Are video games art? Is that even a decent question? Because that answer is clearly based on how you define art. A broad definition of art will allow video games to be art while a narrow definition will rule them out as art. And those definitions will not help us know how to judge the art of video games.
In searching for a better way to judge video games as art I learned that the most recent art movements are Computer Art and Relational Art. Computer Art is easy to understand and recognize. Relational Art emerged in the late 1990s. Nicholas Bourriaud (1998), an art critic, developed the idea of Relational Aesthetics which judges artworks on the basis of the inter-human relations which they represent, produce or prompt.
This idea intrigued me. Are video games relational art to any degree? And how would I know?
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Friday, May 22, 2009
Week 8 - War and Games
McLeroy (2008) detailed a brief history of military gaming. Of note, the 1st century AD miniature battlefields and replicas have been in use throughout most of the succeeding centuries. In the mid 17th century, Weikmann developed a warfare board game, “Konigspiel,” to assist visualization of forces. This and subsequent warboard games allowed players to estimate battlefield actions using probability and other analytical mathematics. The last century saw further advancements in warboard games that increased ability to see more global implications of war actions.
Computers begin to help play these warboard games in 1948 by doing all the math and allowing the players to focus on the tactical movements. When computers became more adept, their calculations surpassed human abilities.It was only natural that computers were used by the military for simulation and training. In particular, McLeroy reported on DARWARS Ambush. This Army game provides scenarios for the soldiers and allows them to problem solve in a stress free environment.
The Associated Press (2003) reported that the Army, CIA, and the Army were using or planning to use video games to recruit and train personnel. Most of the games seek to interface more selectively with prospective and new recruits since most of this population knows how to use a game pad. Of course there is the advantage that there is no health lost and no heavy equipment involved. At least one application hopes to train leaders. The CIA game hopes to teach their analysts to look at the world from the perspective of the terrorists and to learn to expect the unexpected. Characteristically, the CIA was not planning to release its game commercially.
The elements of surprise and better technology have often been the deciding factors in victory. Thus nations who value education and technology have survived to write the histories and others have faded. It is no surprise that military and technology are intertwined. It is impossible to say which came first. The benefits of increased technology and education, not to mention a well trained veteran workforce, continue to benefit nations in peacetime as well. Therefore, nations will continue to fund military and consequently technology. Technology sometimes backfires and wars always backfire for at least one of the participating governments. Video games are in flux development. It would be nice if we could get to the point that the actual battles could be virtual, with no blood spilled. But then there would be the issue of cheating.
In hopes of providing its armies with better skills and coping, the US Army provides some of its recruits with a role playing simulation. The Full Battle Rattle is a movie about a a role playing simulation, located in the Mojave desert, where actors and setting provide a simulated Iraq. It traces the progress of an Army battalion for 3 weeks in this setting. I was able to locate the actual video used by the military that describes the Fort Irwin Mission. Please click on the link to view:
NTC Mission Video
I didn’t see the movie, but watching the video brought a couple thoughts to my mind. Mainly I worried whether the simulation would make the soldiers more or less humanistic. It should reduce the culture shock somewhat. I also worried about the mental toll on the actors there. I just wonder how it would affect your life to pretend you were in a war day in and day out. There was one light note for me. I saw an IKEA dresser in one scene. Even though the simulation isn’t a video game, it is a technology that has role players, soldiers who are pretending to be soldiers, settings that are realistic, and scenarios that may or may not be quest like. Just like a video game, the soldiers will win the simulation and move on to a higher level, i.e. the real war game.
Derene (2008) reported on a situation of life following art, i.e. real war technology following video game technology. Specifically, the Lightweight Stabilized M240 WeaponSystem, a swiveling rooftop gun mount for Humvees had an interface that was similar to a game controller, and in fact had an alternate interface that was a military spec version of an Xbox 360 gamepad. This interface is ideal for military use because it is portable, durable, and ergonomic. While there is a temptation to criticize this development as a high jacking of something fun for something violent, in truth, children have historically played with weapon replicas. And if they don’t have something handy, they will invent something. I am surely not the only one who saw a player piano roll (now antique) as being quite similar to Peter Pan’s sword if you took off one of the ends and all the paper. The duels were great by the way. And if the weapons are better user interfaced, well it is our technological advantage for the moment. The other side will soon have it too.
But the toll of war is never told in the games. Alexander (2009) reported that the video game Six Days in Fallujah was withdrawn by Konami after the game’s real world Iraq setting caused questions and controversy. The game was initiated when returning Marines asked Atomic Games to tell their story through the "most relevant media," a video game. According to Wikipedia, part of the problems stemmed from the significant immersion in the game . . .to the point that it seemed real. Benito (2009) the game developer, explained the setting, "These are scary places, with scary things happening inside of them." He describes the game as plunging into the unknown, with darkened interiors, and 'surprises' left by the insurgency. The goal was to create high suspense and terror. Apparently, the controversy against the game comes from the idea that the situation should not be trivialized in a video game and that it could lead to Muslim retaliation. The game is still in development by Atomic but will not be carried by Konami. I think this game is very interesting because the game seems to be trying to make a serious statement. The very attempt moves video games from mere entertainment to social commentary and the controvesy that the game has generated might be considered a validation of that fact.
I don’t know if the game will make a difference. But some of the truth about war needs to be told. Real war sucks. There is no reset. In real life, we are not well equipped to deal with the actuality and finality of violence. Video games can give better war survivability by training for cooperative play, increased cognitive and problem solving skills, and user interface mastery. Simulations may or may not increase coping. However, to this point games are not really likely to provide coping skills and moral decision making skills for real war. War is an adult activity and requires serious adult coping skills for dealing with death and treachery.
