In the book, Synthetic Worlds, by Edward Castronova, he takes a look at the online game industry and shows us how online games have grown to much more than just the realm for “computer geeks.” This book also shows some compelling opinions on how online gaming is in fact a “lucrative staple of the entertainment industry.” I love how the book shows how many different types of people and age groups can be found completely submerged in the online world. Learning about the whole industry of gaming was probably the most eye opening. This is a field that is about to explode with more and more people being introduced to the gaming world everyday. There are so many different types of games and other online hobbies out there that it is now allowing a broader group of people to be interested in this synthetic world. I think that Castronova’s point where he is exploring the “long-term social consequences of online gaming and posing the question of: If players can inhabit worlds that are more alluring and gratifying than reality, how can the real world compete?” I like this question not only because I was thought about this point as well, but also because I have some light to shine on this thought.
There were many arguments and different topics that were discussed in this book. But, one topic that really intrigued me was the part about online relationship. This part really caught my attention due to the fact that I see not only online relationships as a big problem but the fact that kids today spend so much time talking to one another on the computer rather than face to face. I see this affecting their social skills in the “real world” and as a result making them rather boring to talk to. To back my thought up Castronova says in the beginning of chapter 4, “ It is perhaps shocking to think that, even at their comparatively small size of a dozen million or so participants, synthetic worlds are already beginning to affect the “outside” world, by which I mean the ordinary institutions of human connection: marriages, the web, markets and companies.” He furthers this by saying that “the institution of online friendship takes away time from the institution of offline friendship.” I believe what he is referring to here is that, many prefer to talk to each other online than face to face these days. I see this everyday between my friends and we are even seeing this taken a step farther in the fact that people today are always texting each other. Literally I have seen friends be within feet of each other and rather text each other than talk face to face. What is this saying about our society and where is this leading us to?
I have to say that in the introduction to this book I immediately liked this author due to the main fact that he right off the bat admitted that he felt a bit strange about writing this book, where I felt strange not only having to read this book but also taking this class. However, throughout the book he made me see how much this market is growing and how “the phenomenon of MMORPGs” is taking our society by storm. This is a topic that I would have never spent the time of day even thinking about or even reading about but from all of the information and stats that Castronova presented to me…I guess this is a topic that I should educate myself in. It is hard for me to say that I see much importance of these MMORPGs to the real world because in my eyes I just do not see them helping the world. I read how these games are taking over people lives and making them not deal with their “real world” responsibilities, so to me I just do not see them in a very positive light. I understand that some people need that escape from reality so I can see where the appeal would be in these. However, I also strongly disagree with running away from your problems, it is not a good way to build character or with problem solving. The “real world” is not perfect and part of life is realizing that and dealing with it. So for these games to give people this false sense of utopia, to me is not a good thing. I am not sure where these MMORPGs are going to take our society in the future, I can only hope for the best.
Monday, November 26, 2007
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Is Gaming Addictive?
I decided to concentrate on the mainstream debate of addiction surrounding video games. This topic really interests me because I not only knew someone who was so addicted they attended “Gamers Anonymous,” but I am interested in the arguments surrounding this topic.
In the book, Handbook of Computer Game Studies, the authors of chapter 23, Mark Griffiths and Mark N. O. Davies, expressed that, “the concept of “video game addiction” has caught some “knee-jerk skepticism” within the academic community.” Throughout the chapter we see how many studies and polls were taken in regards to the amount of time adolescents spent gaming. However, these tests needed further and more extensive research done to prove anything. And actually this was the case for most of the information that was presented. There was barely enough concrete information that could 100% prove that gaming is an addiction. Now, one could conclude that gamers show additive behavior when playing games but at the same time the percent of people who actually show this type of behavior is quite slim.
The question of, “What are people addicted to?” is a very important question and a very interesting one as well. This has led to much debate (360). Young made a claim that Internet addiction in a broad term that covers a wide variety of behaviors and impulse control problems. He categorized them through five specific subtypes and the most notable one was “computer game addition: that includes obsessive computer game playing (e.g. Doom, Myst, Solitaire, etc.) (361). Countering this claim, Griffiths argued that many of these excessive users are not “Internet addicts” but just use the Internet excessively as a medium to fuel other addictions (360). In contrast to this however, “Young reports of individuals who appear to be addicted to the Internet itself.“ “These individuals to some extent are engages in text based virtual realities and take on other social personas and social identities as a way of making themselves feel good about them selves” (361). Through this last paragraph you can see how much contradiction was taking place. Every time the authors would make a point they were quick to follow it with another study that dispelled anything previously said.
