Stuff

Methodological commandments

Finishing up my dissertation I am naturally curious about methodological requirements in game studies. A general meme seems to be that the field is multi-disciplinary and no clear guidelines can be given and yet, I’ve stumbled upon a few. The following, arguably, are claims about how game studies should be conducted. Make of it what you will…

“Ultimately, the player’s perspective (Jenkins 1999) and understanding of play
must be included in any meaningful discussion of FPS games and, indeed, of
all video games.”

Wright, T., Boria, E., & Breidenbach, P. (2002). Creative Player Actions in FPS Online Video Games. Game Studies, 2(2).

–

“Gamers’ own thinking about styles of play and the identities they underwrite are a conflation of design characteristics and emergent culture of the context of the MMOG they inhabit, situated within the myriad of contexts they
themselves encounter with others, with some configurations of constructs evoked for sense-making in some social/material contexts, other configurations evoked in order to explain others. They are therefore complicated and necessarily messy. Our analyses of them ought to be a testament to this fact.”

and

“Indeed, indepth investigation into the ‘worlds of meaning’ created, maintained, and displayed by so-called ‘end users’ may very well be the only solid foundation on which to theorize a culture so definitively constructivist, heteroglossic, and hermeneutic
(Steinkuehler, Black & Clinton, 2005) as that of games.”

Steinkuehler, C. (2005). Cognition & Learning in Massively Multiplayer Online Games: A Critical Approach. University of Wisconsin-Madison.

–

“In general, any methodological approach which does not take participants as the primary actors produces flawed results.”

Jakobsson, M., & Taylor, T. L. (2003, 19-23 May). The Sopranos Meets EverQuest: Social Networking in Massively Multiplayer Online Games. Paper presented at DAC2003, Melbourne, Australia.

–

“…the essence of a game is rooted in its interactive nature, and there is no game without a player. The act of playing game is where the rules embedded into game’s structure start operating, and its program code starts having an effect on cultural and social, as well as artistic and commercial realities. If we want to understand what a game is, we need to understand what happens in the act of playing, and we need to understand the player and the experience
of gameplay.”

Ermi, L., & Mäyrä, F. (2005, 16-20 June). Fundamental Components of the Gameplay Experience: Analysing Immersion. Paper presented at DIGRA 2005: Changing Views: Worlds in Play, Vancouver, Canada.

Non-competitive tetherball

Our backyard tetherball pole (left) was replaced with a non-competitive variant (right). “It was just all about winning or losing” one eight-yeard old girl told me.

As you can see, the new one does not specify a “win” state signalling that the game is simply about keeping the ball going. In this sense, it is not goal-less but actually cooperative as the preferred state of the game for the two players is one and the same.

Of course, this doesn’t solve the enigma of why the rackets are always missing.

Video game violence and physiological desensitization

“The effect of video game violence on physiological desensitization to real-life violence” is the title of a very recent article by Nicholas L. Carnagey, Craig A. Anderson and Brad J. Bushman.

It can be found here.

The good Dr. Castronova has scathing comments over at Terranova.

Article abstract: Past research shows that violent video game exposure increases aggressive thoughts, angry feelings, physiological arousal, aggressive behaviors, and decreases helpful behaviors. However, no research has experimentally examined violent video game eVects on physiological desensitization, deWned as showing less physiological arousal to violence in the real world after exposure to video game violence in the virtual world. This experiment attempts to Wll this gap. Participants reported their media habits and then played one of eight violent or nonviolent video games for 20min. Next, participants watched a 10-min videotape containing scenes of real-life violence while heart rate (HR) and galvanic skin response (GSR) were monitored. Participants who previously played a violent video game had lower HR and GSR while viewing Wlmed real violence, demonstrating a physiological desensitization to violence. Results are interpreted using an expanded version of the General Aggression Model. Links between desensitization, antisocial, and prosocial behavior are discussed.

Soccer players are excellent game theorists

Turns out that penalty kick behaviour conforms beautifully with game theoretical predictions.

Economist Ignacio Palacios-Huerta of Brown University has studied thousands of penalty kicks. Penalty kicks are theoretically wonderful since they constitute 2-player zero-sum games where players have very few available strategies and where the outcome is decided immediately after the initial action.

Palacios-Huerta found that no strategy is inherently better. And that soccer players (as opposed to the typical lab subjects of behavioural game theory) manage to play truly randomly (the way they ought to if they are following basic game theory assumptions):

…professional players are found to be capable of behaving perfectly randomly. Their sequences neither exhibit negative or positive autocorrelation, and choices do not depend on one’s own previous play, on the opponent’s previous plays or on past outcomes.

According to the author, these results are close to unique, i.e. the observed behaviour (supporting the model) has not been seen in other experimental contexts.

The article is a fascinating example of how games (in our sense) and game theory (in the economist’s sense) may be reciprocally fruitful. Which was the larger point of Edward Castronova’s recent article Castronova, E. (2006). The Research Value of Large Games: Natural Experiments in Norrath and Camelot. Games and Culture, 1(2), 163-186.

The Pac-Man strategy guide

Didn’t succeed in wasting your childhood in the arcades? Despair not, but check out KiLLerCloWn’s Pac-Man Guide in HTML or 27-page PDF.

And always remember:

“What you have to learn first is cornering. yes, there are differences in how quickly you corner and every Pac-Man pattern out there relies on you cornering quickly consistently without getting stuck. If you get stuck for as much of 1/10 of a second or less, hardly perceivalble to the eye your timing and pattern will be off, you will have to readjust and in the later levels will in most cases not be able to recover!

One basic rule applies: Corner before you get to the corner. The corners are round and if you only start twisting your joystick when you get to the corner you’ve already taken a wider line. This is almost invisible to the eye but it really makes a difference and you’ll notice whether your cornering has been clean when you reach certain key points in the patterns.”

Via Lifehacker

Today's motivational

Pascal Boyer, in his Religion Explained: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Thought
notes (loosely rephrased) that there are questions which, to appreciate their importance, require years of dedicated study. A good point, I think.

(The context is Boyer wondering about how we are able to move our limbs by willing them to do so – a question which few people lose much sleep over; it seems unimportant)

Danish Social Democrats want state funding for games

The Danish Social Democrats suggest ambitious changes in the state’s attitude towards games.

In particular, they suggest that video games be equated with film in terms of opportunities for cultural funding. The party’s cultural spokesperson notes how “I find it completely obvious that we need more state funding in this area”.

His arguments are perhaps less than entirely compelling: “We give support to all sorts of other things when it comes to culture, and we talk a lot about how to counter US culture.”

He also proposes increased funding for games research.

These ideas have circulated in various forms for years, but this time round someone seems to really mean it. Of course, the idea of actually equating film and games would mean a funding revolution that would create considerable opposition in some circles. Also, this debate is likely to lead to a heated discussion of what types of games deserve support. Bald assassins, anyone?

Source: Computerworld (Danish)