In his book Synthetic Worlds, Edward Castranova presents an interesting view of the growing genre of Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games, or MMORPGs. MMORPGs include popular titles such as EverQuest, World of Warcraft, and Guild Wars. Castranova begins by giving an overview of how these games work. He adopts the point of view of a new player navigating through the game for the first time. He creates a character named “Sabert” and then leads the reader through the beginning stages of the game, introducing them to the elements that define an MMORPG, such as gathering objects, meeting fellow characters, battling “mobs,” and trade. As Castranova described how these games are played, I became more and more intrigued. My interest was piqued and I wanted to create a character and explore the game for myself. However, I was afraid I would get sucked into the game and not finish the book, so I chose to skip trying the game until I have more free time.
Castranova discusses many interesting points throughout the book. One that struck me the most was that the economy inside the game and the world economy are somewhat tied together – although it is expressly forbidden by the rules, many people buy and sell game money, equipment such as swords, and even entire user accounts on websites such as eBay. I was really surprised when I read this because I had never heard of this phenomenon before. Castranova explained that these types of trades began to occur because “some people who had lots of dollars happened to want more EverQuest play money, and some people who had lots of EverQuest play money happened to want more dollars” (36). As I thought about it, this began to make a lot of sense. Some people also argue that it’s a waste to spend money on objects in the game because they are not tangible; however, in my opinion, it’s no different than spending money on any other hobby. A sword in the game EverQuest will do someone no more good in their everyday life than an authentic Civil War sword will do a reenactor in his everyday life – but both things are a part of a hobby, and both make the person happy. I don’t think one is worth more just because it’s a tangible object.
Another interesting point Castranova makes is the extent to which players identify with their character and the in-game world. He first displays this when he is introducing the game play in Chapter One. Castranova explains, “Coming to own the avatar, psychologically, is so natural among those who spend time in synthetic worlds that it is barely noticed. No one ever says, ‘My character’s strength is depleted,’ or, ‘My avatar owns a dune buggy.’ They say ‘my strength’ and ‘my dune buggy’” (45). Having not played MMORPGs myself, I can’t identify with this phenomenon. In fact, I generally don’t even enjoy playing first-person games. I have watched friends play EverQuest and I actually prefer to watch in third-person view. I’m guessing if I played, I would do the same. I’m not sure if playing regularly in third-person view would cause me to identify with my character as much.
I was also surprised by the fact that there are people who actually consider themselves to live in Norrath, the in-game world of EverQuest. I couldn’t believe that 20% of those surveyed in a study would say that they considered Norrath to be their full-time home (59). I was expecting these players to be very hard-core, so I was even more surprised when more statistics revealed that those players only spent 1-2 additional hours playing each day than the other players surveyed (61). However, those who were willing to participate in a survey are likely more hardcore players in general.
Another point Castranova raised was that these games are basically microcosms of our everyday lives. The economics of the game closely mirror real-world economies, and many of the same motivations and problems that plague the real world appear in synthetic worlds as well. Castranova states, “Everything that happens in a synthetic world is the consequence of the interaction of human minds, and our minds have things like Love, Property, Justice, Profit, War, and Exploration hard-wired into them. We could not create a world and put people in it without also enabling sex, trade, and battle” (48). I think this is one of the reasons why the games are so attractive to players. They are a fantasy world, and give players a sense of escape from their everyday lives, but still include the things that are most important to us.
Castranova wraps up by giving his thoughts on how synthetic worlds will operate in the future. He seems to have, in my opinion, a rather limited view on the subject. He seems to think, first of all, that everyone will have access to these worlds, which I disagree with. There will be many people who lack access to these worlds due to lack of money or even infrastructure in less-developed areas. There will also simply be some people who are not interested. It’s hard to imagine the Amish tapping into World of Warcraft anytime soon.
