Any time people are uncomfortable with something reported in the news, they look for someone to blame to make themselves feel better. This is what happened to the goths from Mr. Jenkins Goes To Washington. Politicians riding the wave of uncertainty to gain the approval of the masses led to video games and goth culture taking hits in the public view. Even though, as Jenkins points out, goths are actually peaceful people, they were singled out for being different. Different is scary. That is why when any new media form tries to emerge into a respectable form of art or competition, it is always met with resistance from the people scared that their children might be negatively influenced. There is often much more thought given to the harm that could befall children than how much media could actually help them.
The accessibility of the internet allows for children to leave the less-than-stellar life many endure in high school for something different where they can actually have fulfilling conversations with friends that care about them. When you take away the social misconceptions based upon a person's clothing, you have nothing left to judge them by but their personality. Additionally, it is easier to open up to a person online, because the repercussions of them not liking you are far less than a real life situation. There is no real fear of rejection, no social pressures to fit it. Each interaction on the internet is a pure combination of personalities, unlike the prejudices than many young people face every day at school.
How Washington Learned to Love Video Games
shows that violent crime has been decreasing while video game companies
have been growing. There is no solid evidence to support that video
games lead to more violent behavior. Instead of fearfully trying to ban games from children, adults should recognize that this is an emerging culture and technology is only going to get better. Instead of trying to convince everybody that video games are inherently evil, responsible people will look ahead to see how video games can be used in our children's future for benefit. Games can change an individual's world view just as effectively as a movie, a book or a play.
Monday, October 8, 2012
Friday, September 28, 2012
Notes for Final Project
In my paper, I will be exploring what makes a game competitive. I will look at whether a game is, or has ever been, an Major League Gaming title and why it is still there, if it is. Also, I'll look into what individual aspects of a game add to the competitive nature of the game and how all of those aspects come together to balance out a game and make it enjoyable for players.
The first resource I will be using is the actual MLG website: http://www.majorleaguegaming.com. MLG has forums that talk about why a game has been removed from the circuit, rules for play, and loads of info on all of the current MLG games. The two series that I will be examining are Super Smash Brothers and Halo. I have personal experience with both of these games and have been a part of the community of Halo and SSB for many years.
The second resource I'll use is Major League Gaming goes big league. This is an article back from 2006, talking about what MLG is and how it wants to affect the gaming community. Clearly, the audience has grown drastically since 2006, and I will use this article as a "before photo" so to speak, contrasting it with the community now in 2012.
Thirdly, I will use MLG details pre-release Halo 4 Tournament for Dallas to give a fuller idea of the true size of MLG. The fact that Halo 4 will be accepted into MLG play before it is even released, coupled with the $40,000 in prizes, should be enough to make anybody take gaming seriously. Thousands of people will watch even small tournaments via live streaming, which I will detail more in depth in the paper.
The first resource I will be using is the actual MLG website: http://www.majorleaguegaming.com. MLG has forums that talk about why a game has been removed from the circuit, rules for play, and loads of info on all of the current MLG games. The two series that I will be examining are Super Smash Brothers and Halo. I have personal experience with both of these games and have been a part of the community of Halo and SSB for many years.
The second resource I'll use is Major League Gaming goes big league. This is an article back from 2006, talking about what MLG is and how it wants to affect the gaming community. Clearly, the audience has grown drastically since 2006, and I will use this article as a "before photo" so to speak, contrasting it with the community now in 2012.
Thirdly, I will use MLG details pre-release Halo 4 Tournament for Dallas to give a fuller idea of the true size of MLG. The fact that Halo 4 will be accepted into MLG play before it is even released, coupled with the $40,000 in prizes, should be enough to make anybody take gaming seriously. Thousands of people will watch even small tournaments via live streaming, which I will detail more in depth in the paper.
