What happens when you take the “fun” out of a game?  What is “fun” and can it become work? In Homo Ludens, Huizinga explains that,

“all play is a voluntary activity” (7) “it is never imposed by physical necessity or moral duty. It is never a task. It is done at leisure, during “free time”, it is a suspension of reality – another world, like Mnecraft, to explore (8).

But, he also contends that play can be serious. Therefore, can taking a game too seriously actually turn play into labour? Take the fun out of play?

So, Play is described as a voluntary activity in which we suspend our beliefs in lieu of a fantasy realm and can be both fun and serious. This week in Minecraft, I decided to approach Minecraft circuitry as a puzzle instead of as work. I followed no one else’s rules but the ones I imposed on myself (figure it out while having fun!) and I tried to figure out the system.

I succeeded through luck, and trial by error. Since I did not know how the device worked, I went back to the vanilla server and check out Winterchills’ and BIG’s chicken cooker – Winter had previously explained how this system worked and I thought that maybe I could understand BIG’s sorting machine by observing the chicken cooker (which used Red stone).

The device I worked on is a sorting machine.  Once set up, it specifically sought out eggs, cooked chickens, and feathers and placed them into a chest. The system uses “hoppers” (funnels), Minecraft’s version of circuit wiring – red stone –, switches (repeater), and a torch.  The machine works by funneling items into the first hopper on the line that then carries it to the next hopper in the line. Items travel across the line of hoppers and fall down into the bottom hoppers (under the first row), ONLY if they match the item in the bottom hopper.  Therefore, specific items are funneled down into the bottom funnel that then places them into a chest.

This “hopper” funnels feathers – the signs are there to make sure nothing else can go through the system

Third row hopper/funnel – this one only has one feather which forces the system to only drop one feather from the second row funnel before the timer elapses.

The way this sorter works is through a torch and a switchboard.  The red stone lines the torch and the switchboard and generates a minimal amount of power from the items in the bottom hoppers. For my version, I used signs as placeholder (to take up room) and the item I wanted to funnel (chicken, egg, feather).  The funnel needs a certain amount of base items – in this case, I found that 6 is the sweet spot for items that stack up to 64 and 1 for items that stack to 15.  Without a red stone torch, the funnel drops everything into the next available funnel or chest – the red stone locks the funnel and stops it from doing its job (funnel).

For an item to travel from the top funnel down to the second one and into the chest, the torch must be turned off – but not too long or all the items will fall into the chest. The switchboard controls the time – i found that the best timing was on the fastest setting and allowed 1 item to fall each time the red torch was deactivated. In our world, a circuit needs power to work, in Minecraft, the items in the hopper power the wire – acting as electricity.  With its base items (the chicken, etc + 4 signs – let’s call this Y+X – the x standing for the signs) it powers one block of circuitry (not enough for the torch to turn off).  When an item falls from the first row of funnels into the second, this adds energy (Y).  When Y is equal to +1, the circuit has enough power to turn off the red stone torch, and to allow the +1 to fall into the third funnel, which places it into the chest. The funnel always grabs the first item on the left, so the X’s are specifically to ensure no other items make it through to the chest.

Our original fixed set up – you may notice that the red stone circuit only sparks at the first block. Here, we notice the first row of funnels which lead to the secondary and third and finally, to the chest

I had many problems getting this system to work properly.  First of call, the funnels where facing the wrong direction.  For the funnel system to work as a conveyer belt, they must all be going in the same direction.  The bottom funnels must be facing the chest (where we want to item to go).  I figure this out by thinking of dominoes: if you want a domino effect, you have to place everything in a certain order.  I then realized from Winterchill’s design that I needed to specify which items I wanted to funnel into a chest – he had used signs in the version he made for Team Rocket (my Vanilla team), and placed one chicken at the front left.  This made sure that only chicken made it down to my chest.  This system worked perfectly with this design.

