Gender roles in video games are similar to others that we see almost every day of our lives. Take for example when the article from Wikipedia titled Feminist Theory when it states that roles of females in the film industry is for "women to function as objects of this gaze." Speaking about the "male gaze" that was mentioned earlier in the writing, the females are looked upon as something that is lower than what they should be look upon. This goes along with the essay Playing With Fire written by Gonzalo Frasca. In Frasca's piece, it is brought to our attention that females in video games are seen as less powerful than the males. When it is stated that Princess "Peach's superpowers are not physical. . . instead Peach fights with an unconventional weapon: her emotions." I found this to be interesting because so many males around today are so afraid to show how they really feel, or have any emotions at all besides "oh I'm such a cool and tough guy." The way I see it is that the powers of Princess Peach are much more useful and powerful than what Mario can do with his "shift sizing." Sure it does make female characters seem "emotionally unstable" but it all depends on the ways you look at how each power of hers works. I am not a video game player unlike so many other people around, but I think her ways of using her feelings to change what she does in the game does go along with some things that have to do with real life. The ways people react to things really does change the outcomes of what is going to happen next, and maybe this is what the makers of Super Princess Peach wanted to get across to the players. That it is okay to feel the ways you do, but in the end the ways you deal with them that will make or break the future.
When in chapter two of Got Game by John C. Beck and Mitchell Wade, the authors point out to us that "men are hulking muscle-bound members of elite tactical units while women are chesty volleyball players" being another stereotype that is seen other video games. In my mind this is not good at all. When video games let the player pick what they look like, or "try on thousands of different outfits, do their hair in different colors and styles, try on shoes" and such they are cause the player to feel like the game is real and make them want to be fake like the characters in the game. How can they Wade and Beck say that video games "are more and more a common ground for the sexes" when they clearly are not. They even point out how women and men have different preferences when it comes to what kind of games they like to play. Males tend to like games that are more focused on "speedy fingers and nerves of steel" while females "were more likely to favor more cerebral arcade, quiz, and puzzle games." I do not understand what they were saying about teenagers going on dates for video games. I am a teenager and I have never even hear of such a thing. What kind of video games would they have on these dates if girls and guys have such a different take on what kind of video games they like to play? Yes I am aware not every female like the "arcade, quiz, and puzzle games" and not all males like the "speedy fingers and nerves of steel " and that every person has different likes and dislikes, but come on now. Video games on a date would be about the worst date ever.
It does not come as a surprise to me that there are not more and more women playing video games. Not only do women have hundreds of magazines telling them that they have to be the perfect size, and perfect hair, and be sexy all at the same time, now video games are started to do that as well.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Friday, April 17, 2009
Grandmothers are cooler than trolls
This article was mostly about the author Gonzalo Frasca informing the reader of his dislike of fantasy centered video games. When The Sims came about he was looking forward to playing it because it had a more realistic kind of feeling. Babyz is another video game, or rather virtual human game that made more and more people get involved with what was really going on in the world. Frasca brings to our attention that some people were "concerned about the lack of handicapped virtual babyz" and others were worried about the "amount of time that people 'wasted' playing with virtual babies while real orphans were starving for affect." Something happens in The Sims that is not quite the way that neither Frasca, nor can I understand. The players in this game go out and do crazy things, such as "divorce a zillion different wives or husbands, modify variables such as age" and so on. These things are nothing like the things you can do in real life, and you can learn as much from them as you can from a fantasy game, because that is what it seems to be here. Not all humans are as "neat, outgoing, active, playful, and nice" as the characters in The Sims are. These characteristics are making the humans like robots, and not do anything like real people would do. Sure somethings in the game would make the characters be happy, but most of the time "it is hard to have fun unless you buy a lot of stuff." This is what a lot of people in our country seem to struggle with as well. If we could learn more from video games like Frasca would like us to about everyday life, just image how awesome everyone would be.
how do we study games?