Friday, September 21, 2012
Embodiment and Elves
Video Games and Embodiment was a wonderful article about how a player's consciousness can travel into the virtual world while playing a game. My favorite part was actually the Note at the end that explained some examples of microcontrol. Microcontrol is when a person gains a small degree of control over an external object, and that person's consciousness and awareness extend out to encompass that object. A couple examples used were how a blind man gains awareness of his cane to, after using it for so long, and becoming accustomed to having it and how a person watering plants with a machine through a computer screen adapts and gains more awareness of the external objects.
Microcontrol in video games is a concept not thought about that often. If you think back to a game that you were frustrated with because the controls were too 'clunky' or a game that you loved because of how smoothly you could move through the game world, these are good or bad examples of microcontrol. Ideally, in a game like Half-Life 2, the player is allowed to move around without constantly getting caught on corners and ledges. Kinesthetics can make or break a game. If the game does not have solid movement, the rest of the game may not even be experienced by the player. One example that comes to mind immediately is Two Worlds for the Xbox 360. Two Worlds didn't have the best story line, but it did have a good amount of random dungeons, and a revolutionary magic system. Most of these things weren't experienced before the players set down the controller in disgust and wrote terrible reviews about the game. This happened because the lack of polish on the movement controls, and combat in general. You could dual-wield, but that would just make your character swing the two weapons very close to his body, and be nearly useless. Players can distinguish between good and bad kinesthetics in games because they are used to having a level of microcontrol.
Another interesting concept about embodiment was brought up in the article Digital Elves as a Racial Other in Video Games: Acknowledgment and Avoidance by Nathaniel Poor. Nathaniel talks about how elves always seem to get the short end of the stick, when it comes to racial interactions. Elves have been treated as every minority haunted by a bad history, including African Americans, Native Americans, and Jews. While this is rather unfortunate if you happen to be an elf, it is actually a helpful mechanic. By using elves as a metaphor, we humans are allowed to look at issues of racism in games without having the games be boycotted for racism. For example, it's alright to have an elf as a slave, but if one were to portray an African American as a slave in game, that wouldn't exactly help people to look at it from an objective view.
I'd never noticed this before, but elves don't really seem to exist in the Eastern cultures. This is because elves first came about in legends and tales originated in Western culture. Stories of High Elves and Dark Elves go all the way back to pre-Christian Western cultures and have been adapted over time into three generally accepted types of elves. The Elder Scrolls series has the three types: The arrogant, magic-wielding High Elves, the sneaky, destructive Dark Elves, and the arrow-shooting Wood Elves of the forest. There are slight differentiations on these types, but all of them can be directly linked back to old Western stories.
Microcontrol in video games is a concept not thought about that often. If you think back to a game that you were frustrated with because the controls were too 'clunky' or a game that you loved because of how smoothly you could move through the game world, these are good or bad examples of microcontrol. Ideally, in a game like Half-Life 2, the player is allowed to move around without constantly getting caught on corners and ledges. Kinesthetics can make or break a game. If the game does not have solid movement, the rest of the game may not even be experienced by the player. One example that comes to mind immediately is Two Worlds for the Xbox 360. Two Worlds didn't have the best story line, but it did have a good amount of random dungeons, and a revolutionary magic system. Most of these things weren't experienced before the players set down the controller in disgust and wrote terrible reviews about the game. This happened because the lack of polish on the movement controls, and combat in general. You could dual-wield, but that would just make your character swing the two weapons very close to his body, and be nearly useless. Players can distinguish between good and bad kinesthetics in games because they are used to having a level of microcontrol.
Another interesting concept about embodiment was brought up in the article Digital Elves as a Racial Other in Video Games: Acknowledgment and Avoidance by Nathaniel Poor. Nathaniel talks about how elves always seem to get the short end of the stick, when it comes to racial interactions. Elves have been treated as every minority haunted by a bad history, including African Americans, Native Americans, and Jews. While this is rather unfortunate if you happen to be an elf, it is actually a helpful mechanic. By using elves as a metaphor, we humans are allowed to look at issues of racism in games without having the games be boycotted for racism. For example, it's alright to have an elf as a slave, but if one were to portray an African American as a slave in game, that wouldn't exactly help people to look at it from an objective view.