Additionally, he seems to think that these spaces will either become rosy paradises to which people move their entire lives, or that they will become corrupted by commercialism, or that we will all become the pod people from The Matrix. I think these games will grow in popularity for awhile, but eventually they will level off with a core group of people playing and the rest of the world basically uninterested. The virtual reality of synthetic worlds might become somewhat more pervasive than it is right now, but I doubt it will be taking over the world anytime soon. However, I’m sure there were people who forecasted that the internet would be a bust, too. We will just have to wait and see where this technology takes us in the future.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Blog Assignment #3
Is video game addiction a real phenomenon? Several researchers, including Griffiths and Davies, the authors of “Does Video Game Addiction Exist?” have attempted to prove that game addiction is actually real. However, I personally remain dubious about their claims.
Supposedly addiction consists of six required elements: salience (which basically means the addiction monopolizes one’s thoughts and activities), mood modification, tolerance, withdrawal symptoms, conflict (with others, self, and activities), and relapse. However, the researcher’s attempts to correlate these elements to video games are a bit of a stretch. I can see how the researchers might attempt to show video game addiction through salience – when anything is completely dominating your thoughts and actions, it’s probably not healthy. I can also easily see how conflict could occur – with school, work, sleep, relationships with others, etc. However, I’m not sure I believe that one activity causing conflict with another or even with relationships constitutes addiction.
Additionally, I’m not sure that the fact that gaming can cause “mood modification” proves addiction either. Any activity that one enjoys is likely to cause excitement or a “buzzed” feeling, or else a feeling of escape. One can even get these feelings from watching an engaging movie, but that doesn’t mean the person is addicted to the movie, or watching movies, or anything else for that matter. Relapse I can sort of see – for example, I know people who have tried to quit playing WoW, but have gone back to it – but the person can make a choice to return to the activity without that constituting relapse.
The two elements I find hardest to equate with game addiction are tolerance and withdrawal. It’s very difficult to prove that gamers need to play more and more in order to feel the same effects. Additionally, withdrawal is equally hard to prove. Most people would get irritated or moody if forced to stop playing in the middle of a game, but this certainly does not mean they are addicted. Physical symptoms such as headaches or tremors from lack of game play seem even less likely.
The studies that researchers have used to measure game addiction have many flaws. One such study involved handing out questionnaires to gamers. The question meant to measure salience read, “Do you play video games most days?” In my opinion, this question measures nothing. I mean, I brush my teeth every day, but that doesn’t mean I’m addicted by any means. A better question would have been “Do video games occupy your thoughts even when you aren’t playing?” but even this question would not have accurately measured salience.
Researchers have also tried very hard to correlate video game addiction with gambling addiction, probably because there has been a great deal of study related to the latter, and not so much for the former. However, just because the games share certain attributes like shiny pictures and flashing lights does not make them the same. Video games, for one, do not offer the promise of money. Sure, you can rack up a higher score, but the psychological lure of money is much greater and completely different, and in my opinion, should be studied differently.
Supposedly addiction consists of six required elements: salience (which basically means the addiction monopolizes one’s thoughts and activities), mood modification, tolerance, withdrawal symptoms, conflict (with others, self, and activities), and relapse. However, the researcher’s attempts to correlate these elements to video games are a bit of a stretch. I can see how the researchers might attempt to show video game addiction through salience – when anything is completely dominating your thoughts and actions, it’s probably not healthy. I can also easily see how conflict could occur – with school, work, sleep, relationships with others, etc. However, I’m not sure I believe that one activity causing conflict with another or even with relationships constitutes addiction.
Additionally, I’m not sure that the fact that gaming can cause “mood modification” proves addiction either. Any activity that one enjoys is likely to cause excitement or a “buzzed” feeling, or else a feeling of escape. One can even get these feelings from watching an engaging movie, but that doesn’t mean the person is addicted to the movie, or watching movies, or anything else for that matter. Relapse I can sort of see – for example, I know people who have tried to quit playing WoW, but have gone back to it – but the person can make a choice to return to the activity without that constituting relapse.
The two elements I find hardest to equate with game addiction are tolerance and withdrawal. It’s very difficult to prove that gamers need to play more and more in order to feel the same effects. Additionally, withdrawal is equally hard to prove. Most people would get irritated or moody if forced to stop playing in the middle of a game, but this certainly does not mean they are addicted. Physical symptoms such as headaches or tremors from lack of game play seem even less likely.
