FTVMS 328 – First Week at a Glance

>>>Define Gamer
“Who’s a gamer here?”

Thinks… Game + Player = Gamer

*puts hand up*

…Or am I.?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A Little Bit about Me …and My On/Off Relationship with Games~

First Engagement with Videogames: ...9 years old?
Favourite Game Genre: RPGS. RPGS. RPGS.
First Favourite Game: Super Mario 64 – The creative, vast landscape of all the levels in this RPG kept me easily entertained when I was 10 years old. I.e. In Tick Tock Clock – the “pace” of the level depended on what time the clock hands stop on after Mario lands on the clockface. (..Does that make sense?) Unfortunately before I could collect all 150 Powerstars - someone broke the game...Sigh.
First Game I Ever Took Seriously: Final Fantasy X (PS2) by Square Enix. Around 15 or so, friends of mine were hyped into this Final Fantasy phase – (them having older siblings who played it and of it’s awesome-ness)- and I was lent the game to try out… and OMG the graphics during the beginning cinematic sequence totally blew me away O_O and I was caught hook, line and sinker into FF ever since. The depth of detail in the storyline impressed me too. (FF deserves its own blog entry I reckon...)
Last Game I Played & Took Seriously: Final Fantasy XII. Stopped in 2009 due to other commitments and college work. Also the game was too political for my taste. :p

= I am a huge sucker of anime styled RPGS, especially when there are girl superheroes. :D =

A list of games I've either finished, or played for a minimum of 6 hours but couldn't be bothered to finish (…yet):
Nintendo 64: Diddy Kong Racing, Super Mario 64, James Bond, Pokemon Stadium
Computer/ Online/ FB: Earthworm Jim, Neopets, Runescape, Angry Birds, Bejewelled Blitz, Word Scramble… and yes, once upon a time even Farmville and Mafia Wars.
PS2: Kingdom Hearts 2, Kingdom Hearts: Re: Chain of Memories, Final Fantasy X, X-2 and XII
PSP: Loco Roco, Medieval
NDS: Yoshi Island 3, Professor Layton, Warioware, Lost in Blue, Cooking Mama, and other various random games...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hmmm…Not a particularly long list for a supposedly “gamer”.

Following the questions Kevin asked- I felt unsure.
Having played games before – I knew I wasn’t a complete “noob” (a term here used to describe an unexperienced gamer) except what exactly qualifies someone as a gamer..? Even more complex is that there are further sub-groups: pro or hardcore, casual. (… There is also EVEN MORE subgroups which I won’t mention here for they are too rude/funny.XD)

This also reminded me of how a previous blogpost on how can we study videogames. “It takes one to know one” - or how bout a gamer to know games... It takes to mind that one must have adequately played a game before he/she can pass judgment in an academic manner.

Furthermore the first reading (kind of) answered this.

> “We should take a multidisciplinary perspective by analyzing the community of shared ideas and concepts.” (*Also see the 7 Problems)
That is, aside from video game academia study, Wolf and Perron suggests we should look at the early writings of computer enthusiasts and hobbyists, trade journals and in house company journals of the 1970s and in recent times. A speculative approach by the Y generation like myself (or “Digital Native”) hopefully will add to the multidisciplinary perspective.
Though I feel slightly *cough* advantageous that I have a little practical game knowledge, I know critically analysing and writing in the flowery academia language on games is entirely different thing – a skill I hope to develop more by doing this course. The blogging thing however, I find is a cool way for us students to share information and discuss videogame theory/culture, and luckily we're allowed to do so informally! *Relief* xD

Am I a Gamer....? hmmmm

It was interesting during the first day of class when Kevin raised the phase of ‘gamer’.  When I heard the word of ‘gamer’, the very first thing that came to mind was that ‘gamer’ is a word which refers to a person who plays games (of course) but more than for me it was not just playing the game but constantly playing the game.

Just out of curiosity I Googled the word of ‘gamer’ and here is what Mr. Google has to say:

“gamer: gam·er/ˈgāmər/

Noun:

A person who plays a game or games, typically a participant in a computer or role-playing game”.

After reading the definition of gamer. It got me start thinking. Personally speaking, I have never thought or labeled myself as being a gamer. Firstly, I don’t think I have played enough game (games) nor spending enough times on playing games to be qualified as a gamer. But on the other hand, as the gamer refers to “a person who plays a game or games…” simply based on this statement; maybe I could see my self as a gamer?  This thought has bought me to the idea of ‘casual games’. According to the lecture, the definition of ‘casual games’ is tricky, but the core feature is that they are intended to be easy to get into: no jargon, no presumption of prior knowledge or skills. 

Flashing back to the games that I used to play with was mainly Super Marios bros, Tetris, Pac Man etc. All of these games are reasonably easy to play with because all you have to do is to jump and avoid. Casual games are popular in both presents and past period. It’s because they are easy to learn and it dose not requires you with much knowledge of the game. Rules are simple and straightforward and sometimes you can play it with the whole family. Therefore, everyone can play. 

Causal games are flexible, dose not need to pay much attention on to it, a popular game in todays gaming industry would the be ‘Farmville’. I had to admit that few of my friends and even members of my families got very addicted to that game. They have been pretty much playing Farmerville every time they have Internet access. I remember hearing them saying “stop stealing my vegs and fruit” or “ can you please water my farm for me?” 

Farmville was so “powerful” that it made my uncle and my cousins to set their alarms on the dots so that they could weak up in the morning to collect their vegs and fruits before they gets stolen. (My friends’ do waits front of the computer and watching for the minutes and seconds goes by, so they could be the first one to ‘steal’ or ‘pick’ others vegs and fruits. Amazing!) 