I'd never noticed this before, but elves don't really seem to exist in the Eastern cultures. This is because elves first came about in legends and tales originated in Western culture. Stories of High Elves and Dark Elves go all the way back to pre-Christian Western cultures and have been adapted over time into three generally accepted types of elves. The Elder Scrolls series has the three types: The arrogant, magic-wielding High Elves, the sneaky, destructive Dark Elves, and the arrow-shooting Wood Elves of the forest. There are slight differentiations on these types, but all of them can be directly linked back to old Western stories.
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
Point, Click, Adventure!
In this video, Tim Schafer and Ron Gilbert discuss a less celebrated genre of video games: Adventure Games. Schafer brought up the topic of how adventure games seem to have died. Even Gilbert had to agree that, proportional to the rest of the video game market, adventure games are not what they used to be.
Gilbert says that the reason adventure games may not be gaining popularity is because gamers are not as patient as they used to be. The pleasure in a game used to be gained from the challenge of solving a challenging puzzle. Due to the changes in the gaming industry, a lot of people are used to the instant gratification of shooting someone in the face with a shotgun. This mentality doesn't really fit well with a game that requires you to take a break when you get stuck and come back in an hour or two to look at a puzzle in a whole new light.
Interestingly, there is a game based around Tim Schafer looking for old jokes before he goes on stage. I began to play it with the intention of completing it, but soon realized what a monstrous task that would be. I managed to piece together 2 jokes, out of the apparent 22 total jokes. I probably won't ever get the 22 joke perfect ending without cheating, because I don't feel compelled to spend that much time on the game. Even though he is only in one single room, the game still has quite a few puzzles in it.The ending of the game if you manage to complete all 22 jokes, is an unlockable moon-walking mode.
Schafer and Gilbert talked about how the feeling of accomplishment that you get when you finally figure out a puzzle is the real reason a lot of people play adventure games. I really felt that while playing through this one. Each puzzle was challenging, but not so hard that I felt they were unfair to the player. The game also has quite a few jokes about Tim, and also some meta jokes about adventure games, like when he says the chair is hiding something, underneath it. I believe they put that part in just to avoid the pixel hunting that they mentioned in the video.
When I was growing up, I played a game called Myst. The whole idea of Myst was to try and figure out why you were on the island, and what you can do to get off of it. It really felt like an old school adventure game, and also had the elements of a good puzzle that Gilbert and Schafer talked about. However, there was a good deal of pixel hunting I did when playing, though that may have been due to my lack of skill at the game. Personally, I distinguish adventure games and puzzle games into two different categories. Puzzle games, to me, are games that the primary objective is to challenge the player and activate critical thinking in order to progress. I feel like adventure games should maintain a sense of exploration, like Myst had. But some people lump those two categories together into the same genre, and I can certainly see their point.
Gilbert says that the reason adventure games may not be gaining popularity is because gamers are not as patient as they used to be. The pleasure in a game used to be gained from the challenge of solving a challenging puzzle. Due to the changes in the gaming industry, a lot of people are used to the instant gratification of shooting someone in the face with a shotgun. This mentality doesn't really fit well with a game that requires you to take a break when you get stuck and come back in an hour or two to look at a puzzle in a whole new light.
Interestingly, there is a game based around Tim Schafer looking for old jokes before he goes on stage. I began to play it with the intention of completing it, but soon realized what a monstrous task that would be. I managed to piece together 2 jokes, out of the apparent 22 total jokes. I probably won't ever get the 22 joke perfect ending without cheating, because I don't feel compelled to spend that much time on the game. Even though he is only in one single room, the game still has quite a few puzzles in it.The ending of the game if you manage to complete all 22 jokes, is an unlockable moon-walking mode.
Schafer and Gilbert talked about how the feeling of accomplishment that you get when you finally figure out a puzzle is the real reason a lot of people play adventure games. I really felt that while playing through this one. Each puzzle was challenging, but not so hard that I felt they were unfair to the player. The game also has quite a few jokes about Tim, and also some meta jokes about adventure games, like when he says the chair is hiding something, underneath it. I believe they put that part in just to avoid the pixel hunting that they mentioned in the video.
