Untitled

[jaesium-blog]

sorry for all the puns C:

[jaesium-blog]

Mid Terms

Scott Cawthon notice me :)

[jaesium-blog]

DM2004 History of Games Week 6 Assignment

[jaesium-blog]

DM2004 History of Games Week 5 Assignment

Diagram required is at the bottom. 

[jaesium-blog]

DM2004 History of Games Week 4 Assignment Part 2

[jaesium-blog]

DM2004 History of Games Week 4 Assignment Part 1

Before delving into the relationship between ludology and narratology, it is important to first understand these terms.

According to the article, ludology is fundamentally a study of games and in particular, computer games. This study may include a focus on the study of game structure, while paying less attention to games as narratives or visual media.

On the other hand, the narratology in this context would defer from the common definition which refers to the study of a set of theories of narrative independent of the medium of representation. Here, narratology would mean that games should be studied through narratology or that games or closely connected to their narratives. In the case of the latter area of study, the author refers to it as narrativism for the sake of clarity.

In my opinion, narratology or narrativism is a subset of ludology. Both groups of study include the study of narratives in games and are connected in this aspect. For example, games like the early versions of Resident Evil which are largely driven by a fixed storyline (and have even been adapted into novels and films which are alternate forms of narratives) would likely be studied by both groups. However, there are games with minimal narratives driving gameplay such as tetris and more recently, candy crush. In such instances, narratology would be less relevant in the study of these games but not so for ludology. As such, the absence of narratives is what would remove narratology from ludology, and is the factor that distinguishes the two.

However, this distinction is not as clear as it seems. For instance, there are games in which the gameplay would influence the narratives experienced by the player. The lines separating narrativism from the broader study of ludology are blurred as the games while possessing a narrative are only loosely connected and the narrative itself may not be fixed.

Let me name two examples in light of the above-

1.       Bloodborne Set in a Victorian era city of Yharnam, the player controls a character which is plagued by an unknown illness and wishes to chance at the city’s “Blood Healing” which supposedly cures all illnesses. However, from there on. The storyline becomes vague. For one thing, upon going through the healing procedure, the player’s character loses his or her memory and unwittingly becomes a hunter, who must rid the city of beasts (former humans turned monstrous as a side effect of unchecked use of the Blood Healing). The games events and storyline vary from player to player, with many paths of progression each influencing the storyline and concluding with three different endings, the last of which is completely and radically different from the three. As such the game while having a strong lore and narrative frequently studied by lore hunters on Youtube, is flexible in its storyline and as such would sit on the border dividing narrativism and ludology, given that narrativism would require games be closely connected to the narrative.

2.       Far Cry 3 Similar to Bloodborne, Far Cry 3 has different endings and as such a loose storyline. However, what sets Far Cry 3 apart from Bloodborne is the ability to completely change the narrative, and right from the start. To elaborate, the despite the many possible narrative experiences and the three different endings the game offers, Bloodborne would always require the player to roam its virtual world slaying hordes of “beasts” and Great Ones- there is bound to be combat and killing. However, in Far Cry 3, you can vastly transform the game’s storyline and even leave its combat sequences (which is a major part of its gameplay) by simply staying seated at the dining table in the game’s opening sequence for ten minutes upon which, a cut-scene would play and the game would end.

In conclusion, narrativism and ludology are connected by their study of narratives in game while ludology would include other aspects of games such as gameplay mechanics. However, a blind spot in these areas of game study would be that the distinctions between the two may not always be clear. This may take place through a loose but rich narrative influenced by other aspects of the game. 

[jaesium-blog]

DM2004 History of Games Week 3 Assignment

Summarily, America’s Army is a game that can be described as a military training simulator. The game’s original intent was to act as a strategic communications medium to allow prospective recruits to experience first-hand via virtual means the military way of life. This in turn would reduce the rate at which recruits dropped out of basic training as they would know what they were signing up for. The game was also intended to show “how great the US Army is”. As such we can gather that America’s Army ultimately served as a means of recruitment, with the aim of enticing new recruits and also to ensure that the recruits stay in service instead of washing out. The game’s website is in fact linked to an army recruitment website and it is confirmed through the US army subcommittee testimony to have a higher chance of recruitment than any other recruitment means- reportedly, 28% of all visitor’s to the game’s site would also explore the recruitment portal. As such, the game’s objective of recruitment could be said to be a great success.

However, on the other hand the game’s intentions of providing information to prospective applicants to the armed forces could be said to be less successful. Undoubtedly, the game provides a wealth of extrinsic information. It accurately depicts general life in the military, military skills and training and even combat situations. For example, there are numerous reports of people met with situations of crisis or dangers in the wilderness while hiking using the skills they have picked up from the game such as navigation and healthcare to survive the ordeal. Therefore, on a surface level, the game does indeed provide accurate information that recruits can expect to gain while serving in the armed forces.

What is lacking however, is the game’s lack of information on the purpose of the armed forces’ actions, especially overseas. It has been criticized as to excessively portraying the technical aspects of war instead of the moral aspects, showing more of a “how we fight” instead of “why we fight”. “Why we fight” is coincidentally the name of a US government series of film which explains the reasons behind the US war effort in the Second World War, including liberal values such as freedom from oppression. In this regard, the game can be seen to be an anti-thesis to the film and its effects already felt- a growing number of US troops fighting abroad take with them the mentality that they are going to “kick some ass” instead of trying to promote peace and stability in the region. Ironically, the technological and firepower superiority of the American military abroad, when used against relatively weaker adversaries with such an incorrect mind-set could be seen as the very “oppression” the US tried to prevent in their previous war efforts.