How do we study games is a very broad, and out there kind of question, so instead of jumping head first into it, let's take a look at how we study other types of things. For example different kinds of writings. We have poems, short stories, plays, chapter books, fiction, non-fiction, choose your own kind of stories, and so on. Is how we read these all different? In some ways yes, but in other ways no. This is a lot similar in how we play video games. There are ones that give the player more room to do what they want without being timed, and there are other games that time you to put more pressure on you to do what they are demanding of you to do. Depending on how much space we are given to play these games, we play these games in different ways. Some of the video games that are played "insists on telling a story, regardless of how the player chooses to play the game"(181). I think these kind of games should be put out and studied in a different ways then the games that do not go on to tell the person playing it a story. There really is no way that we can have playing a computer game such as Spider Solitar, and playing a game with a real character and story in the same category. This also goes along with how fiction and non-fiction books are always separated at the local libraries. They are so different, and go for a whole different kind of audience.
Some things that we should study in video games are the uses of "texture, colour, and light"(3). As in chapter one we were informed that some people see video games more as some kind of art that will come to take a better affect of the people playing them. The usage of almost everything that have in each scene is sort of like a mini drawing, or painting but in the form of a video game. The way I see it, is that video games that are influenced by something that is already exists is not art at all. But on the other hand, if a video game was just thought up, and is unlike anything else that is out, then it is really art. Everyone sees art in a different light, and who knows, maybe all kinds of video games are a kind of art?
If we see video games as art, then they go way beyond just the ways the rules, different outcomes, value of the good or bad outcomes, the player investment to get the outcome that the wish to have, the attachment of the outcome from the player, and the negotiable consequences for real life, from what Jesper Juul defined as the six common features of a game on page six in Got Game. The art of the game would change how the player plays the game, and would make them do things that they would not have thought of doing if it were not for the art. For example if the treasure that the player was looking for was right in front of their nose, but they see a shinny nice looking sea to the far right with what it looks like to be even more treasure on the sand, they will go for the more treasure. It will influence what the player is going to do next, and the real outcome of what is going to happen after they let go of the treasure that they were going to go for, to go get what seems to be an even better prize.
If the art of the game is something like this, then that would be a big part of how we would study it. The player in this case would be mostly in control of his or her actions, and that would be in a different category than the ones that the player must stay on a path for the whole time they are playing if it were up to me.
Some things that we should study in video games are the uses of "texture, colour, and light"(3). As in chapter one we were informed that some people see video games more as some kind of art that will come to take a better affect of the people playing them. The usage of almost everything that have in each scene is sort of like a mini drawing, or painting but in the form of a video game. The way I see it, is that video games that are influenced by something that is already exists is not art at all. But on the other hand, if a video game was just thought up, and is unlike anything else that is out, then it is really art. Everyone sees art in a different light, and who knows, maybe all kinds of video games are a kind of art?
If we see video games as art, then they go way beyond just the ways the rules, different outcomes, value of the good or bad outcomes, the player investment to get the outcome that the wish to have, the attachment of the outcome from the player, and the negotiable consequences for real life, from what Jesper Juul defined as the six common features of a game on page six in Got Game. The art of the game would change how the player plays the game, and would make them do things that they would not have thought of doing if it were not for the art. For example if the treasure that the player was looking for was right in front of their nose, but they see a shinny nice looking sea to the far right with what it looks like to be even more treasure on the sand, they will go for the more treasure. It will influence what the player is going to do next, and the real outcome of what is going to happen after they let go of the treasure that they were going to go for, to go get what seems to be an even better prize.
If the art of the game is something like this, then that would be a big part of how we would study it. The player in this case would be mostly in control of his or her actions, and that would be in a different category than the ones that the player must stay on a path for the whole time they are playing if it were up to me.
Monday, April 13, 2009
Readings from week one . . Take two!
To add onto what I have already said on blogger on my earlier post about the readings from the first week of class I am now going to talk about how I feel about each of these topics. Got Game is one of the articles that I forget to mention in the blog that I posted before and it has a good point of how we should not stereotype the videogamers. Like it is stated in this article "game are incredibly complex computer programs that lead the brain to new combinations of cognitive tasks and demand new levels of processing power"(20). Here we can see how games can change how people act in and out of the game. The games that they are playing are leading them into being in control and pick the next needed move. Having people like this in charge of business things would be a good idea because of this. They would be able to come up with new and exciting ideas for business's to go about doing.
