In the play of something, any child who could not be creative would immediately protest, and if such a protest was not successful, it would end. The ability to express dissatisfaction, rebellion, departure is what makes such a game a powerful tool of social learning. By allowing children to dominate and play inattentive to our needs and desires, we destroy the social value of the game. The opposite error is, of course, our dominance in playing over children, or, in extreme cases, complete control of the game and eliminating children. Dads are usually more guilty about this, but I have experienced mothers like this.
Together you start building something easily, like a sand castle or one of those specific Lego models. You are totally engaged and you are much better at it than a child, so you take the initiative completely or tell the child exactly what to do. Then it is only your game, not children.
The game requires negotiation
In some cases, we are hoods because we think we should rule them for their own good. But at other times, and especially in the game, we mistakenly think it is our task to allow children to dominate us. But control in any way destroys the game and ultimately destroys relationships. The game requires negotiation and compliance to meet everyone's needs. No bullying and subordination.