smartbella

[smartbella]

Play Journal #5

The game I chose to play for the topic of identification is PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds (PUBG) on the mobile phone.

Let’s start with the target object of identification. In her book, Shaw (2015) emphasized the distinction between identification as and identification with. The former might require and sameness or similarities between the player and the character him/her controls, while the latter could be caused by resonance by more abstract features such as experience. Shaw also drew the line between characters and avatars. According to her, players in PUBG create their avatars by deciding the demographic characteristics and clothing. As indicated in the research of Martey and Consalvo (2011), the avatar created in the virtual world is one self’s projective identity. Players use these avatars to perform themselves in the way shaped by social factors. The assumption of other people’s perception of oneself essentially influences how he/she wants to perform the identity. In PUBG, some players prefer to dress consistently with the game context, and thus they chose clothes in dark colors with a neat design, performing the identity of being “tough”. Yet, there are some other players who choose to dress in an eye-catching style. I belong to the former group, and one of my friends, Alex, belongs to the latter.

My avatar in PUBG always wears a black T-shirt and pants, with leather boots and a dark hat. My first reason is I want to be considered as a tough and high-skilled player in this game which is far from the truth: I’m always the worst one in the team. Second, though clothes in PUBG are not functional at all, I still rigidly think dressing in colors and styles that fit in the background is good for hiding from other players. My friend Alex doesn’t agree. In real life, he is quiet and a little introverted in front of strangers. He always wears normal T-shirts, jeans, and running shoes in real life, but in PUBG he always the most eye-catching one, in the brightest colors and most unique design with exaggerating accessories. We both identify the avatars as project self in a parallel world where we want to perform an image to other people, even though this image is far from the actual self.

Is this identification as or identification with?

PUBG provides two perspectives, that the first-person perspective (FPP) and the third-person perspective (TPP). I usually choose TPP, but when I use multiple scopes for targeting, it changes to the FPP. This mechanism could strengthen the feeling of mirror image, as Rehak (2003) described, that people play the game as a “self” as well as an observer. These continuous back-and-forth changes of perspectives mark the line between the game world and reality. The second factor that might constrain convergence might be the interface and rules. As Shaw (2015) explained, ludic of a game could make players too self-referential. For me, PUBG has a relatively high requirement for manipulation, because of which I can feel the game agency between myself and the avatar and it is hard to forget about the interface and actions I need to make. Another factor could be social. I only play PUBG with friends, and we talk lively while play. The social interaction creates a stronger connection between me and the game, because it is a social situation instead of just a game, and in our conversation, the actual self and the virtual self of the avatar converged as “I” or “me”, and we also actively make the convergence for other people by using “you”. However, I don’t think it represents that I identified myself as the avatar. Instead, as Shaw (2015) also mentioned, social interaction actually strengthens the consciousness of the actual self, especially because I know these people in real life. The concept of death also matters. In PUBG, team rankings of one battle depend on the team member who survives for the longest time in the game. Therefore, there are many times one team member would “sacrifice” for his or her teammates, and it isn’t a hard decision to make, because we all know “it’s just a game”. He/she could watch other teammates playing and give suggestions, still get tangible benefits from the team’s performance, and start a new match. I still want to survive as long as I can in the game and would be stressed if my avatar gets hurt, but the concept of death and repetition in PUBG makes me care less about the avatar as a real person or myself. Instead, I regard my avatar as an agency to reach the goal in the game.

In conclusion, though I created my avatar in PUBG to represent a fake image of myself, I identify myself with the game through the agency of the avatar rather than identify as the avatar.

References

Martey, R. M., & Consalvo, M. (2011). Performing the looking-glass self: Avatar appearance and group identity in Second Life. Popular Communication, 9(3), 165-180.

Rehak, B. (2003). Playing at Being. In: Wolf, Mark J. P. and Perron, Bernard. (2003). The Video Game Theory Reader. New York, Routledge, pp. 103 to 127

Shaw, A. (2015). Gaming at the edge: Sexuality and gender at the margins of gamer culture. U of Minnesota Press.

