Experiencing Games

[xperiencegames]

Quest for a functional Hitachi

Did I learn how to speak Atlantean? Well, probably just one word. But underneath that seemingly non-sensical text there's more meaning than meets the eye. Sure, I did find myself not knowing what the hell I was reading but after looking at her website and photography and finding out more about the author, I saw more sense in the work than initially thought. The body parts, the discussion of the feminism ideology. Her references to the Dirty Girls and how an ideology can never come to fruition once it touches the realm of reality, they all make sense.

Having read the interviews, she is all about creating a 'weapon' out of her games. She wants something more than just something that entertains a reader. She wants to send a message and spark a discussion as opposed to VESPER.5, which is more of a self-reflective and ritualistic experience.

I also liked how she incorporated music into the solving process of the game. It added to the weird atmosphere of the text and made me listen more carefully. The sounds looping throughout the experience really had a sort of metallic feel to them and I felt that they really complemented the robotic setting that the text poses.

I guess going through those body part bits of the text are somewhat a metaphor for the author speaking about her experience as a trans, not being comfortable in her own body and how society reacts to that. Unfortunately I did not understand the Starcrafft reference since I never played it (I know shame on me right?) But then again she mentions how she doesn't like how people judge her work by the sexual orientation and other art, but unfortunately this is how I made sense of what I read.

The ending is far from what I expected, not that I expected anything. I guess it was some kind of in-your-face protest to all the people how might have rejected her for being who she is. Maybe she just wanted to express how good that technology was and making a review about it. I don't know, and I guess that's the beauty of it.

[xperiencegames]

Routine.5

"Playing" VESPER.5 was more of a chore to me than anything close to an experience. I started just walking to the most obvious, shortest paths to get to the finish line. I did not even notice that the objects were ''interactive". As time went on, sometimes I forgot to take my daily step and I get frustrated because I have wasted a chance to take a step. Sometimes I even took a step 11.55 PM and wait till after midnight to take the next one (This gave the illusion of traversing the space faster, but I was fooling myself). Lately I have gotten more used to it, wake up, switch the PC on, take the step, and continue with the rest of the day. I get that the whole concept was to give the notion of dedication and ritual, but I really could not connect with what I was seeing, what kept me going was reaching the end (which I haven't done yet). I counted the number of steps left in days to see how long it would take me to get to the next camera movement. Then I was dying to see how this thing ends, and I decided to watch a video of the ending (because I'm a fat cheater) and I couldn't help but feel disappointed at the rather underwhelming ending. I mean, if a person has been patiently ''playing'' this ''game'' for over a hundred days s/he would expect some kind of reward that is worth all that time. Maybe some form of narrative or inspiring text would have made the experience more worthwhile. Oh well, that is just my opinion, I understand the concept but I'm afraid that it did not connect with me in any way. 

[xperiencegames]

Turning Gamers into Hamsters

Watch This !! A device that actually allows you to move ''naturally'' within a virtual environment. Probably adding to this ''immersion'' topic all the more, The feeling of motion through the game world is even more visceral now than it ever was. However, Markiplier (the person narrating in the video) explains how unnatural and limited the device is and it makes you feel more unbalanced than the Occulus. But still it is interesting to see how more and more time and money is being invested in providing an experience where the player is actually enveloped within a virtual environment. With this technology, kinesthetic involvement is now much more visceral and movement totally depends on using the whole body, which is what we do in real life. Sure the technology still needs more work on it but the concept is there and it works. Never mind that it is completely impractical and probably too expensive for any individual to buy.

[xperiencegames]

Prepare to be confused

I can't really understand. Why is something like Elekroplankton being called an art game? People who called it an instrument are more likely to be right. I mean art is there to communicate something by the creator, this 'musical toy' as some call it may generate a performance art through its use but it in itself is a toy. We don't call a normal guitar an art piece, but it creates art through its use. I have no idea if my argument makes sense but when I look at Elektroplankton and Simtunes this is what I see.