My thought on video game addiction is that it does exist. Now, as stated before this is not a high percentage of people this applies to, but people do get addicted. We as humans have addictive behavior we cannot deny that. So therefore, if there is something in our lives that we enjoy doing and even may make us feel “high” doing, chances are we are going to keep doing it. I see video game addiction just as I see an alcoholic addicted to booze. It makes them feel good; they are able to escape from reality, so they keep doing it. Gamers and Alcoholics or any other addiction people may have go hand in hand.
In the book, Handbook of Computer Game Studies, the authors of chapter 23, Mark Griffiths and Mark N. O. Davies, expressed that, “the concept of “video game addiction” has caught some “knee-jerk skepticism” within the academic community.” Throughout the chapter we see how many studies and polls were taken in regards to the amount of time adolescents spent gaming. However, these tests needed further and more extensive research done to prove anything. And actually this was the case for most of the information that was presented. There was barely enough concrete information that could 100% prove that gaming is an addiction. Now, one could conclude that gamers show additive behavior when playing games but at the same time the percent of people who actually show this type of behavior is quite slim.
The question of, “What are people addicted to?” is a very important question and a very interesting one as well. This has led to much debate (360). Young made a claim that Internet addiction in a broad term that covers a wide variety of behaviors and impulse control problems. He categorized them through five specific subtypes and the most notable one was “computer game addition: that includes obsessive computer game playing (e.g. Doom, Myst, Solitaire, etc.) (361). Countering this claim, Griffiths argued that many of these excessive users are not “Internet addicts” but just use the Internet excessively as a medium to fuel other addictions (360). In contrast to this however, “Young reports of individuals who appear to be addicted to the Internet itself.“ “These individuals to some extent are engages in text based virtual realities and take on other social personas and social identities as a way of making themselves feel good about them selves” (361). Through this last paragraph you can see how much contradiction was taking place. Every time the authors would make a point they were quick to follow it with another study that dispelled anything previously said.
My thought on video game addiction is that it does exist. Now, as stated before this is not a high percentage of people this applies to, but people do get addicted. We as humans have addictive behavior we cannot deny that. So therefore, if there is something in our lives that we enjoy doing and even may make us feel “high” doing, chances are we are going to keep doing it. I see video game addiction just as I see an alcoholic addicted to booze. It makes them feel good; they are able to escape from reality, so they keep doing it. Gamers and Alcoholics or any other addiction people may have go hand in hand.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Blog Assignment # 2
I decided to do my critical reading of a digital game on “Tiger Woods PGA Tour 07.” I decided to look at this game in particular because this is one game that I have attempted to play within the past year and a game that I have watched my brother play. Through playing and observing this game there are some things that I have noticed that I believe relates to some of our readings especially from the book, The Medium of the Video Game by Mark J. P. Wolf. I believe that this game challenges the definition of the medium and it also incorporates things that we have talked about in class such as the time and space usage in video games.
Whenever I see a game being played one thing that I always tend to notice are the object on screen that are not moving when they should be. For example, if one was at a real Golf Tournament, the crowd would be moving, not just standing there with the same expression on their faces looking like a statue. I guess I am looking for too much realism in video games but then I don’t understand how people can get so “lost” in a game where things that happen or move in real life, don’t in their video game. And in addition to that how moving knowing what the next thing you are going to see in the screen is exciting. Wolf talk’s about how things have the potential to move and how any little change of color can make for a slight movement in the game, I guess I don’t have that good of an eye for seeing such slight changes. Wolf says that in some games “their emphasis on the importance of off-screen screen objects vary. In some games, the configurations of objects found in this space are always the same, allowing a player to anticipate what lies ahead in the game.” (Wolf, 57). How some people don’t pick up on these things through playing I don’t understand but I might be looking at this through too critically. However, I will agree with Wolf and say that I do think that they try and make such real live things happen in the video game such as “when a player does not do anything in a game, the computer continues to check for input and event in the world if the game continue, often with something happening to the player-character if it stays in one place for too long” (Wolf, 79). I have seen this happen but the wait time for the computer to realize that nothing is happening to me just looks so unrealistic.