It is interesting to see how a game could manipulate on people’s behavior and it’s so powerful that it can change people’s routine or even related them to our daily life conversations! 

Maybe I could say that I’m a gamer in overall, but more likely a causal gamer ;)

FTVMS 328 – Another Response to Violence within Videogames…

Briefly going through the blog I keep seeing this message/similar: “Video games should not be blamed”… on the cause of death/violence/aggression. etc.

Agreed. Human beings, especially young children, learn by observing. The cause of violence and aggression is a result of a mix of situational and biological factors (i.e inherited mental illness causing mental instability). Videogames certainly can’t be blamed, however, neither can we ignore the impact that they – like any other media text- can cause. As the younger generation is exposed to the wide variety of games out there – made more easily by parents buying for them, or through peer pressure – the higher level of exposure of violent or aggressive material at a young age will undoubtly affect their cognition. Sure it sounds silly that a mere videogame can cause a shoot out… (like the GTA one – link ) but compared with a normally healthy child who has not played any violent games – who do you think would develop more violent tendencies?

For those who are interested from a psychological perspective and brief explanation, take a look at the Bandura Case study: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHHdovKHDNU&feature=related

~Adri

Impossible spaces aka "Non-euclidian level design"

The idea of games having the ability to play with time and space was an idea that was brought up in the first lecture. This is one of the factors that separate game development from film production; these “spaces” can be created with relative ease. In addition to this, the immersion into a game, especially with the first person genre, allows for a greater degree of believability. Unlike cinema, where a much higher level of thought is required to create these spaces through the use of specific cuts and careful editing, level design in video games can seamlessly create these spaces using clever level design, assuming the game engine has the necessary ability. This idea reminded me of a video I had seen which shows how a game engine can create these spaces.

This video demonstrates some of the ideas of impossible spaces, which have been previously utilized in games such as Psychonauts (as mentioned in lecture) and Prey or have been the primary basis of games such as Portal.

One of the most interesting parts of this video comes at the end where the layout of the map is shown. What looks like one seamless collection of rooms is in fact series of disjointed rooms many of which show duplicate versions of what appear to be a single room while exploring within the environment.

In relation to "A bad rap" & "Don't Blame Video Games"

When I went to Korea for a student exchange last semester, I visited my aunt's house and encountered my supposedly hardcore 'gamer' cousin. This 15 year old specimen showed that despite being an obvious 'gamer,' he wasn't socially disadvantaged or had any kind of criminal intentions as media often portrays. His parents, however, were quite concerned as he would spend hours upstairs on the computer playing starcraft or warcraft or somethingcraft and whilst downstairs hanging with the rest of the family, he would be watching broadcasted games on his television on his phone (and when serious shit got down, he'd rush upstairs to the computer, to get a better view I guess). The poor angry teenage boy would get so moody when his dad told him to stop playing computer games (His dad even put a lock on the computer so that you could only log on to it during certain times of the day).
But to be honest, he wasn't all that bad. He was actually quite good now that I compare him to some other 15 year boys. He was his year's student representative, he regularly got top marks in class, he went out to play basketball every night and he spent time making silly noises and faces at his baby sister. So, why do people, even the parents of such an achieving son, hold this bad reputation of 'gamers'? I don't know the answer yet. Perhaps, it will come to me as I progress further into this course. For now, it seems that video games are an easy and seemingly-convincing scape goat. Perhaps people find it easier or safer to blame something that's non-human, a machine, rather than the person's own personality itself.
Before this course, games as far as I was concerned was building a cool house for my Sim and the rest was someone else's business, but now I'm finding myself interested with the relationship video games have with society, the interaction between the machine and the human player as well the interaction between the gaming community and the non-gaming community.

Julia C

A bad rap

Do video gamers get too much of a bad rap? The question of what is a ‘gamer’ aside, this is a question that I’d rather address at this earlier point in time. Someone who considers themselves a gamer; someone who spends multiple hours a week or even a day playing games; people that think of themselves as a part of the fandom circle of certain game series. You know the type. The image that many people may get when reading such descriptions could be considered a direct answer to the original question at hand. When I say image, I don’t necessarily mean just one’s visual image, but the general ideas people who don’t game may have about others that would consider themselves gamers. Though things are certainly improving, I believe that even in this day and age ‘gamers’ continue to get a worse rap than say, film buffs. Playing games does not make someone seen as childish anymore, yet even now when the average gamer is said to be 32 (with an average playing time of 13 hours a week), in general they are still seen in a different – and less positive – way, in comparison to most people with other hobbies.

This is a way of thinking that I would like to challenge. I am not a gamer by my own definition, but I cannot help but notice that some of the more negative views that people have of video games (most of these being unfounded) often lead people to have negative views also on the individuals who frequently play them. In the same way that video games have been seen by society generally in a worse light than other media forms, their consumers also take unfair blame for social issues. Because of the agency that video games involve, violent video games are more blamed than violent films and books are for crime and violence. Yet the United States Secret Service and United States Department of Education in fact found that 27% of people who took part in school shootings were fans of violent films, while 24% enjoyed violent books and a mere 12% were fans of violent video games. An unfair bias against video games and their ‘gamers’ is clearly taking place in society. I really hope that this is something that will continually change to a point where games and their fans are viewed in no different a way than other forms of media and their fans, which do not receive the dirty end of the stick quite so much.

Richard Dunn

Relevant links:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/average-age-of-gamers-is-32-says-study

http://www2.ed.gov/admins/lead/safety/preventingattacksreport.pdf

Be afraid...be very afraid.

Does the name "John Bruce (Jack) Thompson" ring a bell to any of you gamers out there?

Take this as a cautionary warning...Jack Thompson is out to ruin games for all of us.

