It’s not easy. We didn’t just sit there and goof off. It was not a waste of my time. It was actually really challenging for me.

This class has taught me that videogames are worth studying as much as music, art (paintings, sculptures et cetera), literature and movies are. Videogames are legitimate forms of expression and are to be considered artistic mediums too. Somebody had to be the first to study Mozart, Di Vinci, Shakespeare and Alfred Hitchcock. We are simply among the first generation to take a real hard look at videogames.

It is perfectly normal to pick out literary techniques such as symbolism, imagery, and themes found inside novels. It is not unusual for a class to analyze the use of color and other artistic techniques in an art class. One of these days, it won’t be odd for everyone to take a class examining videogames in various critical contexts.

Thanks for an interesting class Professor Sample!

Give me a break.

Just look at the kids playing videogames. By and large they are wealthy/middle class, white, suburban kids playing games they bought with their parent’s money. They enjoy being able to go around and kill people in games because it is something they could never do in real life. No consequences.

Now look at the risk factors for violent youth:

• History of violent victimization or involvement
• Attention deficits, hyperactivity, or learning disorders
• History of early aggressive behavior
• Involvement with drugs, alcohol, or tobacco
• Low IQ
• Poor behavioral control
• Deficits in social cognitive or information-processing abilities
• High emotional distress
• History of treatment for emotional problems
• Antisocial beliefs and attitudes
• Exposure to violence and conflict in the family

Family Risk Factors

• Authoritarian childrearing attitudes
• Harsh, lax, or inconsistent disciplinary practices
• Low parental involvement
• Low emotional attachment to parents or caregivers
• Low parental education and income
• Parental substance abuse or criminality
• Poor family functioning
• Poor monitoring and supervision of children

Peer/School Risk Factors

• Association with delinquent peers
• Involvement in gangs
• Social rejection by peers
• Lack of involvement in conventional activities
• Poor academic performance
• Low commitment to school and school failure

Community Risk Factors

• Diminished economic opportunities
• High concentrations of poor residents
• High level of transiency
• High level of family disruption
• Low levels of community participation
• Socially disorganized neighborhoods

I have a feeling the kids playing Xbox in suburbia don’t encounter too many of these risk factors. It has nothing to do with videogames and everything to do with a person’s environment and mental wellbeing.

This summer I will be spending 2 months in Palestine working with Palestinians and trying to teach conflict resolution skills. There is plenty of violence there by disgruntled youth. They aren’t that way because someone let them play Grand Theft Auto. They become violent because they see their situation as hopeless and violence seems like a solution. Hell, I bet if we gave every Palestinian family a TV, Xbox and GTA, violence would go down. They would have something to do at least!

(note: that is not my solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict)

Sure there are cases where American youth see something on a videogame and decide to go out and copy it and things become violent and deadly. But it is not a phenomenon. Isolated cases cannot be called a trend, even if the media wants to tout them as such.

As I mentioned before, violence is created by environment and a person’s mental health. Both of these need to be improved and monitored in America (and around the world) if we truly want to do anything to curb it.

So, moral of the story, when will videogames take their place in the annals of art history?  Film faced a struggle similar to this one while it was being established.  Film today stands as an art form as legitimate and beautiful as a work of literature or art.  Videogames are still relatively young.  I see at least a segment of the videogame indutry being accepted as a true art form within the next two generations.  I say a segment, because there will always be pieces that will be viewed as well outside the realm of art.  I really don’t think we are going to find anyone who sees Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle as an equivalent  to The Godfather.

Museums are constantly trying to find ways to make their exhibits more interactive in an attempt to keep the attention of the modern human being (thanks a lot TV).  What would be better than every exhibit being a videogame?   Does anyone that has gone through this class not feel this is inevitable?

Yet, I feel my blogs, which are my thoughts on video-games, have become more in-depth. I feel I look more closely at the games, and see the messages behind them, rather then just repeating what has been said, or looking at just the surface of the game. In the beginning, I did not know much about video games. I’d rather go outside and play soccer or read. Video-games never sparked my interest, and I even signed up for the class not knowing it was about video-games. Yet, as I sit here now, I’m glad I took the course. I learned more then just how to play video-games, I learned to analyze them, see them for what they truly were, whether that was a tribute, entertainment, or perhaps a message hidden within the text of a game. I learned new genres such as first person shooter games and narratives. My world was opened up to the gaming world. My blogs reflect what I learned. As time went on, my blogs became more intricate and analytical. I went from simple terms to explaining a game, to knowing about flow, and immersive and progressive game-play.

Even though five of my posts have been within the week, with two of them completed tonight, I still feel they progress forward. They explain my ideas in greater depth then before. I am glad my one post made it to a slide-show that I did not see in class for the fact I was sick, however, that must say I was hitting something on the head. I had to at least be asking a “so what” question.

