clearly refers to the object itself, whereas "clever" seems a bit ambiguous, as it's sometimes referring to the object and sometimes implicitly referring to its creator.

I.e. if I invent some nifty widget then people might say it's elegant and clever, but then if Joe Blow copies my widget, people would probably still say Joe's widget is elegant, but if they know that he was not the inventor, they might not say Joe's widget is clever.

Or a game like Yavalath that was discovered by a computer program is more likely to be seen as "elegant" than "clever", because we don't think of a computer program as being as "clever" as a human game inventor.

At least it seems to me that "clever" seems to include some nuance of praise of the creator, whereas "elegant" seems to be more focused on the object itself.

But I'm not sure. Language usage is tricky.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Mon Jan 30, 2012 10:08 am
  • Posted Mon Jan 30, 2012 10:06 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Oliver Kiley
United States
Ann Arbor
Michigan
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
We discussed this a bit over in this Big Bang Theory Post. I liked Selwyth's response to elegeance/fiddlyness and streamlined/clunky, which can be read here.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Mon Jan 30, 2012 1:16 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Lewis Pulsipher
United States
Linden
North Carolina
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Russ's ruminations on clever brought this to mind, from Jurassic Park:

(Hunter to Velociraptor that had sneaked up on him): "Clever girl".

I'd guess that one's perceptions of the two words depend partly on which you think is more praiseworthy or more unusual, elegant or clever.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:12 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Neil Carr
United States
Barre
Vermont
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I guess I generally use it when thinking of how a particular theme is being simulated by the rules. An elegant mechanism would model the theme well, taking in several different factors, but in a form that doesn't require a lot of overhead or fiddly information tracking.

Card driven wargames can elegantly evoke historical themes, events and pressures that extend beyond the immediate military situation without miring the players in sub-systems that could easily make the game unplayable, or at least unfun for most people.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue Jan 31, 2012 6:43 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Oliver Kiley
United States
Ann Arbor
Michigan
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
echoota wrote:
I guess I generally use it when thinking of how a particular theme is being simulated by the rules. An elegant mechanism would model the theme well, taking in several different factors, but in a form that doesn't require a lot of overhead or fiddly information tracking.


I consider the the mechanic-theme connection you describe above as being an intuitive game, which is different from elegance. An intuitive game is one where the mechanics don't run counter or contrary to a thematic understanding of the situation.

For example, it is intuitive when I can get a range advantage by putting my archers on top of a hill. It's counter-intuitive when archers on the bottom gain a height advantage (for whatever gameplay reason that is the result of, it's counter-intuitive to the logic of archers on hills).

Intuitiveness has to do with theme-mechanics. Elegance, to me, is all about the execution of the mechanics and has little to do with theme.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Tue Jan 31, 2012 6:52 pm
  • Posted Tue Jan 31, 2012 6:50 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Russ Williams
Poland
Wrocław
Dolny Śląsk
Avatar
mbmbmb
echoota wrote:
I guess I generally use it when thinking of how a particular theme is being simulated by the rules.

What about abstract/themeless games?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Tue Jan 31, 2012 6:51 pm
  • Posted Tue Jan 31, 2012 6:51 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Lewis Pulsipher
United States
Linden
North Carolina
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I should think you can have elegant solutions to both gameplay problems and modeling problems.

In games, it's hard for me to dissociate "elegant" and "solution".
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Wed Feb 1, 2012 12:39 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Neil Carr
United States
Barre
Vermont
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
russ wrote:
echoota wrote:
I guess I generally use it when thinking of how a particular theme is being simulated by the rules.

What about abstract/themeless games?


gulp Those games don't exist for me. ninja
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Feb 3, 2012 1:40 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote

Subscribe

Categories

Contributors

Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.