Gaming
Nielson et al (2008) begin a history of gaming by referencing the classic MIT-developed Space War but then backtracking to ancient Egypt to discuss the game of Senet. "Some speculate that Senet's status changed over time, from a purely recreational pastime to an activity with potent symbolism and religious significance, But even more remarkable is that a culture and era utterly foreign from our own, we find a form of a game that maintains its appeal four millenia later"(p. 45). At this early point in the blog post, I would just like to say, I have waited all semester for this week on gaming. Even as a child I was fascinated by non-digital-media games like "Ghosts in the Graveyard"(which seemed to me like a "real" space predecessor of Pac-Man,) or even hide-in-go-seek after a long discussion between me and my cousins about whether it was "olley olley oxen-free" or "olley olley outs in free." For its dimensions of cultural practices, simulation, exploration, probabilistic learning and navigation I am coming out solidly, optimistically pro-games. In fact, in pursuing my MFA in ficiton I was also very interested in how game play enters fictional, short-story narratives. For example numerous families have that game they can't play because X cheats and Y eats the game pieces, etc. For some of you this was Risk, for my family it was CandyLand. Because of the social/intimate family ties that exist within family histories of gaming many short-stories rely on games from "Never Have I Ever" to "Mafia," etc. Also, role playing games of the variety listed by Nielson et al (2008) such as Vampire, Call of Cthulu, and to a lesser extent Magic: The Gathering, were not only means of social connection between youth but separate rites of passage for teens. In terms of the movement from Atari console games to computer games Nielson et al (2008) describes the "nail in the coffin" as the development of Commodore 64 (p. 53). I remember vividly my family's shift from an Atari interest in space invaders and asteroids to hooking up our little tv screen to the Commodore 64 so my parents could play a graphic game called "Dream House"(?) or a text-based game about surviving on a desert island with only the items you selected at the beginning of the game called something like"Marooned"(?). Furthermore, I remember these grown-up computer game parties as part of my conception of what it meant to finally be an adult. However,there was a point in the early 90s where my mother, (embodying the current "video games are evil debate,") began to sell toys and then endorsed only "educational computer software." So, while I was able to fight my way into owning "Myst" and playing the slightly disturbing "7th Guest," I was pretty much restricted to such Sierra or Broderbund games as "Museum Madness" or "The Lost Mind of Doctor Brain," which I hacked my current (brand new laptop w/ windows XP) to be able to still play. Although, I have always longed for the cultural cache of "Castle Wolfenstein" and final girl-like games like "Resident Evil." And such has been my personal history of gaming, (which I relived while reading Nielson,) and which had prompted me to purchase a PS3 last spring, in order to reconnect to the gaming world, even if it is only vicariously.
Turkle (1984) considers the ambivalence surrounding the entrance of video games as also tied to an ambivalence about the era of computing in saying: "It feels like a chance to buy time against more than a video game. It feels like a chance to buy time against a new way of life"(p. 501). Although we have been talking about how technology disquiets the masses throughout this semester in the discussion of print, telegraphy, and even to some extent, writing, there seems to be something different in the discussion of gaming. These were not movements which witnessed the most striking divide within families, with children being familiar and even masterful with telegraphy, for instance, and adults not understanding the way it works. Therefore, I wonder how much of the "video games are evil" debate centers instead around our fear of our children as uncanny-- like us, and at the same time creepy, subjective wells of being, not like us. This also seems to be tied to a generationalism that will not go away by nature of archiving and console considerations. For instance, I will have only witnessed Commodore 64 games (and despite the fact that you can buy a plug-in console for your tv with 20 old Atari games for about $14,) for most games and old game systems there is no way to recuperate the experience of games whose game system has been phased out of existence. (In fact this is what prompts certain people to keep Dreamcast and PS2 systems in their closets FOREVER.) Also, in terms of the psychology of arcade games (and later perhaps online gaming), Turkle (1984) notes that "The old-fashioned pinball machines have no memory. However high your score one day, the machine treats you next time with the same neutral indifference it gives the clumsiest of beginners. And it certainly does not inform anyone else how well you did" (p. 503). This comment reminds me of one I made earlier in terms of video games as cultural cache. Obviously there are some out there who