After the end of a procedural semester, I leave the year with a better understanding of the everyday. Ironically, the study of gaming shines a new light on the idea of reality.
I have never considered procedures to be a form of rhetoric, but now I see how important it is. It's hard to complete my daily routine without considering how it is shaping the way I critique the world around me. Before 813, I felt I had a good grasp on my environment, but the more I ventured into worlds within worlds, it became quickly apparent that reality cannot be defined from within reality. Another contextual reference is required.
Video games offer the ability to experience procedure in a different way. In first life (reality), it's hard to view procedure - your absorbed and typically unaware. WoW and SL offer the ability for people to personify avatars, where it is the user's choice to embrace or to critique the procedure.
Second Life (not a game), offers a procedural experience that is...well...not a procedure at all. Within Second Life, an avatar may do 'virtually' whatever he or she wishes, with minor limitations. Unlike WoW, SL does not require in-game procedures to advance oneself, but people are constrained to an objective-less world.
Learning how to draw in SL was a major plus in 813. SL really opened my mind to consumer-centric designing. The possibilities with SL are phenominal - not just being able to import CAD designs, but assigning scripts and virtually evaluating the usability of objects.
My final reflection on 813 is that I am satisfied...but still hungry for more. I would have liked to have explored more game-design theory. I still crave to know 'why' people enjoy a sprinkle of cartoon in role playing games, where reality is a must in first-person shooters. Why are things the way they are in mainstream games - how can one better understand the design principles? We touched on this area, but never fully developed the topic. In the end, after a semester of analyzing procedural rhetoric, I feel very fortunate to leave with my newfound knowledge.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Rigamarole
Art systems from code-generated displays, in my opinion, is not art. How can a person place a mod within a system and claim it as their own. The discourse within "An Interview with JODI," is astounding - computer dabblers remove textures from a code in attempt to "reveal" the environment. Their findings are cute, yet simplistic. The point of any entertainment (or serious) game is to be removed from reality. We all know that mobs are just number-generating pixels, activated by movement into radii.
Yes, artists dance around the boarders of law - mock copyright, infringe on property, and vandalize...yet the artist is commonly socially accepted. They personalize. It's nice. But, would an urban artist claim their medium (architecture) as their own? I doubt it. The perspective engines discussed in part 2 of the reading seem to take a step too far...it's merely cosmetic, if that.
I battle gibberish like this in my work. I like to think of myself as an artist - painstakingly investing hours, days, and weeks into the geometric design of stuff that may sometimes be nanometers in length. My specific duties are not unique - just like painting with a brush is not unique. But, its my creativity that allows me to continue my work. It's not unusual to visit a trade show and see my work deconstructed - and the creativity falsely claimed for. This is what I see in these "artists." They have pirated a designer's engine [their geometric/statistical design] (their medium), broken it down, and claimed it as their own.
For the chapter on "interdependent Game Development" - I totally disagree. The same bullshit is in the CAD world - there are billions of posts on forums and blogs concerning the difficulty of CAD and that open source tools suck, are not as good, etc. This is all nonsense - CAD just takes time and a spatially-oriented mind to work in. Same goes for animators - so much bitching in the industry about tools and code. Maya takes 6-10 months to adjust to - where your done, your a professional animator. I'm talking about greater than DVD quality, 1080p stuff, photo-realistic design and even throw in some physics generators.
So "can" the small firms make games? Yes. Can they afford the talent? No. Are they willing to learn themselves? Time will tell.
Yes, artists dance around the boarders of law - mock copyright, infringe on property, and vandalize...yet the artist is commonly socially accepted. They personalize. It's nice. But, would an urban artist claim their medium (architecture) as their own? I doubt it. The perspective engines discussed in part 2 of the reading seem to take a step too far...it's merely cosmetic, if that.