The studies that researchers have used to measure game addiction have many flaws. One such study involved handing out questionnaires to gamers. The question meant to measure salience read, “Do you play video games most days?” In my opinion, this question measures nothing. I mean, I brush my teeth every day, but that doesn’t mean I’m addicted by any means. A better question would have been “Do video games occupy your thoughts even when you aren’t playing?” but even this question would not have accurately measured salience.
Researchers have also tried very hard to correlate video game addiction with gambling addiction, probably because there has been a great deal of study related to the latter, and not so much for the former. However, just because the games share certain attributes like shiny pictures and flashing lights does not make them the same. Video games, for one, do not offer the promise of money. Sure, you can rack up a higher score, but the psychological lure of money is much greater and completely different, and in my opinion, should be studied differently.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Blog Assignment #2:
Critical Reading of Space in "Super Paper Mario"
I spent some time this summer trying my hand at the newest Mario game in the Nintendo franchise, “Super Paper Mario” for the Nintendo Wii. It was an incredibly interesting and addicting game, one which I unfortunately got only halfway through due to more pressing concerns like school and life. “Super Paper Mario” contains elements of several genres – it is an adventure game, with Mario and his friends on a quest to rescue Princess Peach from the evil Count Bleck and to collect the eight Pure Hearts in order to destroy Bleck’s hold on the malignant Chaos Heart. However, the main levels of the game play somewhat like a typical platform game, with Mario moving past different obstacles to collect objects and defeat enemies.
One of the most interesting elements of “Super Paper Mario” is the way it uses space. The game’s design challenges commonly held views of space in video games, and space plays an incredibly important role in the game – it impacts how characters move through the game, how they confront obstacles, and even which character should be used at different points in the game.
The hallmark of “Super Paper Mario” – the ability of players to “flip” between 2-D and 3-D views – is in itself a major challenge to the conventional uses of space in video games. While the game takes place mainly in 2-D, Mario is able to flip into 3-D play, allowing players to discover hidden objects, such as power-ups or hidden tools. Additionally it allows players to maneuver around obstacles more easily. For example, Mario’s path might be blocked by a large boulder or by an enemy, but after flipping to 3-D, the obstacle becomes flat and Mario can simply walk behind it. Finally, flipping to 3-D may allow players to find a hidden path, such as a ladder or tunnel, which leads to a different part of the level. There are some constraints on Mario’s ability to navigate in 3-D space, however. There is a timer which only allows gameplay in 3-D for a few seconds at a time. Additionally, players can generally only travel through a small portion of the level at a time while in 3-D before being blocked by a wall, ledge, or other obstacle that must be crossed in 2-D.
Another way conventions of space are challenged in “Super Paper Mario” is the setup of the levels. Mario does not simply move directly from level to level as he did in the original “Super Mario Bros.” Instead, there is a central location, a town known as Flipside, where Mario returns between levels. Mario can enter the different buildings within Flipside in order to rest, buy supplies, or talk to characters that might have important information about his quest. He can travel between levels of the town using elevators, and when flipping into 3-D, he can travel outside the gates of the town and visit “Flipside Outskirts,” where players must find the correct Heart Pillar and install the newly collected Pure Heart at the end of each level. Further complicating things, in order find one of the Heart Pillars, players must visit the town of “Flopside,” which is a mirror image of Flipside. Once Mario has installed a Pure Heart, a new door appears at the top of Flipside Tower, allowing him to travel into a new dimension and move on to the next level.
