FormerlyHemlock
Hero
You just answered your own question there, Umbran. The point is to see if it quacks like a duck. Especially in a thread that heavily implicates the theory of game design, it's helpful to know if we're examining something that has the characteristics of games in the first place.Sure, but what's the point of making that distinction? See below...
If the only real distinction is the quantifiable end goal, then it still mostly looks, walks, and quacks like a duck, so to speak, and we are better of considering it a game with some special considerations, rather than a non-game activity.
For example, do we expect to need a solution to the kingmaker problem? If it's not a game then obviously we don't.
But more importantly, knowing that RPGs are not necessarily considered games according to Zimmerman et al. is interesting, and that's enough reason to mention it.