What does it mean for game producers to become media producers? What happens to users?

I think it means that game producers will need to consider how the games the make will be interpreted with different cultural contexts and how then these games will be socially connected so that they allow online fan based communities to form, and whether or not they will allow their communities to generate their own fan driven content using tools supplied the producers. By doing this they will allow users to investigate different contexts of the game and thus create game driven pop cosmopolitans allowing for different gaming genres and culture to converge, and holding the attention of a broader base of gamers in the proves as their cultural world views expand as they become more deeply involved with gaming interactions.

Can we think of ‘Alternate Reality’ or ‘Viral’ games as akin to console or computer games?

I think we can as I see them as a convergence between the offline and online gaming worlds. Instead of going to different areas realistically constructed by the game designer, players are going to different websites constructed in the offline world, both of which relate back to some central media source. All of these are best played within a networked community to solve problems and share information.

What does it mean for traditional media when games and TV/Films converge?

I think it means that it becomes harder and harder for traditional media to maintain attention of consumers on a single media artifact if there is no method fans to interact with the media or derivatives of the emdia then attention will be quickly lost to those that do. Fans will look for expanding narratives though these derivative medias and socially network with other like minded people on a global scale free of the restrictions of time and space.

Traditional media will thus need to look to move from a digitally divided push media model, to a globally networked pull media model to maintain audience attention.

For my remediation I am going to remediate an article from Cosmos magazine about space travel into a YouTube video. I intend to use a Star Wars theme in a talk show format to accomplish this.

I will first have o summarize the main points of the article so I can create a video about 3 minutes long that semiotically, textually and verbally presents the main points of the article.

I will argue Fair dealing for education purposes when confronting any copyright issues and license any original material under the creative commons license CC-BY-SL-NC.

In doing this I think the video will be both entertaining and informative for consumers, allowing them to watch it free of the constraints of time and space on the YouTube platform and thus easily share it online within their respective online communities.

Over my life time I grew up with board games such as monopoly, game of life, scrabble, stratego, chess as well as many gaming consoles such as Intellivision, NES, Sega Mega Drive II, PS1, PS2, PS3 as well as Commodore 64 and windows based PCs.

At the moment 95% of my gaming resides on my PS3 but I am beginning to shift this more to my iPhone4 which is a big change for me as I now play games in different social spaces and time frames.

The genres of games I usually play are puzzle games such as tomb raider, 1st person shooters such as red dead revolver and sport Sims like FIFA, Tiger Woods Golf and strategy/management games such as SimCity, Age of Empires and Command and Conquer. I have not experience much online network play and tend to play strategy games as a solo player, and console games against other people and now have a few friends with PS3s which I can network play with so I will let you know what I think.

I enjoy games but they are not my main media consumption which is still music and film but with my mobile gaming this has changed a little recently.

Jenkins, H. (2006). The War between effects and meaning: Rethinking the video game debate. In D. Buckingham & R. Willett (Eds.), Digital Generations: Children, Young People, and New Media (pp 19-31). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass.

The Jenkins reading begins by looking at the US government (Limbaugh and Co) and how they see games as having social and psychological effects which possess possible risk factors for consumers in that they may take part in violent or anti-social behavior. The effect of gaming is seen to emerge more or less spontaneously with little conscious effort by the consumer and with little reflexivity.

Meaning in contrast emerges through an active process of interpretation, and displays conscious engagement that can be articulated into words and thus critically examined. Via this a culture develops which can be remediated. Many different interpretations are able to occur which enable the development of new ideas and concepts on the materials.

Thus the argument presented by the US government is that gamers are in fact incapable of reflecting upon and interpreting the media they consume and thus are susceptible to spontaneous and unconscious acts of anti-social behavior as they struggle to differentiate between real & play. I agree that the viewpoint of the US government is incorrect but I do still advocate that media creators need to indicate specific consumer age groups to ensure that the media is consumed by social categories (age groups) who are able to effectively reflect on the content.

The educational significance and value of games is mentioned by Jenkins as games are now growing in importance within youth culture. This is an interesting point as it made me consider how the remediation of games from board games to the computer/console has created a new networked culture of gamers and thus gaming media should probably be assessed for it affects on the existing culture through academic studies.

