1 – I find that Bernard Suits’ definition of gaming is the best because not only is it responding to the physicality of the board and game but also it addresses the meta-physical aspect of gaming. His opinions on how gaming creates a specific state of affairs that is intended to have a mood closely aligns with my interest in the social aspects of gaming and what powers that carries. While other are caught up in the art of the physical game he leans toward the more intangibles.
2 - I would say that a game is artistic medium to augment reality through an escape to fantasy. It comes in different shapes and size be it one player or multiple, electronic of a card game, it is not the physical presence of the game but the social involvement and aspect that unites and defines games.
3 - I feel that his definition is to centered around the creator of the game and how it is their outlet to create. He gives so much attention to the artistic design aspect to gaming that he fails to address some of the social necessities that accompany gaming. He rejects the concept of puzzles because of their logic structure and provides too broad of a replacement for this logic to make any real concrete game structure. This creates somewhat of an imbalance to the games that he is creating that I feel takes away some of the key aspect of gaming that I would say need to be incorporated.