a.k.a. everything that you are supposed to know, but no one really explained to you and you didn’t know you were supposed to ask
Writing is tricky. No matter the subject, it is a skill that, like many others, requires extensive practice before we get it right. Academic writing is even more challenging, with each discipline imposing its own set of implicit rules and expectations. Game studies is no exception, but its interdisciplinary nature makes it particularly complex.
For instance, Polish academia tends to be more formal and favors passive voice—an approach that differs from the conventions of English-speaking and Western/Northern scholarship. At first, these differences can be confusing. However, don’t worry—language fluency is never the deciding factor in whether your abstract is accepted or rejected for a conference.
This guide is aimed at MA students and early-stage PhD researchers who are entering the international game studies field (welcome!). While these guidelines will likely help with other academic conferences, always double-check the specific formal requirements of each event. And most importantly—don’t be afraid to ask.
WHAT IS AN ABSTRACT?
The purpose of an abstract is to provide a concise overview of your research idea, methods, and a brief indication of your expected findings. Think of it as your research elevator pitch.
In game studies, abstracts typically range between 300 and 600 words. For DiGRA, the largest international game studies conference (see our Game Studies Starting Kit tab), extended abstracts are between 600 and 1,000 words. Some conferences, such as DiGRA and FDG, also allow full paper submissions.
For CEEGS, abstracts must be at least 400 words, with a recommended length of 600 words—not including the bibliography. However (and I cannot stress this enough), you must include a bibliography.
In the review process, four main things are taken into consideration:
- Scope: does the submission address the conference theme?
- Relevance and contribution: the originality of the idea, i.e., does the abstract offer new knowledge (insight, concept, framework, data from an understudied context, etc.)? Is this knowledge helpful for other game researchers?
- Theoretical background and methodology: does the abstract engage with the existing research on the discussed topics? Is the methodology discussed clearly?
- Structure: does the abstract follow the formal requirements (length, bibliography, keywords, the template if that was required)?
How much Scope and Structure are taken into consideration depends on the specific conference and Program Committee.
However, sending an abstract that has nothing to do with the conference theme can lower your chances.
ALWAYS include a bibliography and make sure you present relevant research literature! Not following the formal requirements can get you a desk reject (= rejection by the program committee before sending the paper out to the reviewers).
STRUCTURE
While there is no exact template for writing abstracts, every abstract should include the following components:
- Statement of Intent
It might sound daunting or too obvious, but trust me, what is obvious to you is not necessarily obvious to the reader. For this reason, it’s good to include a very clear sentence that summarizes your idea and the intentions for your presentation. You can put it right after the introduction or closer to the end (then it has an additional function as a summary), but I would recommend to always make sure it’s present in your abstract.
Don’t be afraid to signal it in an obvious way:, “In this presentation, I will compare…”, “The goal of this presentation is…”
Example #1
(edited from my own 2024 CEEGS abstract titled Video Game Graffiti, Civil Disobedience, and Player Agency)
This presentation aims to explore video game graffiti and street art regarding their narrative and world-building function, the ludic interactivity, and ways in which they permit the players to enact agency through the process of graffiti (with a focus on whether they have control over what were, how, and why is tagged or painted over).
- Literature review
This section is crucial for demonstrating to reviewers that you have done your research and are aware of existing scholarship on your topic. Reviewers—who are often experts in the field or at least well-versed in the subject—will quickly notice any major omissions, making it essential to cite key works.
For example, if you are writing about the magic circle, you should reference Huizinga. However, since Homo Ludens is widely known, a brief mention is sufficient before moving on to discuss more specialized theories. Prioritize citing works that directly inform your research rather than listing general references.
KEEP IN MIND: Often, a lack of bibliography or sources is grounds for desk-rejection.
- Methodology
This one can be tricky, depending on which discipline you are coming from. If you are doing a qualitative or a quantitative study, you need to explain how you obtained your data, how many participants your study had, and so on. If you are writing from a perspective of culture studies or literary studies, most often your theoretical frameworks will be your methodology. If you are performing close readings of selected case studies, that’s also your methodology!
KEEP IN MIND: Be specific and if you can, share numbers and details. If you’re conducting a study, mention that the data comes from 5 interviews and that you’ve looked at over 20 subreddits. If you are focusing on case studies, mention which games are you discussing and why they have been chosen.
Example #2
(edited from Dom Ford’s 2024 CEEGS abstract What went wrong with Cities: Skylines II, according to players)
As such, more research is needed into how players understand and respond to poor game launches, which could inform how to better manage these unhappy occurrences. To do this, I will scrape the comments of the top 50 posts from the game’s dedicated Reddit forum, /r/CitiesSkylines2.
Prepared by Agata Waszkiewicz