Computers begin to help play these warboard games in 1948 by doing all the math and allowing the players to focus on the tactical movements. When computers became more adept, their calculations surpassed human abilities.It was only natural that computers were used by the military for simulation and training. In particular, McLeroy reported on DARWARS Ambush. This Army game provides scenarios for the soldiers and allows them to problem solve in a stress free environment.
The Associated Press (2003) reported that the Army, CIA, and the Army were using or planning to use video games to recruit and train personnel. Most of the games seek to interface more selectively with prospective and new recruits since most of this population knows how to use a game pad. Of course there is the advantage that there is no health lost and no heavy equipment involved. At least one application hopes to train leaders. The CIA game hopes to teach their analysts to look at the world from the perspective of the terrorists and to learn to expect the unexpected. Characteristically, the CIA was not planning to release its game commercially.
The elements of surprise and better technology have often been the deciding factors in victory. Thus nations who value education and technology have survived to write the histories and others have faded. It is no surprise that military and technology are intertwined. It is impossible to say which came first. The benefits of increased technology and education, not to mention a well trained veteran workforce, continue to benefit nations in peacetime as well. Therefore, nations will continue to fund military and consequently technology. Technology sometimes backfires and wars always backfire for at least one of the participating governments. Video games are in flux development. It would be nice if we could get to the point that the actual battles could be virtual, with no blood spilled. But then there would be the issue of cheating.
In hopes of providing its armies with better skills and coping, the US Army provides some of its recruits with a role playing simulation. The Full Battle Rattle is a movie about a a role playing simulation, located in the Mojave desert, where actors and setting provide a simulated Iraq. It traces the progress of an Army battalion for 3 weeks in this setting. I was able to locate the actual video used by the military that describes the Fort Irwin Mission. Please click on the link to view:
NTC Mission Video
I didn’t see the movie, but watching the video brought a couple thoughts to my mind. Mainly I worried whether the simulation would make the soldiers more or less humanistic. It should reduce the culture shock somewhat. I also worried about the mental toll on the actors there. I just wonder how it would affect your life to pretend you were in a war day in and day out. There was one light note for me. I saw an IKEA dresser in one scene. Even though the simulation isn’t a video game, it is a technology that has role players, soldiers who are pretending to be soldiers, settings that are realistic, and scenarios that may or may not be quest like. Just like a video game, the soldiers will win the simulation and move on to a higher level, i.e. the real war game.
Derene (2008) reported on a situation of life following art, i.e. real war technology following video game technology. Specifically, the Lightweight Stabilized M240 WeaponSystem, a swiveling rooftop gun mount for Humvees had an interface that was similar to a game controller, and in fact had an alternate interface that was a military spec version of an Xbox 360 gamepad. This interface is ideal for military use because it is portable, durable, and ergonomic. While there is a temptation to criticize this development as a high jacking of something fun for something violent, in truth, children have historically played with weapon replicas. And if they don’t have something handy, they will invent something. I am surely not the only one who saw a player piano roll (now antique) as being quite similar to Peter Pan’s sword if you took off one of the ends and all the paper. The duels were great by the way. And if the weapons are better user interfaced, well it is our technological advantage for the moment. The other side will soon have it too.
But the toll of war is never told in the games. Alexander (2009) reported that the video game Six Days in Fallujah was withdrawn by Konami after the game’s real world Iraq setting caused questions and controversy. The game was initiated when returning Marines asked Atomic Games to tell their story through the "most relevant media," a video game. According to Wikipedia, part of the problems stemmed from the significant immersion in the game . . .to the point that it seemed real. Benito (2009) the game developer, explained the setting, "These are scary places, with scary things happening inside of them." He describes the game as plunging into the unknown, with darkened interiors, and 'surprises' left by the insurgency. The goal was to create high suspense and terror. Apparently, the controversy against the game comes from the idea that the situation should not be trivialized in a video game and that it could lead to Muslim retaliation. The game is still in development by Atomic but will not be carried by Konami. I think this game is very interesting because the game seems to be trying to make a serious statement. The very attempt moves video games from mere entertainment to social commentary and the controvesy that the game has generated might be considered a validation of that fact.
I don’t know if the game will make a difference. But some of the truth about war needs to be told. Real war sucks. There is no reset. In real life, we are not well equipped to deal with the actuality and finality of violence. Video games can give better war survivability by training for cooperative play, increased cognitive and problem solving skills, and user interface mastery. Simulations may or may not increase coping. However, to this point games are not really likely to provide coping skills and moral decision making skills for real war. War is an adult activity and requires serious adult coping skills for dealing with death and treachery.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Week 7 - Virtual Interactivity
If I had to pick one word to describe the common thread from our Lit 220 week 7 readings it would be inter *something.*
To start, Heek reported that gold farming, as a case of scarcity and utility in game creating value in the real world, is a billion dollar luminal business. Heek commented that game designers have patched or created obstacles to gold farming with mixed success. This is a feedback loop from designer to game to player to gamer culture to the analogue reality and back to the game designer that is a perfect example of interlacing virtual and analogue economies. Heek commented on the actuality of the industry, estimating dollar values, work conditions, and social ramifications of the practice. Of note, gold farmers themselves receive less than half of the analogue monies for their virtual labors. There is bias generated against the perceived race of the farmers and they are subjected to being killed repeatedly by regular players. It should be added however that regular players will joyfully kill each other (Horde vs Ally) in the same manner if a scarce resource is being monopolized by any particular individual.
In addition, I would submit that gold farming, at least within theWorld of Warcraft, is only a temporary fix and does not substitute for actual experience or social connections. No amount of gear can substitute for poor play or bad etiquette. Gold farming is not a game for the laborers. When I first ranted against annoying gold farmers in a certain locale, a fellow player suggested that I be more sympathetic to the poor individual who had to sit there forever working on the same stuff. Technically, farming gold or using farmed gold is cheating, and is clearly against the rules cited in most end user license agreements (EULAs).