For those of you unfamiliar with this man, Jack Thompson is an American activist who sets out against video games which contain content of sex or violence.

He refers to games such as Grand Theft Auto as "murder simulators" and that they train killers, using the first person view point within shooting games as evidence. Jack Thompson has even gone as far as holding creators of the video games responsible for shootings, such as the Columbine High School Massacre. This may seem ludicrous to some readers out there but he was one of the first people to use "the game made me do it" defense. Don't be alarmed gamers. He was unsuccessful in convincing any judges in court. In fact, he was disbarred from the courts altogether in 2008.

But (unfortunetly, it must be noted), he does bring up an interesting point. Jack Thompson attempted to change "Grand Theft Auto III: San Andreas" from a "mature" rating into an "adults only" rating. He challenged the rating system and how one makes a judgement on whether someone is "mature" enough to handle the content of the game and has the ability to process it or not. It is a heated and current topic of debate about the censorship of games...but what makes Jack Thompson's case study so interesting/hilarious is the extreme stance he takes against the games. He suggests that people absorb the information and skills of a killer whilst playing the game, and then enter the world as "murder simulators" - licensed and ready to kill. What is also interesting is that so many other people out there seem to have the same viewpoint and this allows a platform for Jack Thompson on channels such as MSNBC to speak his mind.

Jack Thompson employs scare mongering for society members who are not familiar with the gaming world. Within moments of the Virginia Tech shootings, Fox allowed him airtime to comment on the shooter himself, saying; "He (Cho) might have killed somebody but he wouldn't have killed 32 if he hadn't rehearsed it and trained himself like a warrior on virtual reality. It can't be done. It just doesn't happen." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18220228/ns/technology_and_science-games/t/were-video-games-blame-massacre/.
He claims that there is a direct link between video game players and killers. If this is true, then wouldn't everyone be a murder simulator? Please forgive the generalisation, but I feel is is worthy to note; what 23 year old male hasn't played one of these games at least once?

All I can conclude is that it is a very complicated discourse with absolutely no easy answer. However, it is clear to me that it is not as black and white as Jack Thompson makes it out to be.

Here is a parody I found on youtube on Jack Thompson. Enjoy.

If you would like to read more about Jack Thompson - here is a website dedicated to his work. 

http://www.jackthompson.org/about_thompson/index.htm

Don't Blame Video Games - In response to all the articles on video games and violence

A couple of blogs so far have touched upon their linking to violent crimes and behaviour. I would have to, to an extent, disagree with these posts. I'm not saying that there is no correlation between violence and video games but you need to take into account that only a handful of people have used video games as an excuse for there actions. Millions of people behave in violent ways and commit crimes, a lot of them who have never played a video game in their life. Society, it seems, is looking for an excuse for their failings. You can argue this for any form of media. For instance, The attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan was said to be because John Hinckley Jr continuously watched Martin Scorsese's film Taxi Driver and, apparently, identified with the protagonist character.

Additionally, in Michael Moore's documentary Bowling for Columbine, Marilyn Manson's music was said to have partially influenced the gunmen to commit this massacre. Manson defended this claim by saying that his music is worldwide and the fact that two two Columbine shooters were fans of his music did not in any way mean that he was responsible. Others have claimed that some songs, such as Adam's Song by Blink182, when listened to repeatedly have influenced adolescents to commit self-harm and even suicide. It is not the song, the movie or the game that is the problem but issues in an individuals life. If anything the individual would probably feel a sense of understanding from depressing lyrics and a temporary escape from reality through a movie or video games. It is rarely nature and nurture deemed to be the cause of violent acts but instead blame is laid elsewhere so people do not need to doubt their personal skills as a friend, parent, or member of society.

Wanda Hart

The Blame Game

Videogames are awesome! You obviously also think so, therefore I assume there is nothing wrong in sharing my enthusiasm. ‘Games are designed experiences’, as Steinkuehler says, with ‘systems designed into them’ in which ‘players actively inhabit their worlds’, and experience the ‘mysterious transformation of their movements’ into ‘extraordinary spectacle of lights, colors and sound.’ Though, just like Television – medium I adore - videogames are blamed to be responsible for our generation’s loss of creativity, originality, and childhood. Anti videogame discourses demonize videogames as a violent tool. So violent, that can lead to murder. This CBS report is a good example: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/06/17/60minutes/main702599.shtml. Rebecca Leung frames Grand Theft Auto as a ‘murder simulator’, a ‘cop-killing game’. The way the murder occurred is described in the article as an identical sequence of the actual game. Funny enough, there are no references to the police’s lack of efficiency. The security inside the police station was so lame that a ‘video-game trained’ kid won the fight. Here is a link to the Grand Theft Official website just in case any of you would like to become an outlaw: http://www.rockstargames.com/grandtheftauto. Despite all psychological, cultural and social reasons that might lead a citizen to kill someone, the game still got the blame. The CBS article proves that the videogame is a new popular cultural force, and that clearly society has been influenced by it. My passion for Media lies here, in the relationship between the media and society, its cultural constructs, and the way it influences our sense of self. Until yesterday’s lecture, for example, I did not consider myself as a gamer at all, even thought I play Angry Birds any chance I get.  Now I know I am a causal gamer, thank you very much! In fact, I was addicted to Nintendo for a long time. I never got into any MMOG mostly because none of the boys wanted me on their team. Ok, they did let me play a few times, but I quickly got eliminated: I didn’t really want to kill anyone, I was more of an explorer. I’m back on the scene though, this time to break this text apart, and hopefully explore how its awesomeness causes a significant increase on the global economic flow, cultivates thousands of communities, and shape behaviors. As Jenni Marques points out on Just a Thought, http://ftvms212-328-2012.blogspot.com/2012/01/just-thought.html, to do it so, I need a game to start. A cool game. Any thoughts?