[smartbella]

Play Journal #4

The argument between narratology and ludology perspectives of studying video games has lasted for years. It seems that the focus is on the role of narrative and simulation in video games. When scholars first paid attention to gaming studies, it was wise and reasonable to adopt theories from other contexts. In gaming studies, people compared video games with fiction, movies, TVs, and theatres with the center of storytelling including plots and characters (e.g. Jenkins, 2004; Grodal, 2013). With more understanding of this field and more talents joined, it was inevitable that people began to investigate the differences between video games from other media forms rather than similarities. The idea of ludology and simulation was introduced. Scholars who hold the ludology perspective claims that the ultimate goal of video games is “play” instead of just telling a story (e.g. Eskelinen, 2001; Frasca, 2013). Narratives, which are not necessary, are embedded in the simulation performing as one game feature. Narratives are pre-structured, while simulation allows players to build their own experience and even stories.

I agree with the essential position of simulation in video games, because it builds the rule which makes a game a game, and a game is live only when people begin playing it. Yet, I also think in some video games narrative could work as the main motivation, around which the game simulation was built. I’ll discuss two games I played in terms of the connection between narrative and simulation.

1. My Love: Queen’s Choice

This RPG romance simulation game gained phenomenon popularity in China in 2017-2018, especially among young females. The protagonist is a young lady, and the story begins with her task of being the CEO of her father’s entertainment company. This storyline refers to a business simulation game and lasts from the beginning to the end. However, this isn’t what made people crazy. Along with the business operation, the girl will meet four charming and handsome male characters with 4 totally different styles which basically cover all popular types of guys among young Chinese females. Players could choose with which characters they want to develop their romantic relationships. It seems that the story between the player and the charming princess in the game is the key, but the success is actually lying on the simulation. First, the magic of romance factors is that players’ freedom of choice. They can decide which characters they want to have more connections and the pace. Besides, simulation makes the story more vivid and realistic. Players can message those in-game avatars in the WeChat interface, and WeChat is the dominant social SMS media in China. Players could also receive phone calls, and famous voice actors were hired to record. All these factors make the narrative more appealing. In this game, stories make people crazy, but the story was presented by great simulation design.

2. Gris

Gris is a new platform game on Switch. The whole game has 4 chapters connected by the exploration of the protagonist, a girl who tried to figure out where she comes from and what happened to her. Unlike many other platform games, Gris doesn’t have time limits nor lives limit, and there aren’t monsters that players need to beat. Therefore, there’s basically no pressure on players. The simulation is delicately designed, from visual and audio effects to the barriers. For me, it wasn’t hard to make progress, but there were numerous times I was surprised by how smart and delicate the simulation was, and that makes it easy for me to get immersed in the game. Gris also has narratives. The whole game is about the exploration of a girl, but there aren’t any texts or messages in the game. Yet, the story was told completely by visual and audio features. At some key points between two chapters where are animations, but more importantly, the environment, the statues, the ruins, and the music, combine to create a sad and desolate story, though it has never been explicitly explained. In Gris, players enjoy the game simulation, but it is the narrative conveyed by the simulation that catches players’ emotions and makes the bonds that differentiate this game from other platform games.

There are so many game genres in the market. I would agree that simulations are the key to video games in general, because it refers to the core of “play”, especially in some sim games and competitive-oriented games, where the simulated projection of the reality is the essential attraction. However, when discussing narratives in video games, it is also important to realize that the effect of narrative on emotional engagement. Besides, I think it isn’t proper to criticize the role of narratives by emphasizing on the narrative structure. Not having a complete structure as fiction, movie, or drama has doesn’t mean there isn’t narrative in a video game. Experience, competition, exploration, construction, once an avatar in a game makes some actions, it could be considered as narrative.

References

Eskelinen, M. (2001). The gaming situation. Game studies, 1(1), 68.

Frasca, G. (2013). Simulation versus narrative: Introduction to ludology. In The video game theory reader (pp. 243-258). Routledge.

Grodal, T. (2013). Stories for eye, ear, and muscles: Video games, media, and embodied experiences. In The video game theory reader (pp. 151-178). Routledge.

Jenkins, H. (2004). Game design as narrative. Computer, 44(53), 118-130.