The piece by Zimmerman tells us the basic ways to go about making a good video game. The naughty terms he tells us that are needed are play, games, narrative, and interactivity. These things can be different for each and every person, so I do not think that there really is a way that we can tell someone how to make a videogame that will be successful.
Now onto what Montfort would like to get across to us is how to break down the ways of videogames. He had a whole lot to go over, and how each video game has potential to become great. I think however that he goes way overboard with everything he is telling us. Some videogames only go with a few of these topics, and that does not make them any worse of a game! Sure some of these topics would make a video game better, but there shouldn't be something to tell us how to have videogames.
In The Influence of Literature and Myth in Videogames by Douglass Perry informs us that videogames have come to us in a verity of ways. Some come from books, movies, even the Bible! I think this is something that does not go with the ideas that Perry told us. Having it based on something that already was common and known to everyone does not make it new or exciting to anyone. I found it interesting that I have never really seen how many video games are really out there that are based on a movie, until I went to the movie store, and saw with my own eyes. I would like to see videogames go into something that will surprise us, and intriguing the players.
The last article I will talk about here will be Once Upon A Time by William Vitka. Vitka here is trying to inform us of how far videogames will go in the future. Instead of having ten videogames with the same problems, or goals we will have new ones, that will not be the same as every other one on the wall. I think videogames do have a big future, and will be able to grow into something that will help people to make their own stories, or whatever in their own life.
The piece by Zimmerman tells us the basic ways to go about making a good video game. The naughty terms he tells us that are needed are play, games, narrative, and interactivity. These things can be different for each and every person, so I do not think that there really is a way that we can tell someone how to make a videogame that will be successful.
Now onto what Montfort would like to get across to us is how to break down the ways of videogames. He had a whole lot to go over, and how each video game has potential to become great. I think however that he goes way overboard with everything he is telling us. Some videogames only go with a few of these topics, and that does not make them any worse of a game! Sure some of these topics would make a video game better, but there shouldn't be something to tell us how to have videogames.
In The Influence of Literature and Myth in Videogames by Douglass Perry informs us that videogames have come to us in a verity of ways. Some come from books, movies, even the Bible! I think this is something that does not go with the ideas that Perry told us. Having it based on something that already was common and known to everyone does not make it new or exciting to anyone. I found it interesting that I have never really seen how many video games are really out there that are based on a movie, until I went to the movie store, and saw with my own eyes. I would like to see videogames go into something that will surprise us, and intriguing the players.
The last article I will talk about here will be Once Upon A Time by William Vitka. Vitka here is trying to inform us of how far videogames will go in the future. Instead of having ten videogames with the same problems, or goals we will have new ones, that will not be the same as every other one on the wall. I think videogames do have a big future, and will be able to grow into something that will help people to make their own stories, or whatever in their own life.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Readings from first week.
The Influence of Literature and Myth in Videogames by Douglass C. Perry, talks mostly about how video games as we know them today are more than what meets the eye. Once Upon A Time by William Vitka informs us of the capability videogames can have for the future. The handouts that we got in class, one by Zimmerman and the other by Montfort are about the structure and make up of video games. Let's jump into how each of these goes along with the others.
The things that influence a lot of video games are books, and tales. I found it interesting how so many of the books that were popular got turned into movies, and then into video games! Like William Vitka said in his essay, each person is a storyteller, and "cannot help but tell stories." Videogames are a type of story, and the player is the one changes how things go in the story. Like Perry points out to us in his essay it will come down to what one has the best story, and what content that a player can get into.
Now off the breakup of how video games are made up, let's take a visit to Narrative, Interactivity, Play, and Games by Eric Zimmerman. Zimmerman points out to us that these three words that make up his title, also make up a video game. Starting with narrative- the videogame must move on or have certain "events" that take place. Next we have interactivity- basically when the player of the game does something there will be a response to it. Play is the next one the list, and it means to have "free space of movement within a more rigid structure." Lastly we have game- this is known to us as having one or more people playing going with the rules to face a problem that has a logical finish.
To put all four of these items together we see that the events that happen in a game will have an effect on what outcomes the play picks, and how they choose to do so while they have to free space in the game to do so. The game as a whole can be described as something that will be affected through the playing process due to the narrative and interacting, and how the player reacts to them all.