By opening this post like this, I am by no means saying that games are not an art form. Just like film, there are games which are purely made for entertainment purposes while others which derive an experience that is audio-visually remarkable and a meaning or feeling, subjective as it may be. Art in itself is a broad and intangible term, we use it as an umbrella term for all the compelling mediated  experiences we willingly subject to. But it is undeniable that videogames have created a culture and the ability to create new forms of experiences which directly involve us through our engagement with them.

I would say that creative game design would be the prominent artistic element in games because everything else can be done with other media/art forms. Thus using game design as a form of expression would be the closest thing to game art possible. I would say that Every Day the Same Dream is a art game, since it perfectly captures the tediousness that life could have if we choose to do the same thing every day. The game design is done in a way that it lets you continue in an endless and dull routine, but if you deviate from that, you are rewarded with new encounters.

I also think that indie games have created a platform of games freed from the commercial chains that videogames have been tied to and adapted them as a means of creative expression. What Iwai has created are a means of expression, a playful instrument which have defied the view of videogames at the time. What is great with something like Elektrplankton is that it gave people the ability to have audio-visual experience entirely generated by themselves. This 'game' does not hold the player's hand and guides him/her through a scripted experience but rather lets the player/user experiment with the system him/herself, which is ultimately Toshi Iwai's goal. That is to include the audience in the creation of an experience.

[xperiencegames]

Come at Me with Your Pitchforks, Narratologists

Here we go again, yet another discussion of how games are not narratives and vice versa. I think that rather than emphasizing on their differences/ similarities, it's better to see games as what they are; a multimedia mess. I specifically agree with Ryan's discussion about media and each medium's specificity. Narrative is more than just a story, the way it is told and the tools it uses to provide an experience (or lack of) are fundamental to how we perceive it.

In film we have the director in charge of camera angles, lengths of shots and editing/montage all of these and more form the language of film. The specificity of film is what makes its viewing experience unique. That is why we go to watch a Lord of the Rings movie even though we've already read all the books. And each medium has abilities that are not necessarily available to other media.

For games it's the game spaces and the level of agency we have within them that provide the particular experience that define games. Representing spaces may not be exclusive to video games, but the certain level of agency within those spaces (mainly the mechanics and gameplay overall) are specific to games.

In film we have the director providing an eye into the narrative world, we are restricted to look at this ''magic window'' as Lombard calls it and perceive what the director wants us to perceive. In games however, game designers create the spaces and the interactions we have within them. So the level of freedom we have is up to the game designer, so we are still submissive to the game designer/author.

I strongly agree with the model  that Aarseth has created, particularly the elements of kernels and satellites. Kernels being the main plot points that create a distinction from other stories and satellites being the points in the middle which are not entirely necessary but add flavor to the story. As I understood it, the moments of gameplay will serve as satellites in an 'ludo-narrative' as Aarseth calls them.

Aarseth explains how different game structures have different levels of narrative dominance or gameplay. While reading about this I was thinking about The Walking Dead "Game". Please note the parenthesis, please.  The Walking Dead is just barely a game, it's almost a hypertext with some interactive objects and quick time events. The focus on the story is so heavy that the 'satellites' are barely present.

Each player approaches games differently. Personally I play Max Payne to jump and shoot people in slow motion (admittedly, heavily influenced by film). But the actual character is so deep and believable that the narrative just gives more flavour and I will be more intrigued to complete the challenges I will be facing throughout the game.

One more issue I'd like to create some thought about is how several players around the world are broadcasting and recording their sessions. In a way, these people are turning games into linear media because basically the viewers barely have any agency. I think this is an interesting point of discussion that isn't quite that discussed.

[xperiencegames]

Of Sound and Space.. Continued

I just watched a video of Markiplier 'playing' an Occulus Rift game called Don't Let Go and I couldn't resist but write something about it.

This is the video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NZov6IffoU

Whilst going through this experience, the various sounds around the avatar are perceived as around him or actually ON him. The surround sound headphones he is using actually make him (jokingly) pinpoint the location of the spider that moving around the avatar's body.