I battle gibberish like this in my work. I like to think of myself as an artist - painstakingly investing hours, days, and weeks into the geometric design of stuff that may sometimes be nanometers in length. My specific duties are not unique - just like painting with a brush is not unique. But, its my creativity that allows me to continue my work. It's not unusual to visit a trade show and see my work deconstructed - and the creativity falsely claimed for. This is what I see in these "artists." They have pirated a designer's engine [their geometric/statistical design] (their medium), broken it down, and claimed it as their own.
For the chapter on "interdependent Game Development" - I totally disagree. The same bullshit is in the CAD world - there are billions of posts on forums and blogs concerning the difficulty of CAD and that open source tools suck, are not as good, etc. This is all nonsense - CAD just takes time and a spatially-oriented mind to work in. Same goes for animators - so much bitching in the industry about tools and code. Maya takes 6-10 months to adjust to - where your done, your a professional animator. I'm talking about greater than DVD quality, 1080p stuff, photo-realistic design and even throw in some physics generators.
So "can" the small firms make games? Yes. Can they afford the talent? No. Are they willing to learn themselves? Time will tell.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
What??? Art and Game
A very important aspect of art is the "transformation from non-art to art" (27).
Isn't this the basis of all art - the evolution of material or fragments into a space?
"Three different modes of relation between contemporary fine art and games [are] appropriation, modification, and production of original games" (29)
1. Appropriation is validated by the needlessness of "in-depth" knowledge of technology or rules
e.g. "Space Invaders" as depicted on p31
2. Modification is in the form on hacks and alterations of the code to further fancy the piece
3. Production as a "Invention in the Form of Mods and Hacks"
What the heck is going on here. To define art is to remove art. A game designer is an artist. A game hacker is a hacker. A game modder is a modder.
Isn't this the basis of all art - the evolution of material or fragments into a space?
"Three different modes of relation between contemporary fine art and games [are] appropriation, modification, and production of original games" (29)
1. Appropriation is validated by the needlessness of "in-depth" knowledge of technology or rules
e.g. "Space Invaders" as depicted on p31
2. Modification is in the form on hacks and alterations of the code to further fancy the piece
3. Production as a "Invention in the Form of Mods and Hacks"
What the heck is going on here. To define art is to remove art. A game designer is an artist. A game hacker is a hacker. A game modder is a modder.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Serious taken seriously
I wholeheartedly agree with Bogost on the seriousness of gaming in contemporary society. The "modern education" (p.320), "commercial development" (321), and family values (as illustrated in chapter 9) discussed in the last few chapters are vivid. The procedural rhetoric that all these themes embody are reinforced in many videogames.
Bogost mounts his claim by noting that "to be useful, a serious game must stimulate and involve all players, not merely a subset of players" (321). No matter the procedure, each required party must not only participate but find "value" in the process.
My question for Bogost surrounds family life. I am interested in his opinion on the future of "famligaming"...since exergaming has taken off so well, and clearly Bogost noted the effects of credit on the family, how game could bring back the family. Does he foresee something much more advanced than Animal Life (??).
Bogost mounts his claim by noting that "to be useful, a serious game must stimulate and involve all players, not merely a subset of players" (321). No matter the procedure, each required party must not only participate but find "value" in the process.
My question for Bogost surrounds family life. I am interested in his opinion on the future of "famligaming"...since exergaming has taken off so well, and clearly Bogost noted the effects of credit on the family, how game could bring back the family. Does he foresee something much more advanced than Animal Life (??).
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Comments on Values and Aspirations
Since this is a blog, I'm just going to continue my relaxed, unacademic style.
I think Bogost limited his analysis of values and aspirations in this chapter. A heavy focus on consumerism and religion seem to trump the topics, but his point is well made - most all values and aspirations are procedural (within games).
And going back to my usual commentary on real life, I see this as very true. Bogost's opener on schooling and education is on the money - American schooling is just that, mandating obedience, simple understanding, and limiting creativity.
Maybe that is why we are studying videogames. The proceduralness of our daily lives is 'won' when we become the gamer (or destiny controller). We can relate very well.