Consuelo’s introduction is aptly titled, asking whether cheating or not is even the question. I believe the issue is forever locked down under the crossfire of ethical behavior expectations and human survival instincts. Consuelo attempted to define cheating as an advantageous distortion of perceived reality and further discussed some cheating ramifications. Setting aside the philosophical problems with Consuelo’s definition (e.g. what is the difference between perception and reality, and further, what is a distortion of perception anyway?) we are left with an ethical boundary of honesty, specifically that not following game rules in an honest to “real” reality way is cheating. Consuelo suggested that gamers who cheat are denied the real victory over the game. The moral victory and ethical upmanship for those who do not cheat are implicit in this statement.
Importantly, Consuelo developed gaming capital as a lateral concept. He specifically noted that gamers share common symbols in a specific game, thus qualifying them as a subculture and further, that a gaming capital, a system of preferences and dispositions, is a way to understand the gaming phenomenon. He makes the point that the development of gaming capital occurs within a larger framework and that such capital influences the world of games as well as digital culture in general.
After that brief and refreshing foray into cultural liquidity, Consuelo cites Huizinga who stated that the rules of a game are binding and when they are transgressed the whole play-world collapses. This is not always true. For example, in sports, when rules are transgressed, penalties are incurred. The penalties are part of the actual game. Any sports enthusiast can cite historical examples and any street player knows how to make it look like the other player committed a foul. On the other hand, Bowyer, also cited by Consuelo, argues that cheating is a “normal” (Consuelo’s quotes) part of society. Consuelo continues to quote Bowyer, carefully adding selected quote marks, revealing his own cheating bias. I think Consuelo made important parts about the general interactivity within games, but I think that he would have made a little more progress with his arguments against cheating if he would have addressed the fact that it takes a cheater and a cheatee to complete the cheating transaction.
Chen discussed social games, particularly Facebook, or similar ventures, and the games within. She noted that within the non-anonymous framework, social dynamics have more nuance than MMORPGs. Particularly that you have to play the games a little differently. Facebook provides opportunities to notice community leanings, preferences, sickness, health, game activities etc., with more accuracy than the vicinity of a living in a neighborhood allowing for a greater sense of community knowledge. However, this knowledge is based on self report. I have noticed varied degrees of self report in Facebook. And varied degrees of how much information people really want. One friend of mine stated “I just don’t care.”
To the point, here is a Facebook rant:
Finally, Sotamaa discussed gamer-made modifications of computer games, noting that tools and technology enable increased intermediality. Specifically, he analyzed gamer-made designs and mods, i.e. custom content. Examples of gaming culture also include machinima, muds, online gaming, blogs, clan homepages, and walkthroughs. In addition he listed new sets of practices among gamers, particularly etiquettes and social expectations. Which brings me to the original point . . . inter “activity,” inter “communication,” inter “play, “ etc. are all words that describe the phenomenon. You might even describe the gold farming as inter “cheating” since it involves a transaction connecting two liminal activities.
So the main point is that there is increased inter activity within virtual realms. What does that mean to analogue reality? Less cost and more communication? A more vibrant democracy? A fatter population? A higher standard of living across the globe or an increased disparity between socioeconomic classes? I don't know myself. But I am hoping for the best.
To start, Heek reported that gold farming, as a case of scarcity and utility in game creating value in the real world, is a billion dollar luminal business. Heek commented that game designers have patched or created obstacles to gold farming with mixed success. This is a feedback loop from designer to game to player to gamer culture to the analogue reality and back to the game designer that is a perfect example of interlacing virtual and analogue economies. Heek commented on the actuality of the industry, estimating dollar values, work conditions, and social ramifications of the practice. Of note, gold farmers themselves receive less than half of the analogue monies for their virtual labors. There is bias generated against the perceived race of the farmers and they are subjected to being killed repeatedly by regular players. It should be added however that regular players will joyfully kill each other (Horde vs Ally) in the same manner if a scarce resource is being monopolized by any particular individual.
In addition, I would submit that gold farming, at least within theWorld of Warcraft, is only a temporary fix and does not substitute for actual experience or social connections. No amount of gear can substitute for poor play or bad etiquette. Gold farming is not a game for the laborers. When I first ranted against annoying gold farmers in a certain locale, a fellow player suggested that I be more sympathetic to the poor individual who had to sit there forever working on the same stuff. Technically, farming gold or using farmed gold is cheating, and is clearly against the rules cited in most end user license agreements (EULAs).
Consuelo’s introduction is aptly titled, asking whether cheating or not is even the question. I believe the issue is forever locked down under the crossfire of ethical behavior expectations and human survival instincts. Consuelo attempted to define cheating as an advantageous distortion of perceived reality and further discussed some cheating ramifications. Setting aside the philosophical problems with Consuelo’s definition (e.g. what is the difference between perception and reality, and further, what is a distortion of perception anyway?) we are left with an ethical boundary of honesty, specifically that not following game rules in an honest to “real” reality way is cheating. Consuelo suggested that gamers who cheat are denied the real victory over the game. The moral victory and ethical upmanship for those who do not cheat are implicit in this statement.
Importantly, Consuelo developed gaming capital as a lateral concept. He specifically noted that gamers share common symbols in a specific game, thus qualifying them as a subculture and further, that a gaming capital, a system of preferences and dispositions, is a way to understand the gaming phenomenon. He makes the point that the development of gaming capital occurs within a larger framework and that such capital influences the world of games as well as digital culture in general.