When using a device such as the Occulus Rift it makes sense that the player is having a first person experience. Doing it any other way defies the whole point of the Occulus. So combining devices such as the Occulus and good sound design will offer an engrossing experience where the actions of the player are even more so perceived as their own in the virtual environment. The first person perspective in this case and many other cases in games, the avatar is just a shell in which we project ourselves within and use it as an extension of ourselves as Collins neatly describes it. After all, what is greater than the identifying with ourselves in a virtual world?

[xperiencegames]

Of Sound and Space

What is the first thing that some players do before starting to play a game? Probably they would close the door and put on their headphones so that the terrible noise and distractions of the real world would be blocked out from the experience they are about to engage in. Sound in games has an enormous role in the experience of games. How is one supposed to be terrified when some unseen object is creating all sorts of havoc behind the avatar's visual field?

Horror games make creative use of sound to keep the player tense and keep alert around every corner s/he traverses. Collins mentions Dead Space, a horrific game which kept me pointing my gun at all times in the fear of finding something as I turn around. In Dead Space, one can hear a random pipe falling from the distance, this has completely no effect on the game, but while roaming around in a monster infested space station, hearing that sound will instantly make me move around to find where the sound came from and what caused it.

Similarly to what Carpenter & McLuhan said, we as humans have always relied on sound to alert us of an event which we are not currently looking at. As we hear a sound, we instantly look around towards where we think the sound game from. Games use this to direct players' attention towards particular objects, or just to terrify someone with a loud abrupt sound.

Collins discusses how receiving aural feedback from the game via the actions players take within the virtual environments help in creating a connection between the player and the avatar. She discusses how the avatar is an extension of our body reaching into this virtual world. I think this is true, even the fact that the player has a voice which in some games you can choose what the player says, it gives a sense of connection between the in-game character and the player.

I remember being annoyed while playing Dragon Age because the player did not voice out the my conversation choices. A mute character is a shallow one, which is why I generally do not like playing first person games. How can I connect with characters that do not talk? It really does not let me empathize with the character that I am playing.

Stockburger emphasizes on how sound in games gives us a sense of space which is beyond the flat monitor that we receive visual information from. When we hear a sound which we perceive as far away in the virtual space, it  gives a certain depth and believability to the environment that the avatar is inhabiting. It also helps us make sense of all the aural input that we a being subjected to by the game. Unlike what McLuhan says, we as humans select what to listen to. Our ears are subjected to all the sounds around us, but our brain focuses on the closest things to us even though its not necessarily so. We may be supposedly listening to someone talk to us but rather listen to a conversation that is going on behind you. We do this also in games, we block out certain environmental sounds in order to focus on the more significant ones.

When we play games we purposely block out aural stimuli coming from our current environment in order to focus on the environment our avatar is inhabiting and we delve into this space which is visually consistent but aurally three dimensional and dynamic.

[idg5202]

Further to this, many have discussed that games are a medium within which ethics can be explored, rather than necessarily being used as a platform to brainwash the masses. I subscribe to this way of thinking and, aside from the obvious implications that games do not foster killers,...

[xperiencegames]

Athl-ETHICS

Ethics in games are an interesting and under discussed topic in game studies. Sicart believes that game designers have an ethical responsibility to the systems and rule sets that they create within their games. If the rules of a game allow negative behavior without consequence, there is nothing to tell the player that a particular action taken in a game is an unethical one. Apart from the game designers, Sicart also gives moral responsibility to the players. He emphasizes a game is just an object without a player. Once a player is introduced, the game becomes an experience. The code or rule set given in the game defines the possibility space of the player, but what if players are given the power to mod these systems beyond the developers' imagination?

Frasca introduces a game called 'Sims of the Oppressed' this system gives the power to the player to modify characters to their own desires. This kind of interaction is very different from what a normal player would do but it is still a form of communication with the system that is Sims. Such power given to the people would have several consequences. People given freedom to exploit a game system can use this power to exploit other or to demean certain social groups or even to create extremist controversies. One the other hand people could actually create more believable characters to experiment with the way the system reacts to these characters.  It is true that designers implement their own ideologies deep into their games but restricting the players' action would reduce the negative impact that it could actually have.