When I was growing up, I played a game called Myst. The whole idea of Myst was to try and figure out why you were on the island, and what you can do to get off of it. It really felt like an old school adventure game, and also had the elements of a good puzzle that Gilbert and Schafer talked about. However, there was a good deal of pixel hunting I did when playing, though that may have been due to my lack of skill at the game. Personally, I distinguish adventure games and puzzle games into two different categories. Puzzle games, to me, are games that the primary objective is to challenge the player and activate critical thinking in order to progress. I feel like adventure games should maintain a sense of exploration, like Myst had. But some people lump those two categories together into the same genre, and I can certainly see their point.
Friday, September 14, 2012
Does a video game have an ‘author’?
I would like to think the answer to this question is "Yes." Video games are capable of stirring deep emotional responses within the individual playing, and sometimes in the group playing if it is a cooperative game. Video games can tell a riveting story, immerse players in the story like no other form of media can, and show players that their actions will have a definite and serious impact on the rest of the world around them. These things are all good and well, but to determine if a video game can have an actual author, one must examine the term 'author' more closely.
According to the Merriam-Webster website, "Author" is defined as "One that originates or creates." The examples given include software authors and film authors. I find this definition to be the most accurate representation, that I could find, of what it means to be an author. The differentiation made between a painter and a short story writer are only made for specificity's sake. The act of creating something for the purpose of enjoyment is all part of the same idea.
Now, not all games necessarily have an author. Some games only have a creator(I'm thinking Tetris here.) For a game to have an author, they must have a story. The same way there wouldn't be an author for a movie that was a compilation of video clips taken of nature, because there is no story. That said, there are plenty of games that have wonderful stories and talented authors. Some games have multiple authors, as do some books and films. In the end, there is really no difference in the will to create something enjoyable, except the format used to make it.
Plenty of games have wonderful stories with many facets that engage the player. One game that comes to mind is Metal Gear Solid. The cocky protagonist of Metal Gear Solid is Solid Snake. As Snake, the player must fight through dozens of faceless soldiers(that are actually clones) to defeat a rogue organization intent on activating a giant robot equipped with nuclear warheads. Each character in the story has a definite, dimensional personality, from Snake's power-hungry brother to the scared scientist that regrets ever working on the Metal Gear project in the first place. The kind of character development found in this game couldn't be accomplished in a movie because of the time it would require, and is often forsaken for the typical stereotypes that people can identify with. The only other place that one might find a story as deep as the one in Metal Gear Solid would be in a novel. So, I conclude the original question with this: Yes, a game can have an author.
According to the Merriam-Webster website, "Author" is defined as "One that originates or creates." The examples given include software authors and film authors. I find this definition to be the most accurate representation, that I could find, of what it means to be an author. The differentiation made between a painter and a short story writer are only made for specificity's sake. The act of creating something for the purpose of enjoyment is all part of the same idea.
Now, not all games necessarily have an author. Some games only have a creator(I'm thinking Tetris here.) For a game to have an author, they must have a story. The same way there wouldn't be an author for a movie that was a compilation of video clips taken of nature, because there is no story. That said, there are plenty of games that have wonderful stories and talented authors. Some games have multiple authors, as do some books and films. In the end, there is really no difference in the will to create something enjoyable, except the format used to make it.
Plenty of games have wonderful stories with many facets that engage the player. One game that comes to mind is Metal Gear Solid. The cocky protagonist of Metal Gear Solid is Solid Snake. As Snake, the player must fight through dozens of faceless soldiers(that are actually clones) to defeat a rogue organization intent on activating a giant robot equipped with nuclear warheads. Each character in the story has a definite, dimensional personality, from Snake's power-hungry brother to the scared scientist that regrets ever working on the Metal Gear project in the first place. The kind of character development found in this game couldn't be accomplished in a movie because of the time it would require, and is often forsaken for the typical stereotypes that people can identify with. The only other place that one might find a story as deep as the one in Metal Gear Solid would be in a novel. So, I conclude the original question with this: Yes, a game can have an author.