In order to successfully navigate through “Super Paper Mario,” players must also understand how they can use characters and tools to manipulate and conquer space. Players have a choice of playing as Mario, Peach, Browser, or Luigi, and each has a particular strength to navigate through space. As previously mentioned, Mario is able to flip between 2-D and 3-D views of space. Peach is able to float, allowing her to cross canyons or easily move from one platform to the next. Luigi is able to jump very high, and Bowser is taller than the other characters, which sometimes enables him to reach things others can’t. Additionally, throughout the game, players collect Pixls, which are small, fairy-like creatures with special abilities which again can help players move through space more easily. For example, the Pixl Slim allows the character to turn sideways and become very thin, and therefore able to squeeze into narrow spaces. Likewise, the Pixl Dottie shrinks the character so that they can fit into very tiny holes. The Pixl Boomer turns into a bomb and can be used to blow away obstacles to reveal secret doors or pathways. The use of Pixls allows players to move through spaces that seem inaccessible at first, and figuring out how to enter these areas is a crucial part of the adventure-style gameplay.
“Super Paper Mario” challenges conventional notions of space like those put forth by Mark J.P. Wolf in Chapter 5 of his book, The Medium of the Video Game. The game does not neatly conform to any of Wolf’s categories of spatial structures in video games. It contains both 2-D and 3-D views at the same time, a concept that was unheard of in the late 1990s when Wolf was writing his book. Wolf also does not mention the ability to switch between characters or the ability to use tools to manipulate space. Additionally, the idea of moving between a central town and levels in other dimensions with the ability to revisit previously played levels does not seem to fit with Wolf’s ideas either. Nor does the idea of being able to move through the level freely, going back to the beginning or revisiting any location at any point. “Super Paper Mario” seems to conform best to Wolf’s idea of “Adjacent spaces displayed one at a time,” but even this does not accurately describe the game’s setting. As video games continue to advance, it seems likely that new structures and uses of space which eclipse Wolf’s ideas will continue to provide new and exciting gameplay experiences for years to come.
One of the most interesting elements of “Super Paper Mario” is the way it uses space. The game’s design challenges commonly held views of space in video games, and space plays an incredibly important role in the game – it impacts how characters move through the game, how they confront obstacles, and even which character should be used at different points in the game.
The hallmark of “Super Paper Mario” – the ability of players to “flip” between 2-D and 3-D views – is in itself a major challenge to the conventional uses of space in video games. While the game takes place mainly in 2-D, Mario is able to flip into 3-D play, allowing players to discover hidden objects, such as power-ups or hidden tools. Additionally it allows players to maneuver around obstacles more easily. For example, Mario’s path might be blocked by a large boulder or by an enemy, but after flipping to 3-D, the obstacle becomes flat and Mario can simply walk behind it. Finally, flipping to 3-D may allow players to find a hidden path, such as a ladder or tunnel, which leads to a different part of the level. There are some constraints on Mario’s ability to navigate in 3-D space, however. There is a timer which only allows gameplay in 3-D for a few seconds at a time. Additionally, players can generally only travel through a small portion of the level at a time while in 3-D before being blocked by a wall, ledge, or other obstacle that must be crossed in 2-D.
Another way conventions of space are challenged in “Super Paper Mario” is the setup of the levels. Mario does not simply move directly from level to level as he did in the original “Super Mario Bros.” Instead, there is a central location, a town known as Flipside, where Mario returns between levels. Mario can enter the different buildings within Flipside in order to rest, buy supplies, or talk to characters that might have important information about his quest. He can travel between levels of the town using elevators, and when flipping into 3-D, he can travel outside the gates of the town and visit “Flipside Outskirts,” where players must find the correct Heart Pillar and install the newly collected Pure Heart at the end of each level. Further complicating things, in order find one of the Heart Pillars, players must visit the town of “Flopside,” which is a mirror image of Flipside. Once Mario has installed a Pure Heart, a new door appears at the top of Flipside Tower, allowing him to travel into a new dimension and move on to the next level.
