Category: Stuff

Let’s not beat around the bush

Regarding the relationship between dopamine, addiction and video games, Professor Olaf Paulsen of The Neurological Research Unit at Rigshospitalet is quoted for saying:

“The reason that some researchers focus on video games is that the brain activity while playing is easier to measure and standardize than in the case of complex task-completion and sports which cannot be measured in a scanner.

“Another reason that some researchers focus on video games and gambling is that this focus can fund their research. By positing a theory that video games and gambling create addiction because of dopamine, the researcher is able to apply for money from the so-called ludomania pool of Tipstjenesten [The Danish national game service].”

That theory seems less than implausable.

The emergence of rules

The other day my (nearly) two-year-old daughter invited me (“ordered” is of course more like it) me to participate in a game called “Ku-kuu”. She has yet to start forming sentences so the rules had to be sort of discovered as we went along. Essentially, the game seemed to be about me hiding somewhere and her coming looking for me. Unfortunately (perhaps) she couldn’t stand the excitement of waiting while I found a place to hide but instead followed me around as I tried to hide. In a sense, this kind of spoiled the game of hide-and-seek if we take it to be based on the skill involved in searching. But I got the clear sense that her version of the game was much more directed towards combining losing someone from sight and being delightfully surprised when that person emerged from behind a door etc.

It will be interesting to see how her gameplaying evolves and in particular how her rule-system preferences change over time.

Models of self

Increasingly, I have come to believe that proposing general models for the analysis of video games, while potentially fruitful, are nearly always rather convoluted ways of revealing your disciplinary background.

That is not necessarily sinful. But game scholars not explicit about the arbitrariness of whatever variables their upbringing has taught them to focus on are treading on truly swampy ground.

Grand Theft Evil

“Children are playing a game that encourages them to have sex with prostitutes and then murder them,” she said in a statement on the issue. “This is a silent epidemic of media desensitisation that teaches kids it’s OK to diss people because they are a woman, they’re a different colour or they’re from a different place.”

The “she” in question is senator Hillary Clinton now out to bash violent games. Interesting how the above mentioned game mechanic is probably the most famous is recent video game history. Interesting also how one of the best designed games on the form-side also turned out to be the most provoking on the content side. Birth of a Nation, anyone?

Via Nick.

Big questions

I pitched a few memes related to online gaming through the radio show “Mission” last night.
Mainly I was asked whether interacting in game worlds could be considered “natural” and comparable to RL communication.
The show also dealt extensively with another question: Is visible female pubic hair extending over the panties line natural or gross?

Seems to me I got the more boring question here…

BTW, I was also interviewed about similar issues in URBAN recently (in Danish).

Post-GDC

GDC 2005 has played itself out. It did so with great pomp, some fascinating talks, some entertaining talks, quite a bit of mingling, immodest amounts of high-quality coffee and a considerable number of visits to Lori’s.
Most distinctly the air was loaded with some trepidation over the coming console generation and particularly buzzing with energy during Will Wright’s “Spore” keynote (advocating a solution to next-gen woes in the form of player-generated content). See Jesper’s blog for more on this.


Oh, and here is Jesse Schell, Edward Castronova, and Jim Paul Gee discussing “What Researchers Can and Can’t Tell You About Your Games“. Castronova pitches his game design idea that will “enable social scientists to finally make studies with the precision of physicists” – yep, that’s more or less what he said.

Videogame doctors

A recent ill-informed CNN money article asked “What’s next: a Ph.D. in video gaming?“
Well, duh! – but I started a small count and actually, the number of game PhD’s to be is quite impressive.
Below is a list of people that I can think of, top of my head, who are speeding towards ludic doctor-hood.

But first the ones who made it (strong focus on games only):
– Mary Ann Buckles (see post on Ludology.org)
– Espen Aarseth (no decent link, as Dr. Aarseth believes the WWW thing will blow over)
– Lisbeth Klastrup
– Jesper Juul
– Lars Konzack
– Dmitri Williams

En route (in order of randomness):
– Gonzalo Frasca, IT University of Copenhagen
– Miguel Sicart, IT University of Copenhagen
– Simon Egenfeldt-Nielsen, IT University of Copenhagen
– Sara Mosberg, IT University of Copenhagen
– Troels Folmann, IT University of Copenhagen
– Jonas Heide Smith, IT University of Copenhagen
– Chek Yang Foo, Curtin University of Technology
– Mirjam Eladhari, Gotland University
– Elina Koivisto, Nokia Research Center (Finland)
– Lisa Galarneau, University of Waikato
– Constance Steinkuehler, University of Wisconsin–Madison
– Kristine Jørgensen, University of Copenhagen
– Gitte Stald, University of Copenhagen
– Charlie Breindahl, University of Copenhagen
– Anne Mette Thorhauge, University of Copenhagen
– Marinka Copier, University of Utrecht
– Christian Ulrik Andersen, University of Århus
– Julian Kuecklich, Ulster University
– Peter Zackariasson, Umeå School of Business and Economics
– Laurie Taylor, University of Florida
– Sean Fenty, University of Florida

Okay, this list is hopelessly incomplete. Please tell me some of the names that my tired brain didn’t come up with.