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
A Beast Named "Fun"
As I read through "Fun" is a Four-Letter Word, I found several concepts that I had previously thought about, a lot of things that I agreed with, and just a couple that I didn't agree with. The overall feel of the article is correct, I believe, in saying that for games to expand and become a respected form of media, they must break away from the norm and add other aspects.
One thing that I don't necessarily agree with is that games are not being made for other purposes than just to be fun. While there are not many examples of large video game companies making buckets of cash off of games with un-fun selling points, there are games that are bridging the gap. Most people's definition of fun wouldn't be: playing an insanely hard game, having your character die permanently, losing hours of progress and the only thing left of your character is a morgue file. Yet, there is an entire sub-culture of gaming based around just this premise called Roguelikes. Roguelikes have a MUCH higher challenge level than many other types of games, which is a large part of their charm. Roguelikes are a haven for the hardcore, who are tired of playing the games that have been specifically manufactured for the "mainstream" or the "casual gamers."
Now, you may be thinking, "Okay, so there is such a thing as an un-fun game. How could that be used in the real-world where you have to make a profit for a game to sell?" Actually, there are quite a few games that share traits with roguelikes. These games include: the Diablo series and Demon's Souls. Diablo II has a "Hardcore" mode where, if your character dies, they are lost forever(along with all the hours of play and sweet gear.) This gives players the option to add extra challenge if they desire it, and also gives the true fans the privilege of bragging rights that they beat "Hell" difficulty on "Hardcore" mode. While Diablo II has a choice between whether or not to make your character "Hardcore" or not, Demon's Souls does not let you choose an easy path. A Demon's Souls character does not die permanently, but will most assuredly die often and to many things. Also, there are permanent effects of death, such as the World Tendency to turn darker, increasing the difficulty of the game and locking legendary weapons from whichever world you are currently in, so the player can never get them.
Some other interesting games that have emerged in spite of the fun-or-go-home mentality are called "One Play" games. These games try to reflect the aspect of reality that you only have one chance to make any one choice. As a result of this unusual twist on what appears at first to be a simple flash game, these "One Play" games are immediately hated by most, but saluted by the few that appreciate new interpretations of what games could be. I played through each game multiple times by clearing cookies in the browser.
As I played through You Only Live Once, I felt like a weaker Mario who lost hearts like Link, but had no way of regaining health. Eventually, I was impaled on a spike pit. Ironically, I spent more time watching events unfold after my characters death than I did actually playing the game. I felt slightly insulted that the creator of the game knew this would happen, and put at least as much time into the after-game as was put into the actual game. After two playthroughs, I had seen enough of this game. But, the game was funny in a ridiculous kind of way and I couldn't hate on a game named after YOLO.
One Chance was my favorite of the "One Play" games. I actually tried to play it 3 times because, from the look of it, all of the endings were pretty grim. After a quick Google of why One Chance was so tragic, I found that there was no way to save your wife and no matter what you do, the majority of the world still dies because of something you invented. I don't feel like replaying or reading about One Chance really ruined the creator's intent. In fact, I believe that the creator realized that people would do this, and purposefully made the choices hard as if to say, "Even if you cheat, you're still going to be disappointed."
I honestly don't know what to think of (Why is) Johnny in an Art Game? And I'm not really sure if it's worth me even considering it on the same level as One Chance. It looks like a very simple parody of "Artsy" games, but without any of the deep meaning or options. Basically, (Why is) Johnny in an Art Game? seems like a bad rendition of a Deterministic interpretation of a shadow of what One Chance was, mixed with Before the Law. Except, instead of choosing to move forward and seek greatness, you kill yourself.