After that brief and refreshing foray into cultural liquidity, Consuelo cites Huizinga who stated that the rules of a game are binding and when they are transgressed the whole play-world collapses. This is not always true. For example, in sports, when rules are transgressed, penalties are incurred. The penalties are part of the actual game. Any sports enthusiast can cite historical examples and any street player knows how to make it look like the other player committed a foul. On the other hand, Bowyer, also cited by Consuelo, argues that cheating is a “normal” (Consuelo’s quotes) part of society. Consuelo continues to quote Bowyer, carefully adding selected quote marks, revealing his own cheating bias. I think Consuelo made important parts about the general interactivity within games, but I think that he would have made a little more progress with his arguments against cheating if he would have addressed the fact that it takes a cheater and a cheatee to complete the cheating transaction.
Chen discussed social games, particularly Facebook, or similar ventures, and the games within. She noted that within the non-anonymous framework, social dynamics have more nuance than MMORPGs. Particularly that you have to play the games a little differently. Facebook provides opportunities to notice community leanings, preferences, sickness, health, game activities etc., with more accuracy than the vicinity of a living in a neighborhood allowing for a greater sense of community knowledge. However, this knowledge is based on self report. I have noticed varied degrees of self report in Facebook. And varied degrees of how much information people really want. One friend of mine stated “I just don’t care.”
To the point, here is a Facebook rant:
Finally, Sotamaa discussed gamer-made modifications of computer games, noting that tools and technology enable increased intermediality. Specifically, he analyzed gamer-made designs and mods, i.e. custom content. Examples of gaming culture also include machinima, muds, online gaming, blogs, clan homepages, and walkthroughs. In addition he listed new sets of practices among gamers, particularly etiquettes and social expectations. Which brings me to the original point . . . inter “activity,” inter “communication,” inter “play, “ etc. are all words that describe the phenomenon. You might even describe the gold farming as inter “cheating” since it involves a transaction connecting two liminal activities.
So the main point is that there is increased inter activity within virtual realms. What does that mean to analogue reality? Less cost and more communication? A more vibrant democracy? A fatter population? A higher standard of living across the globe or an increased disparity between socioeconomic classes? I don't know myself. But I am hoping for the best.
Friday, May 8, 2009
Week 6 - Take Two - Interconnectivity
Take your pick of which post you want to read. Thank goodness I saw Tomica’s post and realized I did not read the right documents for this week. Three cheers for Tomica for posting early. And three cheers for the internet and letting me find out in time to do something about my mistake.
To start I tried playing the games while I printed up the reading material. So far I tried to play three of the games: Fat World, Finding Zoe, and one I tried a couple of weeks ago about finding water if you live in a refugee camp. I liked the premise of each of these games and the graphics weren’t too bad. Fat World was engaging and cute. I was looking forward to plumping up my avatar. But when I opened the tutorial I found out I had to visit about 20 places in town before I could start. Then I found out my avatar moved so slowly it would take at least an hour just to get through the town. That was a complete turn off. It isn’t that cute. So then I tried Finding Zoe. Graphics were really cute on this one. I liked how they used note paper and had cell phones with text messages and doodling pages. But again, too slow. My girl just hung out with a boy forever before she started looking for Zoe. Maybe this is real life, but girl . . .you need to get moving if you are going to find Zoe. Hurry up! I had the same feeling on the water game, I couldn’t get anyone to move fast enough to get the jobs done in a reasonable length of time.
So my point is that I think the games are good, but I also think that the point the game is trying to make could be made in much less time. Or they could make the point many times over in the same amount of time. I don’t think any kid has a longer attention span than I do either.
Whitworth and Friedman (2009) presented information about the importance of expanding theory and knowledge and problems associated with that process. Seems like in this age of expanding knowledge, the transfer of knowledge to the people who need to know is problematic. Historically, the system for this transfer has been via professional journals, specific to the subject. In the very olden days, people would go to the university library, find the one copy of the journal with the article they wanted and then go to the copy machine and copy the pages they wanted at 5 or 10 cents a page. It was assumed that by the time you were in a profession, you could afford to buy that journal for yourself. With the internet, everyone hoped that materials would be easy to access online and for free. Woot! Wouldn’t that be great. If someone learned something really important everyone could find out about it and use it. For a while that was true. But it didn’t last. Most professional journal articles require a fee to read them. PubMed, mentioned in the article, is a very fine cross reference system for medical information. But try finding a whole article. Not likely. Sad to say, I have written many a paper based on abstracts. Yes, I know, someone has to pay. But really, I can’t pay anyway, and how does it help everyone if only the rich people can have the knowledge. That is what is feudal to me.
I like the KES system. I like that it has quality indicators and hopes to publish all submissions. I like the reader evaluation too. I do think that people in general need to learn to read more critically though and that this could be a problem. Many people seem to think if it is in print it is true . . .and there is nothing further from the truth. One problem I can see with KES is that it will need to be flawlessly indexed. Key words must be absolutely on target and there needs to be enough key words to distinguish that particular paper.
Rycroft’s (2007) title page made me laugh. A “long project” indeed. Please note on his second page the excellent abstract, 10 keywords, a citation, and a URL. That is as good as it gets. According to the abstract, young adults are building a new political culture that is more open than cultures of the past. Rycroft posits that this may move society closer to a true democracy. He bases the new culture on the increased interactivity and intercommunicability facilitated by the technologies of the internet and virtual worlds.
Young people prefer the Internet for their news source and participate in online communities. Rycroft points to a multiplicity of public spheres evidenced in online forums and references Habermass’s (2004) association of public spheres with a vibrant democracy.
Rycroft studied several populations of young adults. He observed some in public and surveyed others. He joined Facebook. He noticed a lot of multitasking. He was interested in online avatars and similations. He joined “Second Life” and he felt that it functioned much like real life. His descriptions of the political activities were interesting. He brought up the very democratic possibility of multiple concurrent conversations in addition.
Basically, Rycroft did an excellent job of telling how young adults are using the Internet to further intercommunication currently.