It is necessary to learn some new words if you...

Newbie: 

A person new to a game, concept, or forum. Not to be confused with n00b, a stupid person. Newbies are just new.

-----------------------------------------

Newb: 

Someone who is new to the activity that they are currently partaking in. Very often this term is used pertaining to computer games. Contrary to popular belief, a newb and a n00b are not the same thing, as a newb can and will get better where as a n00b will partake in activites meant mainly to aggrivate other players. 

-----------------------------------------

Noob: 

A "noob" is a person who is new or inexperienced in a subject, usually an online game. Noobs are usually annoying and excessively stupid. Do not confuse noobs with newbs, who are inexperienced players that tend to be more mature and strive to become better.

-----------------------------------------

N00b: 

A inexperienced and/or ignorant or unskilled person. Especially used in computer games.

-----------------------------------------

Nub: 

One who sucks at a particular video game, they are not new to the game, but possess some determent that prevents them from playing well, no matter how long they practice playing the game.

So the next time you call someone something, please make sure you call him or her the right word.
Thanks for your cooperation, and your time.

Graphic-determinism or Gameplay-determinism, which side are you?

This is not only a question to the game console publishers, but always a question to all gamers. Ask yourself this, which of the following facts or aspects means more to you, and as well as to the entire global market and to all potential customers, the graphics or the gameplay, that people want to see more improvement? There was never a concreted conclusion. People among different flags with different believes are still arguing each other with massive amount of examples to back them up.

Back in 80s, 90s, it seems like that both facts were used by the console publisher and the software publisher to battle the others, however, to console publishers, it was as always, “Buy us, because we have better graphics”; there was a concept of so called "bit war”, which was frequently adopted by the console publishers to manipulate the mind of general public, even though the most of public had absolutely no idea what “bit” really was, or what did it do, but as always, they would be told that more “bit” means better graphics, and also means better gaming experience. I would say it is wrong, because, I not am sure about you, but if you do so please try to remember in the old days, almost every single video game console advertisings and commercials used very much identical words, pointing out their significant amount of “bit”. Even Nintendo was guilty at the same time; otherwise their earlier console wouldn’t be called “Nintendo 64”. So why are gamers so obsess about better graphics? The answer is that, better graphics can provide the gamers with advanced realities. Characters look alive, the world looks real, and if it is the war game we talk about, then the atmosphere is shockingly amazing. It is a generation into feeling. Have you played the game Battlefield 3 yet? With the help of Frostbite 2 engine, this game looks almost exactly like the real world. It shocked me into my core at the second stage where you fly an air fighter off a carrier; the light form sun; the reflection from the sea; and the images above and below. Personally, there is no word for what I been through. The experience bought by the advanced graphics is simply outstanding in my eyes; far surpass my expectation as a living human being. This is what the graphics do; stop lying to yourself if you still believed picture means nothing to gaming experience. However, it is still too early to nail the broad on this discussion yet.

Previously I mentioned a general description of the console war up to generation of PS2, NGC and XBOX. I know that I shouldn’t include, or inappropriate to line up XBOX along with PS2 and NGC, because of its online experience, but if we look at the selling number comparison (I am not going to list the numbers, because I am sure you can Google it), PS2 was sold more units than NGC and XBOX sold together. It indicates that, during that specific period of time, or should we call it “the era of PS2”, the online experience is less important to gamer comparing to the experience bought by massive amount of singleplay games and splite-screen mulitplay experience. In this generation of gaming console war, (By the way, I am still highly doubt if Nintendo Wii is qualified to be count as this generation or not, because of its horrible none HD graphics support.) same thing happened again, even though both Xbox360 and PS3 have far better graphics and online support, but they were not able to stop Nintendo dominating the world gaming market. This is worth our thinking. What are the reasons behind Nintendo’s success? What correct Nintendo from going the same path which leads NGC to its death? At the E3 2008, the president of Nintendo North America, Reggie Fils-Aime asks the public, also themselves, whether it is possible to bring some for everybody, and by saying “everybody”, I think he means both the casual gamers and core gamers? He though the answer is positive. But there are always two sides of stories just like two sides of one coin. I think the people who bought the original NES are not the same group of people who bought the Nintendo Wii. I have to say I am totally agreed with second point of view. To me, as a core gamer, I found the Wii is quite a disappointment. For one thing, I had played Resident Evil 4 on Wii for a day, and seriously I almost couldn’t felt my arm in the second day; and for second, the graphics on Wii very much stays at stage of Playstation 2. The picture is blurred along with great amount aliasing all over the place. I am kind of regret of buying this useless piece of crap. If I could go back in time, I would like to get my money back.

Right now, I am begging for the earlier arriving of the next generation console. Lucky me, or it could be a mine, the Nintendo Wii U is just around the corner. Nintendo promised that Wii U is going to support HD graphics, and yet supports a better online experience, along with a brand new controller, which by the way highly doubted by myself its comfort level; with a lcd screen on it, you do have the reason to question its weight, and the positions of the sticks and bottoms are not designed scientifically match our hand structure and thumb moving pattern. So far, if the graphics is butter, and gameplay is bread, then seems like the new Wii U is going to become the ultimate butted bread. So what do you think of this argument?

Albert (Nan) Sun 

to be gamers

I spent last year au pairing two boys aged 8 and 10, and I could not help but noticing how quiet they get when they are playing games, especially on their hand held Nintendos (Nintendo DS?). Games definitely proved useful at times. Also, during the course of a year the boys went from Club Penguin games on the computer to Super Mario to Lord of the Rings Conquest and shooting Stick men. They got more violent, but that could be just part of growing up as boys. While they love their games, I don't know if they can be called gamers, yet, because... they are young?! How young can you start being a gamer?