would vehemently disagree. Perhaps what I meant by what I'll soften as "pop-cultural cache" is this idea of history within the games themselves (even if their permanence or generationalism is constrained by consoles). For instance, if arcade games didn't create an ideology of "being the best" by storing top scores documentaries such as Donkey Kong's "King of Kong" and anecdotal/narratives of gaming would be far different, if in existence at all. Also, (and I know I'm waxing long on this already,) I do object slightly to Turkle's portrayal of Jarish. He is the small, stereotypical gamer who expresses depression over a "meat space" he has no control over and feels deeply disconnected. In portraying Jarish, Turkle (1984) presents the idea that recalling the dogs and cats of Jarish's imaginary video game: "Animals are unusual images for him. More typically, his fantasies are populated by gnomes, wizards, and magic-users. When I was a child I knew about gnomes and wizards and spells from reading stories. Jarish knows about such things in a different way—he lives them"(p. 507). This presentation, while it might have been true in terms of there really existing a "Jarish," (I have no doubt,) seems a little too "easy" by today's standards particularly drawing on the non-gaming segment's hegemonic usage of fantasy as being nerdy and sad. Even the way Turkle presents Jarish as "hedging the question" of whether D and D is more real than reality seemed a bit leading for a twelve-year-old, but perhaps I am just biased in this debate. I was more interested in the slightly more nuanced presentations of Jimmy and David, however.
In a different context, Liestol(2003) questions the movement of gaming history/gaming experience to game studies by asking "How may we, as academic interpreters of popular culture, relate to this new kid on the block?"(p. 328). I was happy that Liestol(2003) states part of her methodology for interpreting games was to play the games, themselves. Although this would seem obvious, there is still a great argument over how much we as academics need to be or even should be actively involved in the new media we critique. However, in relation to an interpretation of games I would question a critic of Joyce's Ulysses who hasn't read the book, so it seems only responsible that members entering into game studies in a serious fashion would actually play the games and not just study others doing so. In terms of Liestol's presentation of the game, I thought it was very interesting in terms of avatar/embodiment issues that Duke of Duke Nukem comments on how good looking he is when presented with "his" image in front of a mirror in the game space. In reference to the complicated gender/social interpretation of Duke Nukem, this did not seem terribly overstated or over-interpreted, but did raise some interesting questions about game narratives. For instance, 7th Guest, described by Nielson as "a haunted house game" is actually a complicated enactment of the Faust tale and psycho-analytic theory of Ego and Id. Also, slasher movies have been pinpointed as containing complex gender ideologies, so it does not seem too much at odds that Duke Nukem would contain a complicated message to metaphorically kill off the single-mother icon in order to "not become a weakling," complete with helplessly bound females and a dangerous, birthing alien queen. It would seem that games and movies provide the singular experience of simulation necessary for advancing complicated psycho-dramas under the cover of splatter.
Finally, Jenkins(2006) explicitly discusses his support of overturning the Limbaugh ruling that stated video/computer games had no constitutional protection under the first amendment right of freedom of speech. What particularly struck me in this opening was the idea that "Constitutional status has historically rested on a medium's highest potential, not its worst excesses"(Jenkins, 2006, p.209). This reminded me yet again of the premise of the Music Man in reacting against the excesses of the dime novel (full of depravity for youth.) This is also largely the struggle that sequential art faces in the "comic books are evil debate," as well. However, the key concept that games share, more so with, but even beyond that of movies, is this concept of simulation which separates games from other medium. In the discussion of the use of Civilizations III in the social studies classroom I thought that it was a potentially interesting note that Jenkins makes saying: "Squire's study showed that teachers played an important role in learning, directing students' attention, shaping questions, and helping them interpret events"(p. 213-214). This was an essential distinction that doesn't often get made in the pedagogical presentation of new media studies. In pedagogy, seemingly more than anywhere else, there seems to be a technological determinism that del.icio.us is inherently a great teaching too, etc., when in actuality any new media experience is only going to be as instructive as it is framed in the learning environment. Also, I thought the discussion of meta-gaming reinforced this ultimate idea that the experience of any game is rooted in the situatedness of the gamer and his/her context.