I think the idea of belonging to multiple communities is most interesting. Because it allows a person not only to see a situation from multiple frameworks but also to contribute to multiple frameworks. In a way, belonging to one community reminds me of living in a small village where everyone gets to speak his opinion and everyone listens to that opinion. Then everyone talks about what was said and evaluates it publicly. They can gather more information. In virtual communities, people can respond more quickly. No one has to say "Oh I will read that paper and get back to you in two weeks on it." What I imagine is that they will open a new window while they are chatting and look it up and then talk about it right there. And people can be talking to many others at the same time. And all the information will just flow around and kind of congeal when it feels right to everyone. That would be a true democracy. And then multiply that by however many spheres there are.
Another really great thing is that there could be way less discrimination based on external factors. Because if you don’t know any of those things about someone, you can’t discriminate. What will distinguish people is the way they act. If they are rude, selfish, or prejudiced they will not have as much influence.
Kahne, Middaugh, and Evans’ (2008) study discussed the civic potential of video games. They were very clear in their desire to increase the propensity of young people to participate in civic activities including awareness and participation. They found that many people in games did participate in guilds and did help other members though I didn’t get the sense that this had a direct correlate in the real world. It might though.
However, I don’t think that humans are all that altruistic. I would submit that while there is a rare person who is gentle, kind, and giving of time and substance, most gamers realize that they will not reach their goals without guild participation. In some games, you will be repeatedly killed without being in a guild. So in a sense, it is the small village model. Furthermore, guilds expect you to help newbies. It is part of bringing up the next crop to help everyone out. Being civic minded in a village is a matter of survival in a cruel world. This may transfer to real life experience. Who can say? I do think the researchers would have more information if they got inside the game themselves however. The researchers pointed out that females do not spend as much time in video games as males and therefore will not have the same experience. I don’t know if this is lamentable or not.
One of the problems I had as I skimmed this reading was that I guess I am really not very civic minded myself. I don’t mind doing a neighborly thing, but I absolutely hate public meetings. If there is something civic I need to do or learn I would like to do it in my own time frame. Sad to say, I am fairly skeptical of the whole process. As such, I thought the study was a little biased in favor of the absolute value of civic mindedness. Thank goodness everyone is not like me.
To start I tried playing the games while I printed up the reading material. So far I tried to play three of the games: Fat World, Finding Zoe, and one I tried a couple of weeks ago about finding water if you live in a refugee camp. I liked the premise of each of these games and the graphics weren’t too bad. Fat World was engaging and cute. I was looking forward to plumping up my avatar. But when I opened the tutorial I found out I had to visit about 20 places in town before I could start. Then I found out my avatar moved so slowly it would take at least an hour just to get through the town. That was a complete turn off. It isn’t that cute. So then I tried Finding Zoe. Graphics were really cute on this one. I liked how they used note paper and had cell phones with text messages and doodling pages. But again, too slow. My girl just hung out with a boy forever before she started looking for Zoe. Maybe this is real life, but girl . . .you need to get moving if you are going to find Zoe. Hurry up! I had the same feeling on the water game, I couldn’t get anyone to move fast enough to get the jobs done in a reasonable length of time.
So my point is that I think the games are good, but I also think that the point the game is trying to make could be made in much less time. Or they could make the point many times over in the same amount of time. I don’t think any kid has a longer attention span than I do either.
Whitworth and Friedman (2009) presented information about the importance of expanding theory and knowledge and problems associated with that process. Seems like in this age of expanding knowledge, the transfer of knowledge to the people who need to know is problematic. Historically, the system for this transfer has been via professional journals, specific to the subject. In the very olden days, people would go to the university library, find the one copy of the journal with the article they wanted and then go to the copy machine and copy the pages they wanted at 5 or 10 cents a page. It was assumed that by the time you were in a profession, you could afford to buy that journal for yourself. With the internet, everyone hoped that materials would be easy to access online and for free. Woot! Wouldn’t that be great. If someone learned something really important everyone could find out about it and use it. For a while that was true. But it didn’t last. Most professional journal articles require a fee to read them. PubMed, mentioned in the article, is a very fine cross reference system for medical information. But try finding a whole article. Not likely. Sad to say, I have written many a paper based on abstracts. Yes, I know, someone has to pay. But really, I can’t pay anyway, and how does it help everyone if only the rich people can have the knowledge. That is what is feudal to me.
I like the KES system. I like that it has quality indicators and hopes to publish all submissions. I like the reader evaluation too. I do think that people in general need to learn to read more critically though and that this could be a problem. Many people seem to think if it is in print it is true . . .and there is nothing further from the truth. One problem I can see with KES is that it will need to be flawlessly indexed. Key words must be absolutely on target and there needs to be enough key words to distinguish that particular paper.
Rycroft’s (2007) title page made me laugh. A “long project” indeed. Please note on his second page the excellent abstract, 10 keywords, a citation, and a URL. That is as good as it gets. According to the abstract, young adults are building a new political culture that is more open than cultures of the past. Rycroft posits that this may move society closer to a true democracy. He bases the new culture on the increased interactivity and intercommunicability facilitated by the technologies of the internet and virtual worlds.
Young people prefer the Internet for their news source and participate in online communities. Rycroft points to a multiplicity of public spheres evidenced in online forums and references Habermass’s (2004) association of public spheres with a vibrant democracy.
Rycroft studied several populations of young adults. He observed some in public and surveyed others. He joined Facebook. He noticed a lot of multitasking. He was interested in online avatars and similations. He joined “Second Life” and he felt that it functioned much like real life. His descriptions of the political activities were interesting. He brought up the very democratic possibility of multiple concurrent conversations in addition.
Basically, Rycroft did an excellent job of telling how young adults are using the Internet to further intercommunication currently.