THE EFFECTS MODEL

Grossman says “kids are being brutalized by over exposure to the representations of violence at an age when they can’t distinguish between representations and reality” I would questions Grossmans points on a few fronts and agree on one of them. I agree that it is sometime difficult even for adults to distinguish visually between a game image and real image of violence as games have become so realistic. However, is it gaming media, or just media in general which is highlighting violent images in the community and thus generating moral panics that is out of balance with the actual threat of violence present in society. Secondly, what does Grossman class as child? This needs to clarify to give context to the argument. Finally, I would have liked to have seen some research presented into the actual of games consumed which are deemed as violent under his assessment. I think there are plenty of what he would deem to be violent games which would fail to be popular so it can’t just be the violence which attracts consumers, and thus I would posit that only an engaging narrative attracts consumers and thus it would be hard to differentiate games from other media which contain violent imagery, except that games engage the consumer through active collective networks and requires problem solving  which take the focus away from the violence to progress the narrative, rather than other passive media consumptions.

Jenkins goes on to discuss how gaming can effect education and that gamers tend to dismiss any media they encounter as fantasy to entertainment  if it is not consistent with what they believe to be true to the values in the real world. Consumer will thus view gaming media through the filter of their own specific world view and thus will interpret and reflect upon the media differently. Jenkins points out that Grossman has missed some key points on the reflexivity of gamers, the context of game play, and not presenting gaming in a meaningful educational context.

THE MEANING MODEL

Gamers can be described as active problem solvers who reflect critically for newer and better solutions.

Games enable players to explore their identity from other cultural contexts and perspectives in a post-modern method where multiple identities can form a fluid evolving self. Thus much like as seen in last week’s study materials where media from different cultural contexts such as the website setup to re-connect Native Americans across several reservations with their cultural history, games are able to do the same thing.

Cultural exploration was shown in the example given by Jenkins of the game Civilization III where they were able to investigate different cultural contexts through the game, showing a great level of reflexivity in game play and thus this kind of reflexivity must also be present in violent games as they explore aspects of their self in that context.

The key point for me in this reading was made when Jenkins discusses just as classroom culture shapes how school learning occurs, the social interactions (wisdom of crowds), can be a critical factor in shaping the meanings of actions within games. As gaming is mainly a social experience as seen in the Thornham reading this would also produce interactions between different cultures s presumably these individuals would also be from varied cultural backgrounds and thus expand the world view of the participants.

When trying to put a meaning to violence Jenkins looks at how violence can be deemed to be found in movies such as Bambi, and questions how violence can be classified so broadly and thus we must develop meaningful distinctions about the representation of violence within all media. And that shielding children from violence would leave them ill equipped for the reality of the real world as we know it at the age of 18. It was seen in last week’s study materials that historically cultures pass down information and stories so that the following generations can understand from actions in the past and can reflect on them within their own cultural and generational context and make informed decisions.

Jenkins moves on to analyses an example by Wright (the designer of Sims) where Wright says games are “perhaps the only medium that allows consumers to feel guilt over the actions of fictional characters” as we are the consumer are in control of the actions of the characters in the game unlike film and TV and thus game consumers reflect on their actions and values and how these values transfer to cyberspace. Thus games like the Sims allow consumers to test out these values in a social space and debate these socially so that values can be transferred to the context of their everyday lives.

It is here where I would question the anonimity of game play as a sticking point. Some see it as a positive and some as a negative – I now see it as a negative as I don’t think we should be able to explore aspects of ourselves free of any repercussions or responsibilities in our offline lives. These lives are converging so it is not right to be identity free online.

GAMES LITERACY

Literacy within gaming media can expand the frameworks and vocabulary player bring to discussions. Thus by allowing remediation of such media, free of copyright and IP restrictions, cultures can develop, investigate and interpret new ideas about gaming media within new contexts, and thus contextualize and recontextualise violence in games thus driving an era of game driven pop cosmopolitanism which reflects on the social contexts of gaming media.

In reflection, Jenkins has presented an argument which asks society to shift its focus from the effects of games to the meaning of games so that we as collective can assess how gamers and game designers are re-thinking the consequences of game media  and reflecting upon them to circumvent the moral panics developed to negatively label gaming in modern society, and in turn positively labeling gaming by popularizing gaming discourse in modern culture so it is better understood across many social contexts. I would like to see further ethnographic and statistical research into all aspects of gaming in modern society to develop these ideas more objectively.