Another thing that I noticed while watching “Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2007” was that the time frame was not realistic. When going to play a round of golf, which is usually 18 holes, it takes an average of 3 hours. In “Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2007,” you can bust out a round of golf in about 30 minutes, making the “game time vs. real time,” quite different. Through reading Wolf’s thoughts on “game time vs. real time,” I understand that the speed in which it takes to play a game or to do something in the game is determined by “ the preset pacing of the computer-controlled events and characters in the game, along with the pacing determined by the player, where the player is given that option” (Wolf, 86). But, this still leaves me with my point that the game is not realistic in that the time it takes to play a real game of golf opposed to one on a video game are not equal. Now, this is great for the way our culture is today, we like things to be fast and always moving at a faster rate. And I really could not imagine spending 3 hours to play a game of golf on the computer when it would take you the same the amount of time to play a real round. So, for people who need that quick fix of golf in less than 3 hours then I understand them playing this game.
Whenever I see a game being played one thing that I always tend to notice are the object on screen that are not moving when they should be. For example, if one was at a real Golf Tournament, the crowd would be moving, not just standing there with the same expression on their faces looking like a statue. I guess I am looking for too much realism in video games but then I don’t understand how people can get so “lost” in a game where things that happen or move in real life, don’t in their video game. And in addition to that how moving knowing what the next thing you are going to see in the screen is exciting. Wolf talk’s about how things have the potential to move and how any little change of color can make for a slight movement in the game, I guess I don’t have that good of an eye for seeing such slight changes. Wolf says that in some games “their emphasis on the importance of off-screen screen objects vary. In some games, the configurations of objects found in this space are always the same, allowing a player to anticipate what lies ahead in the game.” (Wolf, 57). How some people don’t pick up on these things through playing I don’t understand but I might be looking at this through too critically. However, I will agree with Wolf and say that I do think that they try and make such real live things happen in the video game such as “when a player does not do anything in a game, the computer continues to check for input and event in the world if the game continue, often with something happening to the player-character if it stays in one place for too long” (Wolf, 79). I have seen this happen but the wait time for the computer to realize that nothing is happening to me just looks so unrealistic.
Another thing that I noticed while watching “Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2007” was that the time frame was not realistic. When going to play a round of golf, which is usually 18 holes, it takes an average of 3 hours. In “Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2007,” you can bust out a round of golf in about 30 minutes, making the “game time vs. real time,” quite different. Through reading Wolf’s thoughts on “game time vs. real time,” I understand that the speed in which it takes to play a game or to do something in the game is determined by “ the preset pacing of the computer-controlled events and characters in the game, along with the pacing determined by the player, where the player is given that option” (Wolf, 86). But, this still leaves me with my point that the game is not realistic in that the time it takes to play a real game of golf opposed to one on a video game are not equal. Now, this is great for the way our culture is today, we like things to be fast and always moving at a faster rate. And I really could not imagine spending 3 hours to play a game of golf on the computer when it would take you the same the amount of time to play a real round. So, for people who need that quick fix of golf in less than 3 hours then I understand them playing this game.
Saturday, September 8, 2007
What I would like to understand the appeal of...
I have never understood the appeal of computer games or even really sitting around for hours and losing yourself in any type of console gaming. The following websites are a couple that I was told by a "gamer" that were a few popular ones and ones that he and his friends checked out a lot. I have checked them out and am looking forward to hopefully understanding their appeal more towards the end of the semester.
http://www.quake3arena.com/
http://www.gamestop.com/default.asp?sect=2
http://www.quake3arena.com/
http://www.gamestop.com/default.asp?sect=2
Blog Post #1
Growing up I was always surrounded by console gamers. From my grandmother glued to the TV with her original Nintendo games that ranged from "Duck Hut" to "Mario Brothers" her and my brother were always gaming. As the years went on and technology evolved so it the console systems in my house. My brother got every new system that came out and I would have to sit and watch him play if I wanted to have some "quality" time with him, which is still the case today. Sometimes when we were younger he would even let me play his Super Nintendo system where we would play "Donkey Kong," "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" or "Mario Brother 3." Now with level of skill and all those buttons on the controllers I can not even begin to try and understand how to play these new consoles and there games. For me gaming was always fun to do on a rainy day, growing up I would rather have been outside then playing those games. So I guess that is why I have never really understood the whole appeal of gaming but it is something that I would love to learn more about. Same thing with computer games. This is something that I know very little about and something that I have never been exposed to. I look forward to having my eyes open to these world of gaming especially from the in class discussions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)