For me, gamers have one or two games that they are dedicated to. Since you need that dedication to put in the amount of time to become really skilled at a game. Because that is the aim of any game, right? To be experienced, and at its top level? Starcraft is considered a Korean national game, for example, because so many South Koreans play the game, a lot.

I tried it, once. My friends said I had to, since it was in my genes. I won. Didn't really understand why it was so popular, though. Too complicated for me, perhaps.

Because I am not a gamer. I have tried this game and that, but never got hooked to any. It's ironic that while gamers go out and buy new consoles, I could not get interested in them even though we owned SEGA, Nintendo, and PlayStation 2 console games, as well as various computer games such as Doom 2 and 3.

I took this course because I wanted to understand why video games attract people around me so much.

The second lecture kind of helped me put all these vaguely familiar names into a more organised order in my head. That's a good start. Who knows, maybe by the end of the course I will have become a gamer, too.

Viv.

Reply to "Video Games, a Man's World?"

Hi brendo

I'll just focus on your first paragraph on why games are still marketed towards the male audience as I agree with your point about female characters being in a game for sexual appeal.

Anyway, I think the answer to your question about targeting male audience is because of history. What I got from next week's reading ("Slots of Fun, Slots of Trouble") is that even in the beginning, games were already targeted at men like the idea of gambling machines only being in bars and (this part makes the difference) "were rarely ever seen by decent women" (pg 11) and that only men were supposedly strong enough to try out the strength testers. First off, it's implied that if you were a proper, well-respected lady, you couldn't play such gambling games and secondly, females weren't even given the chance to prove their worth when it came to strength-testing games. Because of these limitations, my guess is that since then, any kind of games ended up associating with males because women were either too embarrassed to play games because it was "unlady-like"...

So I think that because of this mindset from the beginning, most parents will teach their children that it's fine for boys to play video games but it's not really acceptable for girls to play them. I don't know about you but I know many girls who play video games but they are still embarrassed to admit that they do sometimes (Closet gamers!!!) and because of this hesitance to admit, I think most advertisers/game developers end up targeting a male audience because they KNOW that a male audience is more responsive to game releases than females.

http://edugamesresearch.com/blog/2008/07/23/esa-survey-malefemale-gamer-ratio-is-6040-average-age-is-35/

Some comments on there prove that girls are less likely to admit that they are girl gamers due to harrassment but this is also another reason why female gamers are more hesitant to admit that they are girls which is why female gamers are not as common.

The most popular Chinese video game series Chinese Paladin

This clip is a combination of the game Chinese Paladin and its adaptation TV series, which was made by one Paladin gamer.I found it on YouTube. The author edits the TV series of the same name and the original game scenes together.It looks fantastic!

Western people may know little about this game but Chinese people at least have heard of this well-knowing Chinese video game series even if they do not play it.

Here are some introduction of the game:

Chinese Paladin Series---a role playing video game. It firstly was released in 1995. For 16 years it has been received many rewards and praises in China's game industry. The background of the game is set in the ancient of China. And it is based on the Wuxia Genre with some fantasy elements. The protagonists are just a group of young people in the beginning, but they have to fight with the evil if they want to protect their beloveds and dreams. In the fighting they gradually grow up and become to heroes at last.

I heard nothing of the game before I watched its TV series in a summer vocation when I just went to middle school. I felt so excited after I watch it.Just so in love with the story. Especially handsome heroes and their beautiful ladies who have both high magic and kungfu skills. Although today I realize that it is just another Hollywood style hero-centred cliche. But from this perspective, I guess in the game its narratives are a very important factor to attract people keep playing it. Gamers want to see their roles' fate and endings. The game roles like the children of the gamers or even are seen as another version of themselves. So, absolutely, gamers do not want their role die and will try as hard as they can to make a better life for their roles. To pursuit their dreams and beloveds are the first and fore goal in the playing. Games with better background and narrative settings will attract more players.

Jiwei Li

Video games aren’t that bad

I'm not a gamer. I don't play any video games. Acronyms like RPG, FPS and MMORPGs mean absolutely nothing to me and in my imagination place themselves into a box that I have never been tempted to open and discover their meaning. Taking this paper has meant that I have to embrace my inner gamer and learn about a universe that until recently was for me too complicated, too technical and too time consuming. However, I admit that in my time I have played the odd game. I made it to at least level 4 in Theme Hospital, and I'll always play solitaire if nothing is happening on Facebook. But until a few days ago I've never taken the extra step to discover how people can endure hours playing, or spending what I consider to be obscene amounts of money on games.

The first question we were asked in lecture one asked us are video games worth studying? Before this class I wouldn't have known what there was to study about a game except for the rules of how to play, so my answer would have been a short one. No. But the technical aspect that I find so challenging is only a small part of the video games universe. When I did the first reading I was relieved to come across the quote "Games are not isolated entities that one can effectively study in vitro. Games are situated in culture and society. To truly understand the phenomenon of digital games, it is not enough to merely study the games themselves". This explained to me that there are aspects of video games that I might understand better or be more interested in like the historical development of games and why some weren’t successful. Being a film student my passion is the cinema so for me I enjoyed learning about machinema and hacking. Using someone else’s creation to make your own content welcomes in a whole new audience to the video games culture. If I came across a video on YouTube that advertised a new games features it’s safe to say I wouldn’t watch it, but I would if it was a clip of the games characters in a short movie. So it's safe to say that I've been resistant to the video games craze, but hopefully this paper will allow me to understand what it is about video games that people love and maybe even play a few games myself.

Emily J.

Video Games, a Man's World?