[smartbella]

Play journal #3

The game I played for this week is Zelda: Breath of the Wild. I haven’t played this game for long, but according to my limited playing experience, I think it would be a good representative for the discussion of immersion. Liveness is one of the most frequently mentioned characteristics when people talk about Zelda. Hanson (2018) concluded that liveness in games is immediacy and copresence, and games are enlivened by the player’s participation. Advanced technology enables the responsiveness of games almost without latency. In Zelda, as the name indicates, the game world is breathing. Wind, grass, animals, the environment is living which enhances the immediacy and enlivens the game. More importantly, as Hanson emphasized, the core of immediacy is players’ consistent engagement. Let’s talk about another concept first before we come back to engagement: immersion. Without a doubt, liveness increases the immersion in Zelda. Murray (1997) defined immersion as “the experience of being transported to an elaborately simulated place”. The technologies in Zelda used for visual and audio effects create an “elaborately simulated place” at a breathtaking level. Few players, if any, would disagree that this game is remarkable on its aesthetics. The interactive and dynamic sensory features make immersion easier and more natural. However, as McMahan (2013) pointed out, immersion isn’t totally dependent on the physical dimensions of the tech, and overwhelming visual and audio effects are not the only key factors. Instead, players' active participation is the essence. McMahan concluded three conditions for immersion:” 1. The user’s expectations of the game or environment must match the environment’s conventions fairly closely. 2. The user’s actions must have a non-trivial impact on the environment. 3. The conventions of the world must be consistent.” The first condition will be discussed later with the rules of games. The second condition is satisfied in Zelda by the narrative. The narrative structure in Zelda is enormous. Even though new tasks and stories are already set, which one will be triggered and when it will be triggered are highly depends on player’s choice, especially as the game proceeds and more stories are explored unrolled. Therefore, players’ choice determines how this game is finished, and their actions matter to the whole game especially in terms of storyline. Zelda is also inherently consistent. Though the story is fantasy-based, the logic constructs in the narrative make sense. Yet, immersion isn’t all about narrative. As McMahan mentioned, some people play games at a non-diegetic level that they’re immersed because of the “deep play” experience instead of narrative, and this indicates players' engagement. Player’s engagement indicates their highly involved participation, maybe even at an “irrational” level, to the game, and this thus makes the game livelier and make themselves more immersed. In terms of the other two conditions of immersion, the game conventions are emphasized. I would like to talk about it with rules in Zelda. In a game as grand and ambitious as Zelda, the rules and conventions must be delicately designed. Salen and Zimmerman (2004) categorized three kinds of rules: operational rules, constitutive rules, and implicit rules. The former two combine to be the essential and fundamental rules of a game in a general sense. Though Zelda is a single-player RPG, it actually might have a more complex game world than many other MMORPGs, and such a world is based on its constitutive rules which perform as the cornerstone. As for operational rules, it surprisingly only defines operations of actions. To move forward in the game, players have to do their tasks, but the decisions are still in their hands, and as discussed before, players can determine how they want to finish Zelda. Fewer limits on operational rules enable higher freedom of choice, and therefore players can play based on their only logic which makes the game feel to be more consistent. Moreover, considering the first condition of immersion, I also think this freedom makes it easier to match the user’s expectations with the game’s conventions. Now let’s return to liveness. Besides immediacy, another factor key to liveness is copresence, which refers to the players feel they are present with events or other characters within the same spatial and time boundary. It is easy to understand the spatial boundary of games, which is somehow marked by the game consoles. Being a single-player game, Zelda isn’t ideal for social copresence with other players. However, because of the dynamic and spontaneous operation of the game world, everything in the game, such as NPCs, demons, and plants are “breathing”, which enables the conception of time flow in the game. This time flow further specifies the time frame of Zelda. With both distinct borderline of time and space, as well as with the liveness of characters in the game, the sense of copresence is strengthened and thus the game, in general, is more enlivened. The extraordinary physical sensory design in Zelda together with its delicate inherent rules and logic enables the liveness of the game, and all these characteristics combine to enhance players’ immersion.

References

Hanson, C. (2018). Game Time: Understanding Temporality in Video Games. Indiana University Press.

