It seemed to me that video games tended to fall into a few categories-- violent 'war' games like World of Warcraft and League of Legends, 'Epic Quest' games like the popular Skyrim and time-passers like Nintendo's Mario Brothers. But, before you jump down my throat, I'll admit games are evolving, and apparently evolving us right along with them. While I was constructing this blog post, I came across a wikipedia article that you can read HERE that took me on an enlightening journey through all the incredibly detailed genres of video games (seriously, from Beat 'em-Up-Hack-and-Slash to Christian games). This got me thinking, what is it that I missed about the video game craze? Where does my aversion to gaming come from? Have I been conditioned to view it as a time waster? Is it because I'm a female? Is it because of the kind of learner I am? Because I just wasn't exposed to them in my childhood? Because I'm not good at them now and feel discouraged?
I really don't have the answers, but when thinking more critically about it I think the popularity has something to do with the same reason we love movies and books, the stories they tell-- only in the online game, you have the ability to manipulate those stories and essentially, create them. Huffington Post has an interesting article on the benefits of gaming, which has been popping up more and more in all social contexts lately. This article is really, really worth the time reading through: there are some shocking benefits that line up very closely with what McGonigal had to say in her TEDx talk. She mentioned that gaming could be the "future survival of humankind" and sited a really interesting mythology of Herotitus and what games were potentially able to do for his community so long ago. McGonigal was engaging and worked well with the other talks we were to watch and learn from. I particularly liked Anderson, who claimed the opportunities we have gained from Dash's 'better tools, and better networks' have allowed for massive spread of ideas through the flexibility of medium on the web. He says, "that primal medium that your brain is exquisitely wired for has gone global", imagine that! From the 'evolution of dance' via the internet, to scientists on Jove spreading experimental details, to the other thousands of people spreading data and responding online, that internet has opened (and that's his key word) a full cycle of learning framed by the presence of our ever growing population.
In an attempt to better understand the potential for gaming and the influence gamers could have on our global community, I thought I should prode a gamer myself and see what I could discover and learn from their experience. I talked to Montana State University student Dillon Bauernfeind, a junion in Sustainable Bioenergy systems, and a 'former' gamer.
An Interview With a Gamer: Dillon Bauernfeind, MSU student
1. What do you like best about gaming? What's your favorite game?
D: It [gaming] helps me to pass the time and it's amusing. It can be really interactive, too. I really like the motion games like 'Connect' on Xbox360 that lets your body be the controller. It lets you be active and gets you up and burning calories. I like both types equally, but Call of Duty is my favorite. Shooting and killing is fun in the game because it's sort of outside the normal realm-- that sounds sociopathic- but it let's you do things in another reality.
2. At what age did you begin playing video games or online games?
D: I got a original Nintendo when I was 8, that had fun games that required movement like Duck Hunter where you shoot ducks that fly across the screen with a plastic gun. It was pretty cool but I didn't play it a lot, I was outside a lot as a kid skiing and what not. I wasn't huge on gaming then but then I got a PS2 for Christmas when I was 11 or 12, which had racing games like car racing and dirt bike racing and a James Bond series of shooter games. Those were my fucking favorite. It was first person shooter so you got to pretend to be 007.
L: What is 'first person shooter'?
D: First person is the perception of you being the person, the character, the guy with the gun. Third person shooter games like Halo are third person shooter where you control the character but you watch from a removed aspect.
L: When did you get more into gaming? Did you collaborate?
D: When I was 15 or 16 in high school I used some money I made over the summer to get an Xbox360 console with Call of Duty 1-6. I played with friends that I would see at school and we'd set something up after [school] to play together. Most of the time we would be problem solving because we would have to come up with solutions to tactical scenarios like if the enemy is coming one way, we needed to decide if it was worth it to walk around and flank them from a different side. It's pretty social. I was less into it after high school though, played a little in college but not as frequently because I didn't have a lot of money to buy new games and there was a sort of fading of interest too.
3. How do you feel when playing your favorite game? When you are winning? Losing?
D: Games for me are pretty mindless, I don't really get emotional. There's a small bit of gratitude and disappointment when I'm playing but I don't notice it too much. I actually think I'm emotional watching movies. I'm not super invested in the game, but enough invested that I think it's worthwhile to play. Like, if you're going to watch TV anyway you might as well play a video game and be more engaged than just observing.
4. Do you ever think about other things you could be doing while gaming? Does it help you relieve stress, organize your thoughts, ect.? Do you ever experience the opposite (more stressed, more chaotic)?
