Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Games As Transformative Works

Posted by Soulskill on from the rigorous-game-journalism dept.

Deepa Sivarajan sends word that the journal Transformative Works and Culture has published an issue that focuses on games, containing a variety of articles which examine how games interact with modern culture. One essay takes a look at how developers gain an understanding of the systems and structures that drive gameplay, and another discusses motivation and "participatory culture" in games that have a substantial degree of user design involvement, such as mods and addons. There's also an evaluation of how the enthusiast press affects the perceived value of games. The issue includes game-related book reviews and interviews, which can be found at the bottom of the full list of articles.

13 of 44 comments (clear)

  1. I'd ultimately argue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...that video games are a richer form of entertainement than any other, since the interaction between a player and a game is much more deep and complex than that between a reader and a book, or between a viewer and a film.

    (yeah, there are shitty games out there, obviously, but there are also shitty books and shitty films, so shut up)

    1. Re:I'd ultimately argue... by CarpetShark · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Games are more interactive, yes. But are they really complex or deep? I don't think so. When you can turn an entire county back from a hellish war full of maddened characters by visiting every town and shown them the bodies of their children, and NONE of that was scripted by the game designers, then you'll have complex and deep interactions. Then, games will truly take the crown of entertainment (and more). However, when you shoot stuff and people say "I surrender" and an outro plays, then a book or even a good movie with decent portrayals of the human condition is still WAY a more interesting, complex, and life-changing experience.

      But on the bigger point here, that games, 3d art, and software in general are great creative works, that deserve more recognition by the traditional art community... right on. It's been a long time coming, and there's a long way to go yet before the digital world (and digital artists, including coders) have been properly recognised for their contributions.

    2. Re: I'd ultimately argue... by Steve+Franklin · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Personally, I have found that video games, especially the adventure/puzzle type, have improved my ability to solve real world historical problems. The scary thing is, some of the solutions begin to look an awful lot like video game solutions, raising questions about the ultimate nature of historical reality.

      --
      Hic iacet Arthurus, rex quondam rexque futurus.
    3. Re:I'd ultimately argue... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Same AC here - I wasn't talking about complexity in terms of scripted vs. procedural elements, but something much more basic. Controlling a character, the ability to look around at the scenery, being a part of the story rather than simply observing it... As gamers we take this for granted, but it's actually pretty involved.

      A good game will make the player feel like he's making the story unfold ; whether this is achieved through scripted behaviour or excellent IA is just a detail of implementation, and entirely irrelevant to the the player's enjoyment (or lack thereof).

      Even the best literary work is merely a static object, presented to the readers who can then observe and interpret it as they please. Same goes for architecture, films, etc. As a medium, video games have the potential to go further, much further than that.

    4. Re:I'd ultimately argue... by KDR_11k · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I have to say I have yet to see a game where I feel like I effected the story rather than just having fulfilled some trigger condition to see the pre-written next part of it that could be shown even without the trigger if the developer had not locked it away.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    5. Re:I'd ultimately argue... by grumbel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      since the interaction between a player and a game is much more deep and complex than that between a reader and a book

      The interaction between a player and a game is extremely simple and most of the time not much deeper then "press button, see character fall dead". Even worse, since the players view in a game is more or less 'locked' to the main character, games have a far smaller range on how to present things, since it would break the gameplay to move away to a non-playable character. Also because a game needs to fill the player with constant interaction, games tend to be pretty comical and unbelievable.

      That said, not every game has to be a typical current day first person shooter. We already have Tetris, Wii Sports, abstract stuff like Passage or story driven things like Monkey Island, Planscape Tourment and we will certainly see completly new genres emerge in future. But most stuff that would fall into the "deep and complex" category just fails mass-market appeal and thus never gets made in the first place, which leaves current day games fall quite a bit behind their potential.

    6. Re:I'd ultimately argue... by grumbel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      being a part of the story rather than simply observing it.

      But that is exactly where games today fail at. The player isn't part of the story, he is a passenger in a roller coaster ride. Giving him not only the non-interactivity of a book or movie, but also all the restriction that come from being locked to the viewpoint of a single character and of course the whole immersion breaking parts of pre-scripted events, bad AI and bad user interfaces.

      As a medium, video games have the potential to go further, much further than that.

      I don't disagree with that, after all everything from Tetris to the Holodeck falls into the 'game' category, so there is plenty of room left to explore. But so far games have at best scratched the surface of their potential, leaving a lot to be desired.

    7. Re:I'd ultimately argue... by bigbigbison · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Complex and deep in what way? It seems as if you mean in terms of story and character development. But what about in terms of the complexity of other things like say troop movement in war or something? The battles in something like Civilization not to mention the hardcore war games are a lot more complex and deep than anything in any film or book.

      --
      http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
    8. Re:I'd ultimately argue... by grumbel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I've had plenty of games that were totally satisfying in terms of interaction...

      So have I, that doesn't mean that I don't see the inherent limits games today have.

      The claim was that games offer richer interaction than other forms of personal entertainment (e.g. books, films, music, etc.)

      No, the claim was that they offer "richer forms of entertainment" due to interaction. Now one can have of course different definitions of "rich", but for me its mainly the amount of variety in terms of what stories can be told and I see plenty of more of that in movies and books then I see in games.

      Games are simply for most part a matter of "There are monsters, go kill them". Even the good games, while they might have better storys and dialog, follow the same underlying mechanics and are still not far away from Space Invaders. A large part of that is because the interaction is extremely primitive and no good for actual storytelling, at best it can be used to trigger a pre-scripted story event, but it does little to let an interesting story evolve out of actual gameplay.

      There are of course a few exceptions with things like The Sims, which allow a rich set of actions and which allows dynamic stories to evolve, but then its still kind of at the level of mix of slapstick comedy and soap operas at best and doesn't get all that much deeper at this point in time.

      The point I am trying to make isn't that books or movies are somehow better, but that the interactive parts of games doesn't really help that much when it comes to storytelling, in fact it often does exactly the opposite.

      To phrase it another way, there has yet to be a single game that gets me emotionally involved due to its interactive parts. It just doesn't happen. The involvement comes due to cutscenes and predefined sequences, but not due to my own doing and those games that get close, just to often spoil it due to bad AI, stupid NPCs or simple save/reload cycles that can undo any dramatic event that happened.

    9. Re:I'd ultimately argue... by grumbel · · Score: 2, Informative

      But then you have masterpieces like Bioshock which centres its narrative around that very phenomenon, and still gives you some freedom of choice to affect the outcome of the story.

      Bioshock, just like many Bioware games, has completly black&white choices, it is "kill sisters" or "save sisters", there is no grey area in between. I don't feel that this gives me freedom, it just makes the limits so more obvious. The little freedom that Bioshock has is that it allows some non-linear exploration of the levels, which is a nice touch, but its not exactly a new thing, Doom1 had that and just like in all other games Bioshock still restricts you to those areas where it wants you to go, you are not allowed to roam around freely through Rapture. Neither does Bioshock allow any communication with NPCs, its all just monologue.

      That Bioshock is hailed as a masterpiece, just shows how primitive the story telling in games is and how little it has progressed over the years. Maniac Mansion, which is over 20 years old and run on a C64, was much more advanced in many areas of storytelling then many of the stuff that is thrown at us today.

  2. Re:Wise words by berend+botje · · Score: 2, Funny

    Yeay! We're getting a pony!

  3. But... by M-RES · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...does TFA let us know when Duke Nukem will be released?

  4. New major by Brandybuck · · Score: 2, Funny

    I can see it now, a new department at universities, for those unable to cope with the rigors of being an Art or Communications major: Game Studies.

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!