McMahan, A. (2013). Immersion, engagement, and presence: A method for analyzing 3-D video games. In The video game theory reader (pp. 89-108). Routledge.

Murray, J. H. (1997). Hamlet on the holodeck: The future of narrative in cyberspace. MIT press.

Salen, K., and Zimmerman, E. (2004). Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. MIT press.

[smartbella]

Play Journal #2: Arcade games in 2019

For the week of arcade games, I went to an amusement center with friends where there are a bunch of arcade gaming machines. I tried many games and will discuss my experience with various topics. 

General

1. Privacy 

Arcade games are usually set in an open public environment such as restaurants or entertainment centers like the one I went to. Because of this, it is common to see some arcade games attract a group of people standing around and watch them play. It might be an “honor” for advanced players, but for people who are self-conscious and not confident, it might pose some stress. Yet, I found several machines with a semi-open space which keeps players into a private gaming environment. Besides privacy, it could also enhance the experience by providing more overwhelming audio and visual effects by blocking distractions from outside. 

2. Input device 

Compared with original arcade games decades of years ago, besides buttons and handles or trackballs, some arcade games also use devices that copy the real objects. There are three major themes of arcade games that opt to use real-life devices: shooting game, moto racing game, and music game. Interestingly, according to my observation, these types are mostly also games that use the first-person perspective, while the arcade games with traditional buttons and handles use the third-person view. 

3. The derivative of classic arcade games 

Another interesting finding is that the arcade games most popular to adults are those revised classic arcade games, such as Pac Man and Space Invaders. Compared with the original version, the new versions, though the game contents stayed the same, used more advanced technology, such as bigger and higher-quality screen, and multi-sense interaction. For example, the screen of Space Invaders is as tall as the wall which provided a very overwhelming visual effect. Also, instead of the classic set of buttons and handles, players now sit down as in the spaceship. The input device also mimics the control in spaceships we usually see in media, and it vibrated when people shot the target successfully. Most players who are interested in this type of renewed classic arcade games were adults. 

4. The derivative of classic games on other platforms 

Kids are more interested in arcade games that derived from other gaming platforms, and the most typical one is mobile games. The ones I saw was Temple Run, Plant Zombies, and Fruit Ninja. Except for Fruit Ninja, which is just put the mobile game on a bigger touchscreen, the other two both made some changes. The input device of Temple Run is a trackball, which I feel make the control harder than the mobile version. As for Plant Zombies, if say the mobile game is more like a strategy game in which players put plants at a proper position, the arcade game version is more like a shooting game, allowing players shoot zombies with an input device in the shape of a peashooter. 

Arcade Game Traits 

In the article Game Analysis: Centipede, Rouse III (2006) concluded several classic arcade game traits. I found all of them in the arcade games I played, though they might not be reflected in a single game. Most commonly, these arcade games are really easy to learn with a short or even without tutorial demos. Most games just have a very brief context introduction instead of a profound storyline. 

Pac Man and Space Invaders, the two classic arcade games, though adopted newer technologies, still only have one single screen, and players could have a whole overview of the in-game environment. Yet, the racing games, such as racing car or motorbike, all use continuous screens showing the progress of the race. As for shooting games, some small movements in screen might occur, but more frequently they still use a single screen and let shooting targets coming into the screen scope. Also, on the main screen before someone paid to start and after the player finished his/her round, there was a score ranking record. 

Some games, especially the ones revised from classical arcade games, enable infinite play, and players keep playing as long as they can, but the game becomes harder as the progress is made. However, the more frequent case is the game sets a time limit or intervals between sessions. These types of games are usually really intense from the beginning to the end, and the intervals could create a good rhythm for the game playing experience. Unlike my childhood playing memory, yet, today even players get a high score and pass the first session have to pay to continue, whereas years ago the games enable at least two sessions if the score is high enough. Multiple lives are also rare to see now. Players only get one chance by paying once, which is usually spent on learning how to play this game. I think it undermined my playing experience because for most arcade games I tried, I needed at least one round to learn how it worked, so averagely I paid twice or three times for each game to really play it.

Reference

Rouse III, R. (2006). Game Analysis: Centipede. The Game Design Reader: A Rules of Play Anthology, 460-473.