Helen Thornton, (2009). Claiming a stake in the videogame: what grown-ups say to rationalise and normalise gaming. Convergence 15 (2), 135-139.

This reading investigates adult gamers within an ethnographic study into over 100 respondents in the UK and presents the thesis that there is a political and social necessity to include gamers, and there discourse into the research on gaming in order to properly understand its significance in our political and social lives. By doing this Thornham proposes that we will be able to identify certain social structure and thus better understand society and culture as a whole.

In the UK the average age of gamers is 28 with over 51% of gamers in the age bracket of 35-50. To me this lends credence to the tactic discussed last week of Pokémon targeting children with a cultural product which they then continue to consume in later life as presumably these adults played computer /console games in their youth and continued into their adult lives.

There is a paradox present in this reading where games are seen by the industry as part on escapism, fantasy and play, whilst gamers see them as serious rational and logical pastimes. Adult gamers appear to rationalize their game play due to an uneasy relationship between play and adulthood.

In the normalization of gaming by adults there seems to be a stereo type being constructed for the kinds of people or groups who play games. This may relate to Becker’s labeling theory where deviants from societal norms are negatively labeled and then as society solves the issues surrounding this deviances they are indoctrinated back into society and commodified. Once it is commodified it can then converge with many different forms of pop culture to maximize its economic returns.

The quote by Newman is interesting where it is posited that games are culturally complex media artifacts that only function truly within a network of social complexity and thus cannot always be easily manipulated by economic or industry concerns, which I think relates to when strong communities form around games they develop particular sub-cultures which cannot be easily manipulated by business to maximize profit as the participants will rebel against it.

The article focuses on three key points:

1.       How gamers initially rationalize the possession of a console

2.       The way in which they humanize the technology

3.       The way the socialize the technology

RATIONALIZATION:

·         Gaming begins at earlier ages and then develops over a lifetime and thus players have sense of nostalgia

·         There is peer pressure to play within social groups

·         Adults play to fill in blocks of empty time caused by social change etc (move to new city, work)

·         Gaming devices are now converged technological devices capable of allowing access too many different medias (DVD, music, photos, game, internet, TV, film). So frequently a console is rationalized as it is financially better a single console then multiple media devices.

·         Social status – being seen to have the latest new technology. This indicated that gaming is embedded in youth culture as a method of social categorization.

·         The pleasure of gaming seems to be within defined social parameters as only in a social context can you enjoy the pleasure of gaming via the interactions present in social environments.

·         Gamers want to be seen as rational, authoritarian and knowledgeable about gaming media in order to distance themselves from the pleasure and play aspects of gaming and present a more critical reflective viewpoint.

·         Different values are placed on different media – High complexity PC games Vs. less complex Console games

·         Attitudes towards gaming can be shaped by the social frameworks in which a person acts out their role. These frameworks can affect discourses of power and performance as proposed by Goffman.

HUMANIZE:

·         In order for adults to justify gaming users needs to talk about the pleasures in a rational way at a human level by creating a relationship between themselves and the machine and how they interact

·         The power relationships that differ with the game progression and variety keep gamers involved.

·         The game is seen as the more powerful part of the relationship. It is the master which you are trying to learn more about so you can form engagement strategies to progress within the game.

·         The relationship is based on a perceived mutual desire of the gamer and machine to keep on playing.  I think this is how games are intentionally designed to ensure that the media holds the consumers attention though engaging game design.

·         By figuring gaming as a relationship the pleasures gained become non-threatening and thus socially normal an equated with pleasure present within any other relationship.

·         Pleasure is vital for the completion of the game even if adult gamers try to rationalize this pleasure away

SOCIALIZING:

·         Social gaming does not only refer to gaming technology as a social support, but attempts to draw a distinct line between ‘normal’ (social) and ‘geek’ (solo) gamers.

·         Modes of play – solo or social determines this difference as the mode of plays seems significant as the pleasure derived from the play itself.

·         Social gaming is seen as normal as it is inclusive of more than just the game itself, and that any immersion into a solo play fantasy world, to replace the ties in social gaming, is seen as abnormal and a trait of geek gamers who are deviants from rigid socio-cultural codes around gaming and negatively labeled as such.