As the study of video games become more popular, we are able to discuss and analyze further some of the main topics and issues that surround it. One of these main issues that has stimulated my interest is gender representation in video games. We briefly discussed gender in our first tutorial on Thursday 5/01/2012 and I thought I will kick start my blog with further discussion on this topic.

Firstly, if some of you think that video games are completely dominated by males then think again. As Mark noted in the tutorial, stats show that the ratio of male gamers to female gamers are 60-40 percent. That is significantly more females than I originally expected and what is more surprising is that games such as farmville have complete domination by female gamers. The question now remains, why is most games still marketed towards a male audience? surely there is enough evidence and a big enough market and demand to create more games that could appeal to female audience. The nintendo wii Zumba fitness is gaming taken to the next level as you get more involved and interact more with the console and dance in highly feminine rhythms. It is clearly targeted towards a female audience as shown on the cover of the game (obviously it doesn't exclude male gamers but targets female gamers.)

Lastly I Would like to discuss the game Tomb Raider. In this game the protagonist is lead by a female, Lara-Croft. The game play itself though is filled with action and puzzles which is a male orientated genre. It is clear from beginning to end that it is targeted for a male audience. Therefore why has the creator's chose to implement a female lead?, well the answer may be that the female character like in the film is there to sexually appeal to the male audience which is evident in the characters dress code wearing a tight high cut short ,sleeveless shirt and boots. Apart from the boots it must be said that the characters dress code has no particular relevance to the environment featured in the game.

Although the large number of female gamers it still seems that Video games is still very much, a mans world!

brendo

Game Design: Then and Now. – Reply

I agree wholeheartedly in regards to game design being in many ways sloppy these days, especially in the field of first-person shooters. For example, Battlefield 3 was promoted in Youtube commercials by emphasizing graphics. It was claimed to look ‘real’, showing images of collapsing buildings and very realistic war depictions. Heavy Rain was also marketed by its amazing use of facial expressions as part of its graphics. However, this almost fanatic focus on polygons has sadly blinded some game designers to a couple of very important points. Firstly, graphics don’t guarantee the quality of the game. If the player’s experience lies in watching pretty images on-screen, watching a movie could actually be just as satisfactory. Unfortunately, both Battlefield 3 and Heavy Rain feel to me like the kind of games that started out as movie scripts, with tacked on interactive elements. In modern days, this is simply poor design, since the different game aspects don’t merge at all. It also kills the interactive side of gaming, making games too self-obsessed with their appearance to remember why people bought them.

What is really interesting now is how this reality has actually gotten through to some developers lately, which is why we have modern releases based on older game design. The thing is, what was so appreciated back then was the simplicity of the game, not to mention the focus on gameplay mechanics. For example, the older Sonic the Hedgehog-games were masterfully designed because the graphics complimented the gameplay. They coexisted, without one eating up the other. Sonic Generations which was released recently has gone back to the side-scrolling formula of game design, leaving behind unnecessary attempts at creating “realism” or graphics matching those of the Avatar-movie. I strongly think design has more to it than looking good, or else it’s like suggesting a happy relationship has no basis in chemistry or personality, just the amount of botox injected.

Lars Hermans

Finding therapy through too much Crash

Since the lecture yesterday and during tutorial today, I have been thinking a lot about my own involvement and experiences with video games, and all the good things about gaming and game culture. I thought this would be a nice place to start for my first blog post...

Video games have been a part of my life from a young age when I saved up my pocket money to buy a Game Boy colour, and became obsessed with Super Mario and Pokemon games. I now enjoy playing on more advanced consoles like the 3DS and Xbox if I get a chance, but am still rather stuck in the dark ages of gaming… My console ownership involves my old Game Boy Colour, an inherited and dying PS1 and a broken PSP. When invited to LAN parties, and internet café Battlefield tournaments I am left behind, constantly having to respawn, and needing advice on what the controls are.

Over the break, a friend (who shares my love of older and highly pixelated games) and myself have taken on the task of getting 105% on Crash Bandicoot: Warped, one of our favourite childhood games. We have been taking the task very seriously, getting every gem, relic and crystal. Throughout this intensive gaming period we have each found that the immersion into the game and the relaxed environment in which we have been playing has caused us to open up a lot to each other, saying things we might not usually say. This is interesting to think about, as it is almost like the gaming environment is acting as a form of therapy, we are distracted by the game, and feel freer to talk. It also seems like a safer and certainly less confronting environment than say, having a heart-to-heart in a cafe. After a couple of quick searches on google and the library catalogue I have found that there is a small amount of material from counsellors and psychoanalysts on the topic of video games being used as a therapeutic tool for children and teenagers.

Here is an excerpt from one particular reading I found online:

“Children may find it easier to relate to a therapist who is ready and willing to play in their usual way (Freud, 1908/1960). Intense situations during video game play (due to powerful audiovisual effects, emotional nature of play, and identification with featured characters) may bring the therapist and patient closer to one another as they share similar affective states, thereby facilitating the emergence of a therapeutic relationship. Video game play allows a therapist to go where a child is. It is common for an adolescent to remain silent during therapy, and this may indicate resistance. Here, video games may offer a medium of interaction that can continue through the verbal blackout to reassure the patient that the therapist is still there and in touch with possible changes in the meanings of the silences. This is very similar to the way therapists and children use board games such as checkers (Loomis, 1957).”

http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/gpr-14-2-141.pdf

Emergent behaviour = Existential fufilment???

So I play this RTS game Warcraft III (please don't laugh) and one of the features of it is a sort of 'custom scenario' program. On this program they give you the tools to basically create any scenario/game you desire, from tower defence maps to pokemon battles and so forth. One of the most popular custom maps spawned from this sub-culture is the Defence of the Ancients map, or DotA for short. The map is based on the premise of destroying the opposing team's (either Sentinels or Scourge) main structure.