The Animal Crossing description on p267 is nightmarish. Bring together families via gaming? Instead of spending 5 pages critiquing the mock-consumerism values in the game, why not mention family values? This is the big news to me.
As for as consumerism, are not video-games pure extensions of this? I don't think you can become more self-actualized (or, excuse me, use your self-actualization time) on video games. I don't know the numbers, but I'd say that most games are not for training purposes, they are pure entertainment. Serious they may be, but entertaining they are. Maybe we should ask Mr. Stein, but it may be worth debating between socializing and shopping vs. solitary video-gaming. Both are outlandishly consuming resources - most importantly your time.
I think Bogost limited his analysis of values and aspirations in this chapter. A heavy focus on consumerism and religion seem to trump the topics, but his point is well made - most all values and aspirations are procedural (within games).
And going back to my usual commentary on real life, I see this as very true. Bogost's opener on schooling and education is on the money - American schooling is just that, mandating obedience, simple understanding, and limiting creativity.
Maybe that is why we are studying videogames. The proceduralness of our daily lives is 'won' when we become the gamer (or destiny controller). We can relate very well.
The Animal Crossing description on p267 is nightmarish. Bring together families via gaming? Instead of spending 5 pages critiquing the mock-consumerism values in the game, why not mention family values? This is the big news to me.
As for as consumerism, are not video-games pure extensions of this? I don't think you can become more self-actualized (or, excuse me, use your self-actualization time) on video games. I don't know the numbers, but I'd say that most games are not for training purposes, they are pure entertainment. Serious they may be, but entertaining they are. Maybe we should ask Mr. Stein, but it may be worth debating between socializing and shopping vs. solitary video-gaming. Both are outlandishly consuming resources - most importantly your time.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Procedural Literacy
Education
NIU: Mechanical Engineering Video Game
My fav quote from Bogost in this chapter (241)
"They [games] situate meaning in a multimodal space through embodied experiences to solve problems and reflect on the intricacies of the design of imagined worlds and the design of both real and imagined social relationshipa nd identities in the modern world"
Bogost defines procedural literacy by "the ability to read and write processes, to engage procedural representation and aesthetics, to understand the interplay between the culturally-embedded practice of human meaning-making and technically-mediated processes" (245)
Education in procedural literacy is legit - I concur with Bogost. Check out basic problem solving, competition, and most importantly - spatial relationships.
As for procedural history: I agree with Bogost - games allow the user to interact with items in different ways, experience things in different mediums, and allows unique and special interactions. promoting critiques that would not be done in the real world.
Class Notes:
Go Meta: the ability to teach a holistic understanding of the subject.
NIU: Mechanical Engineering Video Game
My fav quote from Bogost in this chapter (241)
"They [games] situate meaning in a multimodal space through embodied experiences to solve problems and reflect on the intricacies of the design of imagined worlds and the design of both real and imagined social relationshipa nd identities in the modern world"
Bogost defines procedural literacy by "the ability to read and write processes, to engage procedural representation and aesthetics, to understand the interplay between the culturally-embedded practice of human meaning-making and technically-mediated processes" (245)
Education in procedural literacy is legit - I concur with Bogost. Check out basic problem solving, competition, and most importantly - spatial relationships.
As for procedural history: I agree with Bogost - games allow the user to interact with items in different ways, experience things in different mediums, and allows unique and special interactions. promoting critiques that would not be done in the real world.
Class Notes:
Go Meta: the ability to teach a holistic understanding of the subject.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Licensing and Product Placement
I fail to see how the licensing and product placing of video games differs from any other industry. Video games seem to closely mimic the movie and online-video industry.
The Procedural Rhetoric found in the Japanese fast food games were interesting...the level of detail in the prep of some food versus just scooping something from a prepared product.
The Procedural Rhetoric found in the Japanese fast food games were interesting...the level of detail in the prep of some food versus just scooping something from a prepared product.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