When it comes to computer game ethics, I am always reminded of Black and White. Black and White is a particularly interesting example since it actually lets the player define what is good or bad to the miniatures. This allows the player to create a completely different ethical system for these miniatures than the real life requires. In my opinion this is very similar to Sims of the Oppressed, the only difference is that the hardwired 'code' of the game actually allows for this skewing of morality. Sicart states that a computer cannot be seen as an agent, since everything is mathematical, this is true but if the game system reflects back to the player the repercussions of a skewed morality, it allows a player to actually consider and reflect about his/her in-game actions.

Metro: Last Light actually has a built-in system of morale points which evaluates the player's actions. For example if s/he lets a group of harmless creatures pass by without killing them the game would produce a positive sound while if s/he does kill these creatures a negative sound is heard. These series of decisions made throughout the whole game actually have an effect on the ending.

Similarly, Dishonored has a system which analyses the amount of people the player has killed, every corpse has a negative effect on the city and even some characters of the game will grow to despise the player's character for the violent actions he has taken throughout the course of the game.

The Walking Dead game is also a very interesting game in terms of its ethical system. The game constantly records decisions that the player takes throughout the playthrough and at the end of an episode, it will show the player statistics of what all the players of the game have chosen. This kind of statistical screen allows the player to reflect upon the possibly unethical decisions s/he have taken. The game actually forces the player to make fast decisions for the best (in the player's opinion) of the whole group. The statistics screen would actually cause the player to wonder what would have happened if s/he had taken a different course of action.

There many games that cause the player to make possibly ethical decisions but most of them are driven by the narrative more than anything.  In these cases, the game analyses the choices made and reacts to them according to the code implemented in them. Thus games are most often very rigid in the ways they react to player's actions but still have the power to make the player think about the actions taken in order to serve as an ethical rhetoric tool. 

[xperiencegames]

Give Me Some Space

Previously, I discussed the issue of presence within games. In order to be present, there has to be a space, be it a high tech space station or ancient Rome. In terms of games, Leirfall claims that cyberspaces are actually places in the space we call reality. Mentioning the word Cyberspace, according to Leifall, would imply that it is a space which can be physically experienced. Thus we as players are, ‘hallucinating’ when playing games and perceiving them as spaces.

Alternatively, Lefebvre claims that space is dependent on the ‘spatial practices’ of a particular society. This relates to Tuan’s discussion of how different cultures perceive and find their way through their immediate spaces. Taking Tuan’s perspective into games, gamers have a way of understanding how different spaces work and how to interact with different implementations of space. This of course requires experience in playing games to some extent. But the way  players make sense of their surroundings and the map available to them so early while playing a new game connects to Tuan’s notion of how different people perceive space differently.

Players adapt to the spaces that are available to them, they test their boundaries to find out about the possibility space that the game offers to them. different implementations of space allow different kinds of interactions and gameplay. Aarseth compares the worlds of Myst and Myth and explains how the possibility spaces around these games result in a totally different experience from each other. In Myst all the player can do is click on items while in Myth the player controls a number of characters at once and has to utilize the space available to him/her in order to make use of a strategy which will result in winning the game. Aarseth goes on to say that the spatial implementations of different games are a crucial part of the aesthetics of games and that a classification of spatial representations is needed.

Nitsche does provide an in depth classification of how game spaces are structured and how they are considered as narrative elements. Although he never really explains what he means by spatial structures as narrative elements, he refers to how a representation of a bridge in Medal of Honor, represents one which was crucial in World War II. Nitsche also explains that the constraints that the world places upon the player encourage exploration and completion of quests/missions. The explains how bridges are used to lock players out of certain areas of the game before they complete a set of quests. This reminds me of Grand Theft Auto, which consistantly uses locked bridges to unlock new areas on the map.