·         Games like other media are able to be remediated across different cultures as previously seen with TV and film but perhaps have more flexibility in cross cultural mediations due to their educational and learning structures. Games can thus simulate other cultures for users from outside to investigate and evaluate and thus enrich our own culture via a gaming pop cosmopolitanism.

·         By rationalizing and humanizing gaming users are positioning gaming as a social norm.

·         Normal gamers take pleasure out of the real world affects of social gaming (social ties),in contrast to the fantasy realm of the ‘geeks’ who get pleasure the fantasy whilst neglecting the real world

·         Gaming can take a role in social identity through the two roles of the “normal” and “geek”. One is a social insider and one is an outsider.

·         In adult life a person’s working day to day life has to have meaning or purpose. Gaming play however calls into questions these basic structures of adulthood and thus could be a reason why there is a need to justify game play. As an adult they feel they should be doing something that is perceived as meaningful.

The justification of gaming as an adult I can’t really understand within a culture which is largely a pop culture filled with disposable media for participant’s largley from a bourgeois middle class.

I see gaming as a media preference that usually takes place as part of a an interaction with other media types such as film and TV as it already has pre-existing cultural value from the source media. I myself am not a large game player although I do play games related to other media I enjoy such as sports simulations, games related to film narratives, and the like. Perhaps I do this to reinforce my own identity against the original source media to justify my game play. I understand the social aspects of gaming but I think this is where, as Stewart Woods raided in the lecture, that play moves from playing for no real reason or goal, to playing for reasons which are both social and competitive as a way of framing our own identity.

·         Media has moved from a spectatorial activity to a participatory one, driven by new technology facilitated by gaming culture (better PC tech driven by more realistic games)

·         Play has been defined as being voluntary, not serious, separate from the real, unproductive. Promote social groupings

·         All games have ‘rules’ but not all have ‘goals’

-          Rules – mediated environment, customs within game

-          Goals – most adult games have goals to provide a sense of achievement; most games of youth are goalless (i.e. playing house, etc.)

·         Codified – When a set of rules are easily replicated everywhere to the same rules (i.e. sports such as soccer have the same rules globally, as does chess etc)

·         TV killed the innovation of the gaming industry by the remediation of different games with brands from television (i.e. the Simpsons games of life, different versions of monopoly etc) – meaning games stop being created and were just rebranded/remediated.

·         Board games later evolved into new complex simulation/scenario games which drove an innovation into role playing games such as dungeons and dragons. These games have endless goalless scenarios which is still today’s underlying paradigm in modern computerized RPGs.

·         Games are transmedial – can shift between media

·         Computers are excellent at simulation which is what makes then perfectly suited to gaming

·         First games were simulations  of pre-existing games that you played with other people not versus AI

·         Convergence of game players and programmers

·         Computer games also enabled the simulation of AI players which sparked a move from multiplayer to solo play which was the subject of moral panic of people disconnecting from the real world and to machines

·         Gaming is the most popular form of media entertainment and has resulted in a specific culture

·         Games were originally integrated into culture by placing them on TV (game shows, sports) – spectatorial gaming where consumers watch games being played

·         Participation of the audience became important for game play – mediated interaction. And has taken shape in the form of reality TV structured as games (big brother, survivor). These shows provide interaction between audience and program.

·         Game structure was used to create narrative for film as seen in momento where as in a game the main role starts the game not knowing who or where he is and must find out things much like in many games.

·         Almost any successful media no gets remediated into a game so the audience is able to play out the own scenarios and outcomes of the characters they like.

·         Overflow media – Lost example. Books, websites, puzzles, games, DVD all were specifically designed to form a collaborative puzzle that would not have been able to exist before the internet as they are all small pieces of the overall narrative which are easily accessible, distributable amongst individuals and communities online.

·         These overflows form complex narratives which require collaborative problem solving

·         ARG (Alternative Reality Games) - By solving these problems within a game players are in fact uncovering parts of the hidden narrative and are designed to be solved only via a networked community of people.

·         Games can be designed to simulate the behaviors of social systems via virtual scenario play to figure out solutions to real world issues using the affordability’s of a virtual space to play out successful and unsuccessful tactics.

·         Play isn’t a manifestation of culture; it precedes civilization and culture and shapes how they form through the laws, institutions, societal structures which are played out in games first.

·         Gaming is a new form of language that is orientated towards the future – new modes of discourse are possible through games