I think the idea of belonging to multiple communities is most interesting. Because it allows a person not only to see a situation from multiple frameworks but also to contribute to multiple frameworks. In a way, belonging to one community reminds me of living in a small village where everyone gets to speak his opinion and everyone listens to that opinion. Then everyone talks about what was said and evaluates it publicly. They can gather more information. In virtual communities, people can respond more quickly. No one has to say "Oh I will read that paper and get back to you in two weeks on it." What I imagine is that they will open a new window while they are chatting and look it up and then talk about it right there. And people can be talking to many others at the same time. And all the information will just flow around and kind of congeal when it feels right to everyone. That would be a true democracy. And then multiply that by however many spheres there are.
Another really great thing is that there could be way less discrimination based on external factors. Because if you don’t know any of those things about someone, you can’t discriminate. What will distinguish people is the way they act. If they are rude, selfish, or prejudiced they will not have as much influence.
Kahne, Middaugh, and Evans’ (2008) study discussed the civic potential of video games. They were very clear in their desire to increase the propensity of young people to participate in civic activities including awareness and participation. They found that many people in games did participate in guilds and did help other members though I didn’t get the sense that this had a direct correlate in the real world. It might though.
However, I don’t think that humans are all that altruistic. I would submit that while there is a rare person who is gentle, kind, and giving of time and substance, most gamers realize that they will not reach their goals without guild participation. In some games, you will be repeatedly killed without being in a guild. So in a sense, it is the small village model. Furthermore, guilds expect you to help newbies. It is part of bringing up the next crop to help everyone out. Being civic minded in a village is a matter of survival in a cruel world. This may transfer to real life experience. Who can say? I do think the researchers would have more information if they got inside the game themselves however. The researchers pointed out that females do not spend as much time in video games as males and therefore will not have the same experience. I don’t know if this is lamentable or not.
One of the problems I had as I skimmed this reading was that I guess I am really not very civic minded myself. I don’t mind doing a neighborly thing, but I absolutely hate public meetings. If there is something civic I need to do or learn I would like to do it in my own time frame. Sad to say, I am fairly skeptical of the whole process. As such, I thought the study was a little biased in favor of the absolute value of civic mindedness. Thank goodness everyone is not like me.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
Week 6 Video Game Addiction? -> Maybe Harmful? -> Jury is Out
In essence, most of the readings supporting video game addiction were flawed. I am sighing, because I know from personal experience (not me, just people I know, haha) that video game addictive type behavior really does exist. The trouble is that there is some trouble, but no one can pin it down precisely and without bias. Cause and effect are not clear and only one author explains benefits. At the end of this post I have added how I use WoW in a way that might be considered addictive.
READINGS ANALYSIS
Hauge and Gentile (2003) researched 607 8th and 9th graders and reported several behavioral variances for students who had addictive behaviors related to video games.These researchers very precisely stated that addiction is associated with adjustment problems. However, that was their absolute last statement of the article and I think their presentation is wrong. There is no question that any addiction in that population is going to be associated with adjustment problems. In addition, that population is always going to have a percentage of adjustment problems without any addictions. While I think the survey was good, and that the researchers did find an important association, I balk at their presentation of the material. The title of such material should be pristine in its implications and not sensational at all. Perhaps a more valid title would be “Adolescent addictive behavior related to video games is associated with adjustment problems.” That is the take home truth and that should be the title. This survey gets one blip on the video game addiction radar.
Howze (2009) makes a similar argument to mine. She reported that an author (lamentably unnamed) analyzed a Harris survey and found that “8 percent of the children . . . responded in a way that fits with a clinical diagnosis of an addiction” and that they were more likely to do badly at school than “non-addicted” regardless of how much time spent playing games. Howze points out that there is not a clear cut cause and that more study is needed. While I would like to give a radar blip for addiction to this article, I think the evidence of the unnamed researcher is somewhat invalidated by (a) not attaching his name to his work (or did Howze do this to downplay the evidence?), (b) doing secondary research on primary research. In spite of this, I still think this article gets one blip on the video game addiction radar.
Eakes (n.d) as a spokesman for Mothers Against Violence in America (MAVA) clearly states the point that violent video games are an ideal environment in which to learn violence. Her main goal in this essay is to encourage parents to be aware of the content of the video games their children are playing. That is honorable, and gets one blip on radar. One of her supporting statements, however, that violence is the most prevalent health risk for children and adolescents is absolutely not true. I was able to locate the Center for Disease Control (CDC) 2005 statistics on the number of deaths from selected causes by age, and found that for the age group 5 through 14 years of age, transport injuries (mainly motor vehicle accidents) remains the most prevalent health risk. In 2005, there were 2415 transport related deaths and 613 self harm or homicide.
It makes you wonder if the kids would be safer if they stayed home playing video games.
Eakes references 3,500 research studies that mainly show that the more violence one sees the more likely one is to be violent. This may be a valid statement and deserves another blip, for a total of two blips on the addiction radar.
The World Science Staff (2008) examined a study by Ko (2008) of 20 World of Warcraft(WoW)players that compared brain scans of 10 addicted players with 10 non addicted players, stating that the “cue-induced” gaming urges draw on a network of brain pathways “similar to that of the cue-induced craving in substance dependence.” This is a fairly solid piece of evidence that World of Warcraft may have addicting qualities. The sample is very small, however, the test is very expensive. Just the same, this piece of evidence gets two blips on the addiction radar.