One thing that I don't necessarily agree with is that games are not being made for other purposes than just to be fun. While there are not many examples of large video game companies making buckets of cash off of games with un-fun selling points, there are games that are bridging the gap. Most people's definition of fun wouldn't be: playing an insanely hard game, having your character die permanently, losing hours of progress and the only thing left of your character is a morgue file. Yet, there is an entire sub-culture of gaming based around just this premise called Roguelikes. Roguelikes have a MUCH higher challenge level than many other types of games, which is a large part of their charm. Roguelikes are a haven for the hardcore, who are tired of playing the games that have been specifically manufactured for the "mainstream" or the "casual gamers."
Now, you may be thinking, "Okay, so there is such a thing as an un-fun game. How could that be used in the real-world where you have to make a profit for a game to sell?" Actually, there are quite a few games that share traits with roguelikes. These games include: the Diablo series and Demon's Souls. Diablo II has a "Hardcore" mode where, if your character dies, they are lost forever(along with all the hours of play and sweet gear.) This gives players the option to add extra challenge if they desire it, and also gives the true fans the privilege of bragging rights that they beat "Hell" difficulty on "Hardcore" mode. While Diablo II has a choice between whether or not to make your character "Hardcore" or not, Demon's Souls does not let you choose an easy path. A Demon's Souls character does not die permanently, but will most assuredly die often and to many things. Also, there are permanent effects of death, such as the World Tendency to turn darker, increasing the difficulty of the game and locking legendary weapons from whichever world you are currently in, so the player can never get them.
Some other interesting games that have emerged in spite of the fun-or-go-home mentality are called "One Play" games. These games try to reflect the aspect of reality that you only have one chance to make any one choice. As a result of this unusual twist on what appears at first to be a simple flash game, these "One Play" games are immediately hated by most, but saluted by the few that appreciate new interpretations of what games could be. I played through each game multiple times by clearing cookies in the browser.
As I played through You Only Live Once, I felt like a weaker Mario who lost hearts like Link, but had no way of regaining health. Eventually, I was impaled on a spike pit. Ironically, I spent more time watching events unfold after my characters death than I did actually playing the game. I felt slightly insulted that the creator of the game knew this would happen, and put at least as much time into the after-game as was put into the actual game. After two playthroughs, I had seen enough of this game. But, the game was funny in a ridiculous kind of way and I couldn't hate on a game named after YOLO.
One Chance was my favorite of the "One Play" games. I actually tried to play it 3 times because, from the look of it, all of the endings were pretty grim. After a quick Google of why One Chance was so tragic, I found that there was no way to save your wife and no matter what you do, the majority of the world still dies because of something you invented. I don't feel like replaying or reading about One Chance really ruined the creator's intent. In fact, I believe that the creator realized that people would do this, and purposefully made the choices hard as if to say, "Even if you cheat, you're still going to be disappointed."
I honestly don't know what to think of (Why is) Johnny in an Art Game? And I'm not really sure if it's worth me even considering it on the same level as One Chance. It looks like a very simple parody of "Artsy" games, but without any of the deep meaning or options. Basically, (Why is) Johnny in an Art Game? seems like a bad rendition of a Deterministic interpretation of a shadow of what One Chance was, mixed with Before the Law. Except, instead of choosing to move forward and seek greatness, you kill yourself.
Monday, September 10, 2012
Class Discussion of Ebert
Ebert decides to use a definition from Wikipedia for the definition of art: "Art is the process of deliberately arranging elements in a way that appeals to the senses or emotions." He then proceeds to say that this resembles a chess game. I disagree, on the grounds that a game of chess is not designed in a form to specifically appeal to senses or emotions. Chess is a game that, while it certainly contains metaphors, is designed to display one players prowess over the other, not to trigger emotions of activate senses. Ebert's definition of a game is obviously not to the proper level, judging by this comparison. Games like Okami are created to be aesthetically pleasing and scenes in Portal were created to trigger emotions. Emotions that were tied to a metal block(Companion Cube) because the writing of the game was good enough to create an emotional tie to a chunk of metal.
Collaboration by Lee & Lacie
Collaboration by Lee & Lacie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)