Now to go into Interactive Fiction by Nick Montfort who opens the door to how new media in interactive fiction. Montfort talks about story, game, storygame, puzzle, novel, world, literature, problem, riddle and machine all have in influence on how we understand this kind of fiction. Story has to do with the action and adventure that will go in the text. Game would have to do with how a player works toward a goal they set for themselves, and how they are going to get there. Storygame is when a story is better interpreted by images rather than just text. Puzzles get the reader or player to get more involved in what is going on, and help them to better get a sense of what is going on. Novel is just a way to see how long something is suppose to take you to get through on average. World is showing us the importance of a plot that keeps the story going. Literature is the output of text that makes something unreal seem to come alive. The problems are questions that come about to get a solution to something that is going on in the story. Riddles are things that must be solved in order for the story to move along, but they take much thought and understanding. Lastly machine refers to the rules of IF and how it can be viewed. Not only looking at the story or game of something try looking at it how literature and puzzles interact with each other.
As we see here we start with how video games are influenced today, and we move forward to how they should be influenced in the future, and how they should go about making these needed changes.
The things that influence a lot of video games are books, and tales. I found it interesting how so many of the books that were popular got turned into movies, and then into video games! Like William Vitka said in his essay, each person is a storyteller, and "cannot help but tell stories." Videogames are a type of story, and the player is the one changes how things go in the story. Like Perry points out to us in his essay it will come down to what one has the best story, and what content that a player can get into.
Now off the breakup of how video games are made up, let's take a visit to Narrative, Interactivity, Play, and Games by Eric Zimmerman. Zimmerman points out to us that these three words that make up his title, also make up a video game. Starting with narrative- the videogame must move on or have certain "events" that take place. Next we have interactivity- basically when the player of the game does something there will be a response to it. Play is the next one the list, and it means to have "free space of movement within a more rigid structure." Lastly we have game- this is known to us as having one or more people playing going with the rules to face a problem that has a logical finish.
To put all four of these items together we see that the events that happen in a game will have an effect on what outcomes the play picks, and how they choose to do so while they have to free space in the game to do so. The game as a whole can be described as something that will be affected through the playing process due to the narrative and interacting, and how the player reacts to them all.
Now to go into Interactive Fiction by Nick Montfort who opens the door to how new media in interactive fiction. Montfort talks about story, game, storygame, puzzle, novel, world, literature, problem, riddle and machine all have in influence on how we understand this kind of fiction. Story has to do with the action and adventure that will go in the text. Game would have to do with how a player works toward a goal they set for themselves, and how they are going to get there. Storygame is when a story is better interpreted by images rather than just text. Puzzles get the reader or player to get more involved in what is going on, and help them to better get a sense of what is going on. Novel is just a way to see how long something is suppose to take you to get through on average. World is showing us the importance of a plot that keeps the story going. Literature is the output of text that makes something unreal seem to come alive. The problems are questions that come about to get a solution to something that is going on in the story. Riddles are things that must be solved in order for the story to move along, but they take much thought and understanding. Lastly machine refers to the rules of IF and how it can be viewed. Not only looking at the story or game of something try looking at it how literature and puzzles interact with each other.
As we see here we start with how video games are influenced today, and we move forward to how they should be influenced in the future, and how they should go about making these needed changes.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
King of Kong
When we first started watching King of Kong in class I thought it was such a waste of time, and that it was something I could just go make fun of with my friends after class, but this was not the case. There really is more than meets the eye in this movie. It shows that if you work hard enough at something, you can do whatever you want.
Steve Wiebe started to play King Kong when he had more time on his hands. He worked and worked trying to get the highest score he could. When he did get his high score and it was refused, he did not give up! This is something that everyone should learn to do. He shows how much he believes in himself by wanting to face the ever so bold Billy Mitchell. When Mitchell didn't show up to play him several times, I think this made him feel much more pride in himself and what he is doing.
This whole story made me think of the time in my life when I first started out with volleyball. Somehow I managed to get on the varsity team my first year out, and I was super excited to be on the team and learn how to be a better volleyball player. The first day of practice after we were all warmed up and done with peppering, the coach wanted us to get into hitting lines. I had never really gone up for a hit before and it seemed like everyone else did it like it was second nature.