Leach’s (2008) concern over World of Warcraft addiction is not well substantiated. His first piece of evidence is long ques for 2nd expansion pack for WoW. He did not state that the first editions come with extras that you cannot get later. He also did not take into account how many first editions were preordered to be delivered the next day with the same perks. Furthermore, his quote from Richard Graham, is horrifying in its implications. I actually saw his quote in a box on an advertising site, but I can’t remember where and I laughed for quite a while. Graham should also be horrified. He stated that “some of my clients will discuss playing games for 14 to 16 hours a day at times without breaks and for those the consequences are severe.” It makes it sound like they are discussing these things while in treatment (maybe because I first saw the quote on a site advertising video game addiction treatment) and that there are no interventions during treatment and that those people will receive severe punishment during treatment. I doubt this is what he meant. He needs to revise his statement. This article gets no blips on the addiction radar.
Clark’s (2006) review of video game detox is darkly intriguing. She explains game addiction as a “clinical impulse control disorder,’ an addiction in the same sense as compulsive gambling. The explanation is that the fantasy world of online role-playing games makes a player “feel better.” And that the virtual life becomes more appealing than real life. Damaging effects are the inability to develop real world coping skills. Signs of addiction were gaming to escape, lying about it, playing for long periods of time, and thinking about gaming during other activities. Of interest, Clark quotes Bakker saying that it is difficult to show somebody they’re in trouble, and that you have to show them [gamers] that they are powerless over their addiction.
At one point in my life I was very interested in addictions treatment. I spent a 90 hour internship in such a facility. My major research paper reviewed current treatment modalities and made recommendations. I was very hopeful. However, the statistics on addictions treatments are horrible. Only 1 in 7 patients is considered to be successfully treated. The rest return to their addiction. I have attended some AA meetings and some treatment meetings with a partner. I was shocked at the laxity of discussion and the lack of focus and I was horrified by the constant repetition of “substance abuse stories” told from a “Red Badge of Courage” standpoint. As such I think a video game detox center is a bad idea. If a person needs an antidepressant or an antipsychotic medication, it is much cheaper and much more humane.
Finally, Leith (2008) is obviously a gamer who enjoys WoW. He makes salient points for playing WoW and points that there should be freedom to choose what to do in leisure time. Which is a point well made. In addition, Leith seems very very happy and well adjusted. He does not support his argument with statistics, but supports the game qualitatively.
MY SUBJECTIVE REPORT ON USING WOW
The way that I have additive behavior to WoW is that I use it to generate feelings. I loved the latest expansion. There is a sweep to the geography and a beauty that is breathtaking. You have to be in it to appreciate it. For me, it feels like I am in the woods, or standing at the edge of a pristine lake. That part is like a calming meditation. Or on a lonely dark night . . . I might choose to roam in a melancholy and aimless manner across a bleak terrain. Just another meditation, really.
In addition, I use it to generate adrenalin. I have talked to other players who use it the same way. There is a clear and heady rush in the battleground game play for me.. I haven’t used recreational drugs and I have never smoked. I do drink coffee, for the caffeine. I don’t drink because I hate even the very mildest “let down” from only one drink. But the high from the battleground generates a more lasting euphoria that doesn’t seem to have a “withdrawal effect” for me. Is this any worse than any other chemical? I submit that it is better for me than antidepressants or anti anxiety medications. In the medical parlance, WoW is a “clean” drug with little chance of causing allergies, cancer, or GI upset. Its main physical side effects are likely from secondary to inactivity.
I have also used WoW as a reward for other activities. For example, when I complete a certain task (such as writing this essay) I will be able to play WoW.
Enough said, you get the idea. For me, and likely others, WoW gameplay can generate mood changes, that may or may not be beneficial. Rather than condemn WoW for this breakthrough and name it as dangerous and harmful, I think the mechanism of generation needs to be better understood and exploited for its benefits.
Other questions that should be evaluated in this discussion include: (1) Who makes the values rules? (2) Who has the right to a pursuit of happiness and how far does that go? (3) What behavior is really pathological? (4) How much to addiction treatment centers stand to earn by condemning video game addiction? (5) How much of video game addiction is really normal human behavior that is now directed to a new venue? (6) How much abnormal human behavior that would have occured anyway just happens to be associated with video game addiction?
VIDEO
The following video shows a difficult family situation. It you listen to it a couple of times you can see that the kid is clearly out of control. He demonstrates the importance of family monitoring of video game content and play. WoW is an adult game (over age 17). There is no visual on this "video." The session was recorded though Ventrilo by the child's fellow players. Please turn your volumn low before starting the video.
READINGS ANALYSIS
Hauge and Gentile (2003) researched 607 8th and 9th graders and reported several behavioral variances for students who had addictive behaviors related to video games.These researchers very precisely stated that addiction is associated with adjustment problems. However, that was their absolute last statement of the article and I think their presentation is wrong. There is no question that any addiction in that population is going to be associated with adjustment problems. In addition, that population is always going to have a percentage of adjustment problems without any addictions. While I think the survey was good, and that the researchers did find an important association, I balk at their presentation of the material. The title of such material should be pristine in its implications and not sensational at all. Perhaps a more valid title would be “Adolescent addictive behavior related to video games is associated with adjustment problems.” That is the take home truth and that should be the title. This survey gets one blip on the video game addiction radar.
Howze (2009) makes a similar argument to mine. She reported that an author (lamentably unnamed) analyzed a Harris survey and found that “8 percent of the children . . . responded in a way that fits with a clinical diagnosis of an addiction” and that they were more likely to do badly at school than “non-addicted” regardless of how much time spent playing games. Howze points out that there is not a clear cut cause and that more study is needed. While I would like to give a radar blip for addiction to this article, I think the evidence of the unnamed researcher is somewhat invalidated by (a) not attaching his name to his work (or did Howze do this to downplay the evidence?), (b) doing secondary research on primary research. In spite of this, I still think this article gets one blip on the video game addiction radar.
