>Playing is a form of interaction so this is a somewhat circluar definition. perhaps
Definitions shouldnt take things for granted IMO.
>- A game must state all the rules (even flexible rules) so that the player knows what must be done.
>Myst stated no rules. Is it not a game?
All of the things you mentioned here HAVE rules or all rules. Rules dont need to be specified on the box or a manual or something to be rules. If they constrict the player, they are rules whether they are stated explicitly or not. Obviously in board games you need to specify the rule as you dont have the computer to take care of it for you.
>- A game must be able to have some kind of victory condition. Something has to HAPPEN: win, lose, gain some sort of closure (even if this is just the highest score/level).
>I have played deathmatch quake for hours on end and stopped without lookin at my frag score.
Most likely you are playing with short victory conditions of one kill, or avoiding being killed without having it explicitly stated. Explicit rules or goals are not necessary to have rules and goals.
>- A game by virtue of its rules and goals will define a small world/reality that all players understand commonly as the rules are there for all to see.
>If all of the players understood the world because all of the rules were plain to see then adventure games would not work. Many games are based upon people figuring out what has to be done and how to do it.
This is incorrect. They do not need to understand all the obstacles completely, they need to understand the rules which make up the world. For instance, in reading, everyone understands reading english you read from the left to right, top to bottom. This could be considered a common understanding that everyone has. This is the type of thing I was talking about, only games define more than one activity, they usually define your entire range of activities.
>- A game is created for the purpose of entertainment.
>Some games are created for the purpose of gambling and to make money. Some play these games for entertainment, some play to try to make money.
This is a context confusion. You are confusing the purpose of the developer with the purpose of the product and the purpose of some people playing the product.
Gambling game: Developer makes it for money. The game is DESIGNED for entertainment of the player, taking money (and giving) being the way of entertaining. Some players play specifically to make money.
Whats left here is that there is a design purpose for the game that it will entertain in some aspect. Is all gambling a game? No, I dont think so IMO. But most of the things people associate with gambling probably are.
>- A game must interact with the player.