Nitsche’s classification includes Labyrinths/ Mazes, these are mostly corridor shooters like Half-Life and F.E.A.R. These leave very little room for exploration while on the other hand, sandbox games offer open worlds where the possibility for exploration is much larger. Nitsche also explains how different implementations of space are crucial to how a game is played. He explains how game designers pay attention in balancing out a map for multiplayer games in order not to give an unfair advantage to a particular team.

Experienced gamers may understand how a game is played just by looking at a screenshot and looking how the space in that screenshot is represented. An overhead view of many miniature characters will signify that it is a strategy game etc. By understanding the importance of setting a space in a game will greatly improve a designer’s ability to create a game which makes the best use of the space created for it and ultimately making it a believable, playable and enjoyable experience. 

[xperiencegames]

Presence Shmesence

Another widely discussed issue with regards to player experience is the notion of presence. Many define this as the player's perception of habitation within the game environment. The technological representational capabilities of games are most of the time a major focus when it comes to discussing presence and immersion in games. 

Murray, in Hamlet on the Holodeck discusses a concept of a technology which is capable of representing a virtual environment in which the player is physically present in. Rather confusingly, Slater explains that immersion is the representational technology while presence is the reaction to that technology.  Tamborini and Bowman emphasize that the actual inputting devices have a bearing on the sense of spatial presence in a player.

It is Salen and Zimmerman who decide to diverge away from the notion that realistic simulations are a crucial element for the player to have a truly engaging experience. They state that play is the true element that defines the player experience. They discuss how while playing, the player is conscious of his/her actions as a human being and as a player in a game. These mental states constantly fluctuate from one to another.  This resonates with Calleja's term 'incorporation'  in which the player is conscious of his co-existence between physical surroundings and his location in  the game environment. Through play,  players have actions and abilities which the real world would not allow. Games act as an extension of the consciousness of the player.

Tamborini and Bowman put an emphasis on how input devices that focus on natural mapping for interaction with games enhance the level of spatial presence within a game environment. I would tend to disagree with this since players would, after a certain amount of time, internalize the input methods of a game. Like Brown and Crains explain in their theory of immersion, the first step to total immersion is to learn and internalize the way the game works and reacts to inputs. When total immersion is achieved, the act of interacting with a game becomes second nature, so much so that it is almost transparent.

Even if using such input devices does enhance the element of spatial presence in games, the mechanics of such games lack depth and creativity. Most games that make use of such devices often require repetitive actions which do not provide a meaningful playing experience.

Salen and Zimmerman explain that the Immersive Fallacy has become a barrier to game design. I would agree with this statement, since game designers tend to focus more on the simulations they are creating rather than focusing on new and exciting mechanics which allow for more a interesting and engaging gameplay experience. 

[xperiencegames]

Games as Parallel Universes?

This blog is directed to a credit in a Msc in Digital Games which focuses of the theory behind the experiences of a player and the attentional resources a player allocates towards a game. 

Many have used the word 'immersion' so broadly that it is not an academically viable term any more. It has been used in too many contexts to be a term which encompasses a specific experiential mode which the player is in.

It is difficult to analyse player experience. It may require an in-depth knowledge about psychology, but not even psychology may explain what connections happen in the brain of a player while playing a game.

Calleja (2011) has created the Player Involvement Model which pinpoints the different aspects of a game that the player allocates attention towards.Each of these different elements are competing, in a way, for the player's attention yet they are not mutually exclusive. 

Calleja also coins a new term called 'incorporation' which attempts to let loose of all the previous terms that tried to identify player experience in a virtual world. Incorporation separates itself from the notion of diving into another world but rather the absorption of the avatar’s position in the game world as the player’s own. Calleja’s (2011) term of incorporation serves the purpose of recognising that the real world and the game world are in a co-existing state. When playing a game, the player perceives the game world as an extension of one’s conscious reality.

Future posts on this blog will have a more in-depth analysis of different aspects of player attention and experience.