Eakes (n.d) as a spokesman for Mothers Against Violence in America (MAVA) clearly states the point that violent video games are an ideal environment in which to learn violence. Her main goal in this essay is to encourage parents to be aware of the content of the video games their children are playing. That is honorable, and gets one blip on radar. One of her supporting statements, however, that violence is the most prevalent health risk for children and adolescents is absolutely not true. I was able to locate the Center for Disease Control (CDC) 2005 statistics on the number of deaths from selected causes by age, and found that for the age group 5 through 14 years of age, transport injuries (mainly motor vehicle accidents) remains the most prevalent health risk. In 2005, there were 2415 transport related deaths and 613 self harm or homicide.
It makes you wonder if the kids would be safer if they stayed home playing video games.
Eakes references 3,500 research studies that mainly show that the more violence one sees the more likely one is to be violent. This may be a valid statement and deserves another blip, for a total of two blips on the addiction radar.
The World Science Staff (2008) examined a study by Ko (2008) of 20 World of Warcraft(WoW)players that compared brain scans of 10 addicted players with 10 non addicted players, stating that the “cue-induced” gaming urges draw on a network of brain pathways “similar to that of the cue-induced craving in substance dependence.” This is a fairly solid piece of evidence that World of Warcraft may have addicting qualities. The sample is very small, however, the test is very expensive. Just the same, this piece of evidence gets two blips on the addiction radar.
Leach’s (2008) concern over World of Warcraft addiction is not well substantiated. His first piece of evidence is long ques for 2nd expansion pack for WoW. He did not state that the first editions come with extras that you cannot get later. He also did not take into account how many first editions were preordered to be delivered the next day with the same perks. Furthermore, his quote from Richard Graham, is horrifying in its implications. I actually saw his quote in a box on an advertising site, but I can’t remember where and I laughed for quite a while. Graham should also be horrified. He stated that “some of my clients will discuss playing games for 14 to 16 hours a day at times without breaks and for those the consequences are severe.” It makes it sound like they are discussing these things while in treatment (maybe because I first saw the quote on a site advertising video game addiction treatment) and that there are no interventions during treatment and that those people will receive severe punishment during treatment. I doubt this is what he meant. He needs to revise his statement. This article gets no blips on the addiction radar.
Clark’s (2006) review of video game detox is darkly intriguing. She explains game addiction as a “clinical impulse control disorder,’ an addiction in the same sense as compulsive gambling. The explanation is that the fantasy world of online role-playing games makes a player “feel better.” And that the virtual life becomes more appealing than real life. Damaging effects are the inability to develop real world coping skills. Signs of addiction were gaming to escape, lying about it, playing for long periods of time, and thinking about gaming during other activities. Of interest, Clark quotes Bakker saying that it is difficult to show somebody they’re in trouble, and that you have to show them [gamers] that they are powerless over their addiction.
At one point in my life I was very interested in addictions treatment. I spent a 90 hour internship in such a facility. My major research paper reviewed current treatment modalities and made recommendations. I was very hopeful. However, the statistics on addictions treatments are horrible. Only 1 in 7 patients is considered to be successfully treated. The rest return to their addiction. I have attended some AA meetings and some treatment meetings with a partner. I was shocked at the laxity of discussion and the lack of focus and I was horrified by the constant repetition of “substance abuse stories” told from a “Red Badge of Courage” standpoint. As such I think a video game detox center is a bad idea. If a person needs an antidepressant or an antipsychotic medication, it is much cheaper and much more humane.
Finally, Leith (2008) is obviously a gamer who enjoys WoW. He makes salient points for playing WoW and points that there should be freedom to choose what to do in leisure time. Which is a point well made. In addition, Leith seems very very happy and well adjusted. He does not support his argument with statistics, but supports the game qualitatively.
MY SUBJECTIVE REPORT ON USING WOW
The way that I have additive behavior to WoW is that I use it to generate feelings. I loved the latest expansion. There is a sweep to the geography and a beauty that is breathtaking. You have to be in it to appreciate it. For me, it feels like I am in the woods, or standing at the edge of a pristine lake. That part is like a calming meditation. Or on a lonely dark night . . . I might choose to roam in a melancholy and aimless manner across a bleak terrain. Just another meditation, really.
In addition, I use it to generate adrenalin. I have talked to other players who use it the same way. There is a clear and heady rush in the battleground game play for me.. I haven’t used recreational drugs and I have never smoked. I do drink coffee, for the caffeine. I don’t drink because I hate even the very mildest “let down” from only one drink. But the high from the battleground generates a more lasting euphoria that doesn’t seem to have a “withdrawal effect” for me. Is this any worse than any other chemical? I submit that it is better for me than antidepressants or anti anxiety medications. In the medical parlance, WoW is a “clean” drug with little chance of causing allergies, cancer, or GI upset. Its main physical side effects are likely from secondary to inactivity.
I have also used WoW as a reward for other activities. For example, when I complete a certain task (such as writing this essay) I will be able to play WoW.
Enough said, you get the idea. For me, and likely others, WoW gameplay can generate mood changes, that may or may not be beneficial. Rather than condemn WoW for this breakthrough and name it as dangerous and harmful, I think the mechanism of generation needs to be better understood and exploited for its benefits.
Other questions that should be evaluated in this discussion include: (1) Who makes the values rules? (2) Who has the right to a pursuit of happiness and how far does that go? (3) What behavior is really pathological? (4) How much to addiction treatment centers stand to earn by condemning video game addiction? (5) How much of video game addiction is really normal human behavior that is now directed to a new venue? (6) How much abnormal human behavior that would have occured anyway just happens to be associated with video game addiction?
VIDEO
The following video shows a difficult family situation. It you listen to it a couple of times you can see that the kid is clearly out of control. He demonstrates the importance of family monitoring of video game content and play. WoW is an adult game (over age 17). There is no visual on this "video." The session was recorded though Ventrilo by the child's fellow players. Please turn your volumn low before starting the video.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