The first girl went up and she hit it into the net. This made me feel a lot better about how I would do. Now the second girl went up to hit, and she hit it over, but not so hard or anything. Now it was my turn. I was nervous and wanted to look good in front of all the older girls. I started my approach and bam! I totally messed it up. The coach made me look like a fool in front of all the other girls, but I knew I could do it after practicing it over and over.
I was determined to hit the ball over and place it just in the correct spot for my team to score. I practiced at our practice timing, with my mom in all the spare time she had, just about any moment I could I was practicing my hitting. Some of the older girls who always started off the games would make fun of how much I was doing it over and over again. This only made me want to be better so I could take over their spots as starting off the volleyball games. Just like how Steve would work harder and harder to beat Billy, and one thing that pushed him into it was because how Billy thought he was the best and how no one could ever beat him.
At our last game of the season I had my hits down! I was so comfortable in hitting, and I knew that I could place it in the best spots for the other team to let it drop. It was time for our coach to tell us the starting lineup. By my surprise I was on the list for starters. I could hear the older girls whisper amongst each other about how this "could not be happening" and that coach must have made "some kind of mistake."
I did not let their comments get to me, in fact it pushed me even more to do the best I could ever do! Just like Steve did not let the comments of Billy or his little spy get to him. Like I believe he said in the video that the crowed that Billy's buddy got around him when he got the blackout on King Kong, was that the crowed got him going, and basically got him more into the game.
Watching this video King of Kong has really opened my eyes to how video games can be more than just something to do after homework. They are games that help you be the best you can. If only everyone in this world could be as committed to something like Steve Wiebe was to getting a high score for King Kong, everyone would be working on something, and get a sense of accomplishment just like Steve in the end.
Steve Wiebe started to play King Kong when he had more time on his hands. He worked and worked trying to get the highest score he could. When he did get his high score and it was refused, he did not give up! This is something that everyone should learn to do. He shows how much he believes in himself by wanting to face the ever so bold Billy Mitchell. When Mitchell didn't show up to play him several times, I think this made him feel much more pride in himself and what he is doing.
This whole story made me think of the time in my life when I first started out with volleyball. Somehow I managed to get on the varsity team my first year out, and I was super excited to be on the team and learn how to be a better volleyball player. The first day of practice after we were all warmed up and done with peppering, the coach wanted us to get into hitting lines. I had never really gone up for a hit before and it seemed like everyone else did it like it was second nature.
The first girl went up and she hit it into the net. This made me feel a lot better about how I would do. Now the second girl went up to hit, and she hit it over, but not so hard or anything. Now it was my turn. I was nervous and wanted to look good in front of all the older girls. I started my approach and bam! I totally messed it up. The coach made me look like a fool in front of all the other girls, but I knew I could do it after practicing it over and over.
I was determined to hit the ball over and place it just in the correct spot for my team to score. I practiced at our practice timing, with my mom in all the spare time she had, just about any moment I could I was practicing my hitting. Some of the older girls who always started off the games would make fun of how much I was doing it over and over again. This only made me want to be better so I could take over their spots as starting off the volleyball games. Just like how Steve would work harder and harder to beat Billy, and one thing that pushed him into it was because how Billy thought he was the best and how no one could ever beat him.
At our last game of the season I had my hits down! I was so comfortable in hitting, and I knew that I could place it in the best spots for the other team to let it drop. It was time for our coach to tell us the starting lineup. By my surprise I was on the list for starters. I could hear the older girls whisper amongst each other about how this "could not be happening" and that coach must have made "some kind of mistake."
I did not let their comments get to me, in fact it pushed me even more to do the best I could ever do! Just like Steve did not let the comments of Billy or his little spy get to him. Like I believe he said in the video that the crowed that Billy's buddy got around him when he got the blackout on King Kong, was that the crowed got him going, and basically got him more into the game.
Watching this video King of Kong has really opened my eyes to how video games can be more than just something to do after homework. They are games that help you be the best you can. If only everyone in this world could be as committed to something like Steve Wiebe was to getting a high score for King Kong, everyone would be working on something, and get a sense of accomplishment just like Steve in the end.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)