In order to successfully navigate through “Super Paper Mario,” players must also understand how they can use characters and tools to manipulate and conquer space. Players have a choice of playing as Mario, Peach, Browser, or Luigi, and each has a particular strength to navigate through space. As previously mentioned, Mario is able to flip between 2-D and 3-D views of space. Peach is able to float, allowing her to cross canyons or easily move from one platform to the next. Luigi is able to jump very high, and Bowser is taller than the other characters, which sometimes enables him to reach things others can’t. Additionally, throughout the game, players collect Pixls, which are small, fairy-like creatures with special abilities which again can help players move through space more easily. For example, the Pixl Slim allows the character to turn sideways and become very thin, and therefore able to squeeze into narrow spaces. Likewise, the Pixl Dottie shrinks the character so that they can fit into very tiny holes. The Pixl Boomer turns into a bomb and can be used to blow away obstacles to reveal secret doors or pathways. The use of Pixls allows players to move through spaces that seem inaccessible at first, and figuring out how to enter these areas is a crucial part of the adventure-style gameplay.
“Super Paper Mario” challenges conventional notions of space like those put forth by Mark J.P. Wolf in Chapter 5 of his book, The Medium of the Video Game. The game does not neatly conform to any of Wolf’s categories of spatial structures in video games. It contains both 2-D and 3-D views at the same time, a concept that was unheard of in the late 1990s when Wolf was writing his book. Wolf also does not mention the ability to switch between characters or the ability to use tools to manipulate space. Additionally, the idea of moving between a central town and levels in other dimensions with the ability to revisit previously played levels does not seem to fit with Wolf’s ideas either. Nor does the idea of being able to move through the level freely, going back to the beginning or revisiting any location at any point. “Super Paper Mario” seems to conform best to Wolf’s idea of “Adjacent spaces displayed one at a time,” but even this does not accurately describe the game’s setting. As video games continue to advance, it seems likely that new structures and uses of space which eclipse Wolf’s ideas will continue to provide new and exciting gameplay experiences for years to come.
Sunday, September 9, 2007
Blog Assignment #1: Personal Narrative
A website I think will be relevant to this course is: http://gamestudies.org/0601
I am probably a strange anomaly in a video game studies class since I do not generally think of myself as a "gamer." That particular notion of mine was upset last week when a friend of mine made an observation while watching me play Sonic the Hedgehog 3. He claimed that there was no way someone with such an obsession with a particular game could consider themselves "not a gamer." Never mind the fact that I've played the game about three times in the past five years and that 99% of what I was doing was based on muscle memory -- I did have to admit that he had a point. I still knew where practically every 1up was located, and had just spent five minutes explaining to everyone in the room that in order to gain a perfect score in the 3rd level of the special "chaos emerald" bonus stage, one had to jump over the last red sphere and collect all of the rings before completing the level. The fact that I had stored away all of this inane knowledge for the past 15 years did kind of say something about my level of obsession with this game as a child.
My brother and I pooled our money to buy a Sega Genesis in the early 1990s, when I was 7 and he was 11. Of course, being the oldest, he got the first crack at every game (when my father wasn't extending seniority over him, that is). By the time I got a chance to play, my brother had usually already conquered the game. I was not a particularly skilled gamer as a child - I had no more hand-eye coordination then than I have now - but I was persistent. I would play my favorite games over and over until I learned every move by heart. My three favorites made up an eclectic collection - Streets of Rage II (I got a disturbing amount of joy out of beating up thugs with a lead pipe), Aladdin, and of course, Sonic 3.
By the time I reached middle school, I began to play games less and less as I became interested in other hobbies such as reading and music. We never got a more advanced gaming system, so I never developed many skills besides mastering the basic tenets of early Genesis games - always run to the right and try not to get hit by enemies. This has left me at a great disadvantage as my college friends have tried to teach me to play more sophisticated games on the Wii or XBOX 360. 3-D games are basically too difficult for me to navigate, and I have no idea what to do with a controller that contains more than four buttons.
I am trying to learn enough skills that I can at least get through a game passably. I made an attempt at playing Super Paper Mario this summer, and I got through several levels, though not without practically making my friends’ heads explode as they watched me try to navigate my way through without help. I tend to enjoy active games such as DDR and Guitar Hero more than other types of games, and the appeal of first-person shooters still eludes me completely. I will play games if they are around, but I imagine once college is done I will become distracted by other pursuits. However, when life gets stressful, I might have to dust off the old Sega Genesis and take Sonic for one last spin through the imaginary world of my childhood.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)