[smartbella]

Play Journal #1: Transported into Stardew Valley

The game I played this week and I’ve been playing for the past several weeks is Stardew Valley, which is a simulation role-playing game available on Nintendo Switch, the only gaming console I have. It has a single-player offline version and an online co-op version. I played it online with my boyfriend who lives in another city. Stardew Valley is a farming and life simulation game. Avatars start making their living by farming and then after accumulating more money they could explore other tasks including fishing, raising livestock, mining, etc. Avatars get up at 6:30 in the morning and need to go to bed before midnight, every day is saved as a section, and one hour in the game is about several minutes in the real life. It has four seasons in a year and farming should follow the current season. Avatars would be given some tasks but in general, there’s no pressure in this game, because avatars don’t just have limited lives, there’s no punishment if players fail to finish tasks, and players could always start over from the previous day. Stardew Valley has a pure process, according to Galloway (2006), that when the avatars are “paused” and don’t do anything in the game, the macro gaming world is still running and operating by itself. Time goes by and season changes. I enjoy this game a lot, partly because challenges and competitions in many games usually make me anxious which isn’t what I expected for my leisure time; the other reason is this game allows me to do something together with my distant boyfriend and to create a shared experience. According to the 4 classifications of play by Caillois (2006), instead of “agon” (competition) provided by many other games, Stardew Valley belongs to “mimicry” (simulation). Players “pretend” they have another life in this game presented by gaming avatars. Especially for many players, the valley is a peaceful and beautiful promised land which differs a lot from their real world. Players like me probably never have farming experience before, but we pretend we are making a living by being a farmer. I think the joy of Stardew Valley comes from “ludus”. The game world is fully organized with rules, such as what crops should be planted in which season, and stores are only open during a specific time. Though the overall game structure has already been well-constructed, players still have much freedom in deciding what they want to do, which is also a core characteristic of play. Stardew Valley strikes a good combination of rules and freedom, and thus players could experience game joy and meanwhile don’t suffer the chaos. I think Stardew Valley is a good representation of flow experience. Though as I mentioned above there’s little pressure in this game, players still have their own goal, such as making more money, decorating houses, finishing one task, getting higher skill levels, and so on. Yet, playing this game is autotelic, meaning that instead of outside stimulus, playing experience is the whole point. Different with many other competition games, players’ dedication into this game doesn’t arise from challenges, but more from the inherent wish and duty towards the avatar, who is the projection of gamers themselves, to make a better life, and I think this is the ultimate goal of playing Stardew Valley. Therefore, it’s not surprising if players concentrate on this game as much and serious as they can, because this is an easier and maybe more ideal version of their real life. This dedication and concentration make flow occurs, and thus players could easily be transported to the game reality. For myself, the life in this game is operated and managed by me and my boyfriend, which isn’t the reality but is all about our hope, so every time when we play it we are both completely engaged and immersed into this game, and in the end we get much pleasure and enjoyment from it. Csikszentmihalyi (1990) discussed 8 major components of enjoyment, among which “the merging of action and awareness”, “concentration on the task at hand”, “the loss of self-consciousness”, and “the transformation of time” are more considered as outcomes or sign for having flow experience. I experienced all of these in my playing experience, and I can only recognize these characteristics by reviewing. Other components discuss the characteristics of the contents of activities. Though Stardew Valley isn’t competition-oriented, there are many activities that require skills and practice. For example, fishing in the game is really hard compared to farming, and every time I tried fishing, I was even more focused than usual. The game also sets clear goals and feedback, the most basic one is how much money players make in the previous day, showed as a daily report before the game is saved. In terms of the possibility instead of the actuality of control, since the game progress is saved on an everyday basis, players can always quit and start over from the previous day if they’re not satisfied. People play this game as a simulation of another lifestyle, but the chance of starting over makes it more controllable, which won’t never happen in real life. Considering all these qualities of game content in Stardew Valley, I think this game could easily generate enjoyment and the flow experience among game players.

References

Caillois, R. (2006). The definition of play and the classification of games. The game design reader: A rules of play anthology, 122.

Czikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.

Galloway, A. R. (2006). Gaming: Essays on algorithmic culture (Vol. 18). U of Minnesota Press.