D: I can definitely see how some people are but I'm not invested enough in the game to feel that emotional pull. It does chill me out sometimes though. Some people take it really seriously, probably because they really like it and it's a good escape, an alternate reality.
5. Is the plot of the game an important aspect to you? Does the story-line matter to you as a gamer?
D: Call of Duty has a really complex story. It helps give me reason to be playing, keeps it addictive because you're working toward a goal and you want to reach it. Only trouble is, like with Skyrim, that game is too long, too complex maybe, and I get burnt out and it's not really fun anymore.
6. Have you ever been in a situation where gaming has helped your everyday life?
D: Games are nice because you can be isolated in your room but still sort of be socializing. The ultimate laziness- you can be kicking it with your friends in your boxers without having them see. I haven't ever really felt like games have really helped me, but I've never thought about it before. I think they do help you socialize though because you're interacting with people in an intimately removed way... talking and using a simulated character to portray your actions. Kinda cool.
7. Will you encourage your children to play the kinds of video games you play?
D: Ehh, no. They games I play are violent. I won't encourage it but I won't restrict it. I'll definitely stick to the guidelines, the rating system of ages on the games. I didn't start playing "kill games" until I was 12 or 13 which are rated T for thirteen and up. I would let my kids play those when they're old enough.
8. The company Leap Frog makes "educational" video games for kids ages 3+. Do you think there is an age where it's 'too early' for a child to play a video game? --> ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pov3VnPk_BY )
D: No, I think they are really an educational tool. The educational games I've played like the school sponsored ones we would play in class were pretty entertaining and helped me focus with my ADHD. I think the games that are meant for these kids are great, but they need to be intermixed. Like if you're helping teach your kid to read, it shouldn't be all of one or the other.
9. If you could give one reason to encourage others to play video games, what would it be? Any negative reason you can think of?
D: Video games can be addicting. Play in moderation. Too much is too much, and just right is optimal- when you're not thinking about the game outside of playing it.
Notes on the videos:
McGonigal-
3 billion hours a week of gameplay for the future survival of humankind
Idea of constant feedback- collaborative online environments (satisfaction of virtual world)
Evolving to be a more collaborative and hearty species (10,000 hours 'theory of success' virtuoso)
What exactly are gamer's getting good at? -- McGonigal argues Urgent Optimism (desire to act immediately combined with the hope that you can be sucessful)
Social relationships (playing games with others makes us like them better)
Blistful Productivity (happier working hard, optimized as human beings)
Epic Meaning (awe-inspiring missions)
Trying to make the real world work more like a game -- Herotitus (famine in the kingdom of Lydia)-- trying to escape real world
gamer's as a real world resource
Priebatsch-
"This world is social, the next world is gaming"
I understand where you are coming from. Regarding your second-to-last paragraph—as of now, gamers seem to be getting good at gaming, that's about it. If there was some possible way for it to be an effective real-life tool, that would be great. Flight simulators, for example, help prepare pilots for actual flying. In a similar way, I feel that they could be effective. But as of now, they are not (in my opinion).
ReplyDeleteI think I am going to have to agree with Mitchell as well; video games have a ridiculous amount of potential but as of right now they are useless, perhaps ever hurting society. It think it is interesting to bring up he comparison between flight simulation and GTA. If you can teach people how to land a airplane are you not subconsciously teaching people to be violent when they play games? I am not trying to argue on this topic I am trying to bring up the question, can this brainwashing/persuasion be already happening? I hate being conspiracy theory guy but I think this is interesting to think about. When I think about this for some reason I connect the literary theory of Horkheimer and Adorno, DIALECT OF ENLIGHTENMENT. In this they outline the belief that the rich control the population through movies, books, magazines, and radio. The reason for this is the little time to think that these multimedia devices gives a listener/viewer between ideas. Now video games have come into the mainstream and they are more persuasive than ever in terms of Horkheimer & Adorno theory. I will ask again, is this brainwashing/ persuasion already happening?
ReplyDeleteI agree with both of you guys, but the critical thing I think we are missing is that is the answer to your question is yes-- video games are a method of very successful brainwashing/persuasion-- then why can't we use these (in the future) to persuade users toward a common end goal that is positive rather than negative. I think what McGonigal in particular was trying to get at is the potential for games to be used as a medium for the bettering of society. Kind of like how a movie (though a relative "waste" of time, can pass on a moral that we can connect to and apply in our lives. This doesn't always happen, but the potential is there. And I'd counter your argument that video games are not making us any more violent than movies, or television or even books are making us. They all do the same thing in different ways, but it's in the eye of the beholder to make meaning and take action. Just a thought.
Delete