I think DotA is a good example of a game company embracing, and perhaps more importantly expecting emergent behaviour in the gaming community. The custom map program blizzard developed gave gamers the resource to twist their gaming experience into something the games developers had no explicit intention of doing themselves. The mod map DotA has more players than the entire online battle.net (the online server Warcraft uses), aswell as having multiple 'graphically upgraded' versions/inspired the developement of other industry produced games such as HON and LOL. There is also a sequel to DotA, called DotA 2 (naturally) which has completely abandon the world edit software, in favor of being produced by the company VALVE, a seperate game developer in the industry. This can be seen as a testament to emergent behaviour aswell as a really good window into the industries relationship and interactions with gaming culture.

Personally I think this reflects one of gamings core principles, agency, and applies it to gaming on the macro level. When I playing I usually don't give a sh*t about why I play games, or think about what makes it 'fun'. But after the first lecture and dwelling on the bits and pieces of the course that Kevin oh so cruelly dangled infront of me, I've come to the conclusion that for me personally games reflect the inner escapist in me. I think its f*ckin awesome that I control alien dudes who 'shoot fire balls out of their eyes and lightning out of their arses' because it gives me an extra medium to exercise my agency, and to extend my limitations (at least imaginatively) and allow me to be the one who's 'shoot fire balls out of their eyes and lightning out of their arses'. And I think emergent behaviour is a symptom of peeps like me simply trying to satisfy that desire.

Joshua-Dean

Reply to "Digital Natives'..and us?"

I think an interesting point was raised in respect to defining who can be a “digital native” and who is a “digital immigrant”. As stated at the end of Constance Steinkuehler’s article “The Mangle of Play” the video gaming field (like most technology) is a rapidly evolving field where even those who were born in the 2000’s may struggle to understand the technology that the next generation create. In this way, those distinguished as current “natives” might be outdated by “post-natives” who have an even further advanced understanding of technology. Similarly, digital immigrants may struggle to understand the logic and mind-workings of digital natives and therefore make irrational conclusions.

This is always interesting to think about in relation to violence and video gaming and their correlation as portrayed by the media. Many people controlling the news stories in the media are currently “digital immigrants”. They are aware of how to use technology but didn’t grow up in the technologically saturated environment we find ourselves in today. In this way, perhaps a misunderstanding or “outsiders looking in” approach has been taken on by the (immigrant-controlled) media with respect to not only the stereotyped characterisations of “gamers” but also the relationship of those who play violent games and those who commit crimes and violent acts in real life. Immigrants may not understand that natives who play games more easily synthesise themselves when playing a game to the game’s world (for example, natives can more easily become unconscious to the fact that they are watching a screen) and this is perhaps because natives (unlike immigrants) have been around such screens their entire lives. This easy synthesising is not however a valid translation for gamers “confusing” the game world for the real world and then committing a crime. For example, killing someone in a game involves selecting a gun and then hitting the ‘X button” repeatedly until the victim’s energy bar decreases from green to red. The equivalent outcome in real life is achieved by markedly different actions. A more reasonable justification for criminals who happen to play games can be realised by examining one’s social, parental, cultural backgrounds (as mentioned by Kevin in the lecture). The divide between immigrants and natives seems to be growing, we can only wait and see what irrational assumptions we will start making about post-natives.

- Priya

Sam G Censorship - Reply

I understand your point about two very similar (ideologically) games that somehow have different ratings. Your examples of "Crash Bandicoot" and "GTA" really shows the similarities between the two.

However, ratings are made based on the game's characterization in my opinion. While "GTA" is more lifelike in the fact that characters actually look like humans, the characters in "Crash Bandicoot" are clearly fictional and "cartoonier". I think that because "Crash Bandicoot" is more animated-looking rather than "GTA", ratings for "Crash" would be lower because players don't feel the similarities between themselves personally and the characters on "Crash" where as "GTA" is more reality-based (I did say "MORE", doesn't mean it's real...) so if an 8-year-old plays it, they're more likely to assume that they can do things that they see in "GTA" BECAUSE the characters in the game look like them where as the characters in "Crash" create a kind of barrier because they are not humans and rather they are animals.

So ideologically the two games are similar (with the revenge thing) but because the playable character does not relate to the child, "Crash" becomes less of a threat and is seen more fun in my opinion. It also goes down to target audience (obviously the makers of "Crash" are aiming at younger players while "GTA" is aimed for an older group) and that affects the character designs on the game so yeah...

Hope that made sense -_-;;;;
Ju Mei

Reply to 'Digital Natives'..and us?

I disagree with your statement about how it is harder for Digital Immigrants to keep up because of the rapid changes in your second paragraph. I feel instead of blaming it on the rapid changes in technology, more focus should be put on the willingness of so-called Immigrants who supposedly cannot keep up. The changes that happen in a type of technology (eg the changes between Iphone1 and Iphone2) does not make such a big a gap that it requires you to totally ignore what you've learnt previously. I do agree that there is a barrier between Immigrants and Natives but I feel that it's down to

Game Design: Then and Now.

I touched on this a little bit in my tutorial today, so I decided to expand on these thoughts.

Since NES only has so much space for work on an 8-Bit system; Game Developers had to work with what they had in order to make a top quality game. no fancy graphics or surround sound. The NES had a limited colour pallette and had to work with a strong level design in order to make their game appealing and fun.

You see when video games were a new media, in say the 1980's there were no real rules of game design, game developers didn't have a real way to tell people how to play the games and didn't take gamers as idiots when it came to gameplay.
An example of this would be from most sidescrollers on the NES one in particular: Megaman.
So you enter a level in Megaman, and how do you move? well you look on your controller, see buttons on it, one has arrows, and they make you move. You can't go left, so you go right to advance. Simple right?