-----

Before going into the topic of serious games as elements of education and social change, I would like to point out a few noteworthy points from Rodriguez’s writing. The article mentions that

·         Huizinga’s claim that games are played mainly for the experience they afford and are independent of players’ psychological make up. Any additional benefits such as knowledge are secondary are “good-to-have-extras”

·         Gaming is not really the solution of the task, but the ordering and shaping of the movement of the game itself and the modulation of the experience.

·         Playing is the act of an organism capable of grasping the meaning of her actions and those of others.

·         Games may be regarded as means to make learning fun filled and thus more interesting OR play can be part of the learning process because the subject to be learnt is, at least in some respects, essentially playful.

·         To play is in many instances to test the player's strength, intelligence, effort, persistence, manual dexterity, spatial reasoning and so forth. The idea of fair play also suggests an element of moral evaluation at the heart of many games.

·         Serious game designers can enhance the playfulness of education by treating the learning process as an exploratory arena- any learning is thus fluid and independent of the rigidity of model answers.

From the above, I contend that serious games should not be seen as elements of social change and education, but rather social change and education should be seen as elements of serious games.

We should first recall that play exists in a separate realm (sometimes called the magic circle) with its own rules and conditions independent of the “real world”. The world of “play” while incorporating “serious games”, are often seen to be more pleasant and forgiving than the “real world” and its harsh realities. As such, just as there is learning in the real world, there would similarly be learning in the realm of playing. Therefore, opportunities for social change and education also exist in play and are elements of play as well.

Viewing social change and education from this angle would be more appealing- people play of their own free will and through the play experience would also gain useful new skills. The experience would also be more fluid, freed from rigidities often present in the real world. As such, players would be able to test their limits in many aspects and also at a pace comfortable to them. In the process, they would be able not only to learn more, but also more about themselves. From this, we can conclude that learning (contributing to education and social change) when considered a subset of serious gaming, would be a more pleasant and enjoyable undertaking. The learning process is also likely to resonate further within players and have a larger, longer lasting impact.

When serious games are used as agents of social change and education, the experience gained more limited and often distorted by the agendas of “educators”. The games would undoubtedly make these endeavours less tedious but subconsciously, players know that they are still going through the rigours of the “real world”. They may not have chosen to take part in a social change movement or a certain education path and this would nag at them, preventing them from maximising their learning experience through gaming unless the games manage to genuinely perk up their interest in said topic. Additionally, when serious games are viewed as elements instead of a compound of social change and education, any experience gained from gaming is still restricted by rigid models set in the real world.

To conclude, in order to maximise the value of serious gaming, we should view social change and education to be elements of serious gaming. This would allow for fluid, independent experience which maximises gamers’ learning, also allow them to discover their limits and ultimately push forth beyond.

-----

Realistically speaking, we cannot save the world by playing online games. Jane Mc Gonigal raises interesting observations about gamers such as the ability to form a tight community and working exceptionally hard to solve problems. This may be true but using online games to solve problems would give rise to another set of problems.

Online games here are given a goal, that is a desired outcome at the end of the game. Usually when results are sought, agon is conceived. These further gives rise to a possibility of an erosion of the original intent of the game and elitism.

With regards to the erosion of intent, gamers may be so engrossed about solving world problems that it is all they care about. The solving of world problems as a result is now transformed into a mere necessary by-process and its place, winning would have taken over. An example of this can be clearly seen in the online game America’s Army where technical aspects have unseated moral aspects of the game.

This leads to the next issue, elitism. What I refer to is not elitism in the gaming community; that may be a problem but not as big as elitism in society. The gamers who have played a role in solving major issues have effectively “played god” and it would be a historic moment being the first to solve a world problem such as global poverty especially by such relatively unconventional means. Players may view themselves as above others in society, especially those they have helped. This on its own may lead to a new set of world problems.

[jaesium-blog]

DM2004 History of Games Week 2 Assignment Part 2

[jaesium-blog]

DM2004 History of Games Week 2 Assignment Part 1

[jaesium-blog]

DM2004 History of Games Week 1 Assignment Re-upload Part 2

[jaesium-blog]

DM2004 History of Games Week 1 Assignment Re-upload Part 1

The magic circle is a hypothetical space within which play occurs. It is separate from the “real” world and within its space, is secluded and limitless- a sort of alternate reality governed by its own rules. Participation in play within the magic circle occurs by one’s free will and the activities within are exclusive, may even take on an element of secrecy when faced with outsiders. However, the magic circle is in fact fragile and can be destroyed when someone refuses to acknowledge the rules that exist within the circle.

A common example of the magic circle being broken occurs in a children’s game of play-pretend where mimicry is involved. For example, children may pretend to be pokemon within the confines of a playground when an older child or adult comes about and denounces their game as childish nonsense. The children playing are aware that their game is merely a pretension are this illusion (illusion literally means “in play”) immediately have their game ruined and the magic circle can be said to have broken.

The play within the magic circle may also be a representation of actual events and this is where the boundaries of the magic circle may be blurred.

This can be observed in rituals and especially religious rituals where there is a certain element of belief in the ritual. As time goes on and the origins and intents of the ritual is forgotten, this becomes more so as participants of the ritual may become less aware of the magic circle containing it, allowing the circle to blend into reality.

As such we can infer that while the magic circle is fragile, given time it is able to seep into the fabrics of society where it becomes interwoven. Its borders are thus blurred, somewhat merging into and becoming much harder to “break”.