We will never know how Big’s original BFC cooker and sorter worked.  For starts, his base items in his funnels completely powered his circuit.  Although, I see this as system ready to short circuit at any point: if too many chickens fall into his first chest and powers the entire system, then all the items in the subsequent funnels will fall and therefore the system will no longer work as desired.  For this purpose, I made sure that each chest had its own line of circuits that did not intersect (one for eggs, feathers, and chicken).  And with the use of our mods, we can enhance it: my plan is to change all three chests for “hopping barrels” which can hold more items (up to 64x 64!) and features the items image on the front with the amount in the barrel.  I was also planning on talking with Darren who had told me about a block which could destroy items (hence the “hopping barrel” would act as a funnel and deposit any excess into this block to be destroyed).  But this raises questions of waste, and supply and demand.

Vanilla server. Big/Chris’s original BFC design. Notice that the red stone circuit is fully powered – this might have caused a short circuit. This system only operates on one repeater/circuit board whereas ours works on three.

If no one uses BFC’s chicken cooker (and without a way to destroy excess), the system will overload and crash.  In this case, the system would fall apart on its own and eventually become a useless shed like the rest of the unused projects on both the vanilla and modded servers.For this system to work, there must be a supply ratio that corresponds to the server demands.  Therefore, it would be unwise to house too many hens (which lay eggs that become chicks who burn by lava and make roasted chicken) – we want the system to work, and if we breed too many hens, the server could lag and we could break our sorting device.

This system also emphasis gluttony, greed and waste.  Instead of setting up a system that could send our surplus food to other parts of the server, we want to destroy it so that our system does not clot up.  We expect this server to create enough food to sustain all those who play on the server – but these people can only access it if they find BFC first.  We want a lot of cooked chicken, and we want it quickly (hence why we have filled out chicken coop with an unlawful amount of chickens).   Like food in hospitals and restaurants, we want to throw our surplus out – we tell ourselves no one needs it, we have enough for us and therefore we are good.  We are in a world where even digitally, waste is accepted and normalized.  It does not matter whether it is useful or not, we wish to be rid of it.

On the other hand, my teammates built the chicken cooker and approaches it as a choir and as a repetitive assembly line job: follow plans. Build. Next.
Therefore, although my teammates Sean and Saeed were able to create a chicken cooker, they did not understand how it worked (they followed someone’s video) or why their system was not working.  They were the builders, not the engineers, and therefore did not know what they were doing wrong and why their system did not work. Once Sean showed me their layout, I noticed something that I’d noticed with the sorter: the hoppers where not placed in the correct alignment and so the system was not funneling the resources properly.  If my teammates had approached this labour as a puzzle as I had, maybe they would have noticed that they had incorrectly placed their blocks.
Combined that a faulty circuit, a backwards dispenser, and a missing block, their system would have never functioned.

It was funny to me, because each time they had a problem with their system, they would run down to mine and tinker with it (which made me mad).  My teammates did not understand how the sorter worked and therefore could not test it properly, which might have led to someone playing with the system and breaking it (again ;p).   They did not realize that the system only took chicken, eggs or feathers and therefore shoved grass and wood and did not understand why it did not end up in a chest.
Both machines are independent but rely on each other to accomplish the task we have set (get items into barrels).

Play can be serious, but where my team mates playing? – technically yes I guess since it is a computer game but really, where they playing a game or doing labour? Just following instructions and building a house?
Although my playing uncovered how rudimentary red stone and circuitry works in Minecraft, my partners learned how to build something from scratch. Maybe with my new found knowledge I would also be able to, but there is different gains in playing (let’s call it tinkering) and studying vs studying and working.
When does play become work and when does it become fun?
What can be said about playing and learning, vs studying and building? Are they the same or is it the factor in determining “fun”? Where playing and learning is solving a puzzle, and studying and building is following someone else’s directions.

For your viewing pleasure, some fun discussions about chickens:

Our team discussion our chicken farm’s name: BFC’s REAL DIGITAL CHICKEN – We swear to only provide our customers with the BEST CHICKEN MEAT around.

In case the “Read More” tag does not work, here is the address to Homo Ludens: http://art.yale.edu/file_columns/0000/1474/homo_ludens_johan_huizinga_routledge_1949_.pdf