So you're running along the level and you are put into the situation in the picture, you run along and you fall down to the bottom, so you press one of the two buttons available (A and B) you press B and Megaman shoots out his arm cannon "OK sweet I shot something, but torch face is way up there out of my line of fire!" So since pressing a button has gotten results, you press a different button and Megaman suddenly jumps "oh my glob! now to do both at the same time!" So now using these two different techniques you have simply taught yourself, you have overcome a simple challenge.

The game developers had designed the levels around these two techniques: you jump and shoot. These techniques are used in different scenarios, some that require timing and precision for both jumping and defeating enemies. Boss battles will often incorporated what you have learnt in the level and that will be used to defeat the boss; like the conveyor belts in the Metal Man stage of Megaman 2.

So now let's talk about colour. Game developers used colour to make their game more interactive; take the above pictures for example: Megaman is a bright blue, while the backgrounds are in a darker shade of red, basically the colours are on the opposite spectrum of the colour wheel. because of this contrast: Megaman pops out and is easy to notice, making it easier for players to notice the character which is important when it comes to jumps and avoiding enemies. Also the attacks of Megaman and Metal Man are very bright, making it easier to notice. The walls, floor and ceiling are also bright; this is an indication of the limits and shows where you have to go since most levels are designed like tubes, which draw you to the other side.

So with the advancement in technology with the original rules and guidelines of game design, you would think game developers would use this to make more stunning games with larger level design with the incorporation of better sound, better graphics and even including an engaging narrative? This is not exaclty the case however.

Now with no real limitations to game design; developers don't work as hard to make their product around the barriers since the barriers are being broken down. More powerful equipment to make games may leave developers as lazy: creating games with very little use of colour palettes when they have a huge range to work from, making level design just a linear amount of enemies in a line and blasting your way through to the end, no real thought, no real strategy, just line up the iron sights to the enemy and shoot
basically a brown point and click adventure.

But now that game developers are breaking down more barriers to games with motion control games and targeting the non gamer masses it seems that game developers are now treating gamers like idiots with missions like: "kill enemies to proceed" and occcasionally filling the screen with reminders like "press RT to shoot" even though you're in the fourth level and you currently shooting.

Personally, it just seems that a lot of potential is being wasted when it comes to game design. Good graphics does not entail a good game.

However all is not lost. the advancement of technology can improve games take for example Okami which was originally on the PS2 in this game you solved puzzles and fought enemies by drawing calligraphy symbols on the screen with the joystick. but with the release of the Wii, drawing the calligraphy became a lot simpler.
Gimmicks of good graphic or motion controls aren't the future. innovation and new ways to play games aren't the future. It is the combination of all these things coming from the roots of good gameplay and game design.

A tree can't flourish if you cut out its roots. That's all I'm saying.

Nicholas Boulton.

Reply to Sam G on Censorship

I can understand where you are coming from Sam. When you say that almost all games would end up with at least an m15+, I agree. I don't think this would be such an awful thing though. I know that many people get into rather heated arguments about overprotecting children and the impact of games on them. I believe it truly depends on the individual. we have to be careful to not do what was said in the lecture though, that it is ok for me and people like me to play those games but not for others. We know what we can handle and cant handle. If we leave it to the parents to decide and the child ends up being 'affected' by it, I think it is not about bad parenting but about whether we can really know whether something is going to be bad or fine for someone else to handle. We don't know how other people will react, but at the same time they shouldn't be protected from everything. I also say 'affected' as i believe that people cannot be affected by games alone. Long Story short, I don't think having most games at a higher censorship rating would bother me.

“Sure observing a game allows you to see the aesthetics and hear the sounds, even see the reactions of the person playing. But in my opinion these are all secondary to the personal experience of actually playing it yourself. It would be like Jeremy Clarkson analysing a new Ferrari without ever driving it, just watch it go round and round a track. The very last point I would raise which is possibly irrelevant, why would you forgo the chance to game in an academic setting, surely if given the chance to analyse games for a job you would be soo keen to actually play them! (dream job)”

– quoted from James

I’m with you when it comes to the idea of how a player is needed to experience a game when it comes to passing judgment rather than just witnessing content. However I’m going to remain parked up on the fence as to whether New Zealand censorship laws are passed in the right way or not. Sure I see it as a bit of a laugh how a man in a suit watches and determines a games rating passed only through visual and audio content without laying a finger on a controller. However, if a rating was passed through the emotion or ideologies understood while playing through a game then the censorship system could be in for quite a bit of a treat. Lets compare our childhood classic, ‘Crash Bandicoot’ and the highly controversial ‘Grand Theft Auto 4’. Both games are revenge based, crash needing to get his sister and take down the sinister Dr Cortex, and GTA4 protagonist Niko hunting for the man that portrayed his unit (I think). Straight away on just the plot, both games sound as though they should be up on the ratings board… Lets move into game play, in one if the AI ‘enemies’ is ‘terminated’ you have the opportunity to claim reward in the form of money, the other gives you immediate reward, only in the form of apples once laying down the fists/feet of fury (does anyone even know what that whylee bandicoot it doing while it spins?). The only difference is the face value of what’s seen on screen. I’m sure you all can’t deny the fact you as a child yeld out ‘DIE DR CORTEX, DIE!!!’. So, what I’m trying to say is, that if games weren’t primarily ‘rated’ by visual/audio content over what the player really ‘relates or feels’ from the game, then nothing would get passed without an M15+ warning.

Remember, as Kevin said in the lecture NZ censorship rates games no differently that it does film.

Sam G.