I have told people that I am taking a class about video-games and everyone says, “oh man that’s awesome!” It is awesome. I enjoyed the games I have played and the new ones I learned about. But I’ve taken away more then just knowing how to play super Mario brothers 3 online for free. I now know how to critically examine a video-game. I’m sure I won’t always look at a video-game and think, what context or genre is this game, but at least now I have more understanding to what I am playing and my blogs show that. They went from mere overviews to in-depth analysis of game-play and impacts on society. I feel I have grown more as a person, even if it is in the video game society.

            I went over my aunt’s house the today and sure enough there it was: violence, murder, prostitution, drunk driving, drug trade, etc.  There was even one scene where a guy supposedly took a baseball bat to a prostitute after she asked him for a tip.  It’s nauseating.  It’s also a video game.  The television screen tells tales often seen on the news but this time it was brought to you by the newly released Grand Theft Auto IV, the latest craze in gaming. 

            I was astonished when I learned that this overly realistic and downright gruesome scene was actually a video game being played by my 12 year old cousin.  Sitting on his couch he actually grew angry when the prostitute wouldn’t die fast enough as he swung the bat at her head splattering blood on the walls.  What’s wrong with this picture?  What happened to Super Mario Brothers?  What happened to Duck Hunt? What happened to Sonic the Hedgehog?  How did we get here? 

            Exposing our youth to such video games at such a young age may seem preposterous, yet parents permit such activities.  Are parents aware of the brutal nature of the game?  Are they indifferent on the issue?  Or do they merely want a baby sitter to occupy their child and their naivety is a priority.  Regardless of the reason, children are getting their hands on Grand Theft Auto IV and they are playing it constantly.  Prostitution, drugs, drunk driving, murdering, strip clubs; all tabooed topics pried from the world and delivered to the doorsteps of children across America.  Capitalist companies market and supply the high demand.  The companies get their money.  The children get their entertainment.  The parents get their babysitter.  It’s a win win win. 

            Is it so hard to believe that children could be entertained and enamored by such a horrific violent game?  As a nation we have been desensitized to a sense, which also reigns true for children.  They can sit in front of a television all day and play a game which promotes and preaches violence with little or no sympathetic reaction.  Is the game merely entertainment like its less violent predecessors or does it have further reaching moral implications?  It’s a hypothetical question certainly without a definitive answer; at least not at the moment.  Perhaps years down the road when we view our society we will see what this violent exposure has wrought or hasn’t. 

            So, what does this say about our society? Many of us have been known to be followers. Only a handful of people ever emerge as leaders, even though everyday I feel there are signs and people saying anyone can be a leader. Anyone can show leadership skills, all they have to do is take a stand and make themselves known. We are all getting pushed by our parents, our teachers, and our employers to be leaders and to make a stand; yet, how many of us actually have the guts to be the controller, to be the person in charge. We are all told to make a difference in the world and stand up for what we believe in. Yet, sometimes standing up for what we believe in causes us to be the outcast and can bring much anxiety to that person. Thus, imagine if something such as the instance in the baron were happening in your town. How many of us could actually make a stand and tell the man what he was doing was wrong? How many of us could turn him in? And what if we did, and it turned out he was innocent?

            I’d like to think that any one of us would have the guts to at least turn the man into the police if we could not say something to him ourselves. We want to believe we are that strong and would do the right thing, but what if we had no proof. What if we just had rumors? So what is the game designer saying about that village? I find it hard to believe not one person would be able to say something, so for him to decide that not one person would have come outside seems preposterous. We are better then that, we have morals and we want to upkeep them. But maybe that was the designers plan all along. Maybe he is not trying to say that no one would help, but maybe he is trying to make it so that someone always comes outside. I know how strongly I feel after playing the game that I’d be that one villager outside. Yet, I feel I would have been out there anyway, even if I had not played the game. Thus, he is reinstalling a feeling I already held dear to my heart, he just wanted to remind me of it. So, moral games may not be there to question our morals, but there to help reinforce them into our brains. They help to just make us not forget what we actually felt was important all along.

I have also found that I like looking at videogames as works of art, not so much as toys or training tools. The games that were made to make a statement, like September 12^th and AntiWarGame, and all of Jason Nelson’s strange countergames we looked at were the most interesting to me. I think this is because these games are meant to be explored not necessarily played in the traditional sense, as in playing to win or playing for a high score. I’m not an avid videogame player and I was more than a little skeptical of the idea of videogames having deeper meanings and all that. I have to admit that I didn’t think very highly of videogames at the start, but it is interesting to see them used as a medium for art or for conveying certain social or political viewpoints, etc. It sort of elevates them in my opinion, maybe because these videogames are often better at communicating issues and reach a broader audience than say an ad in a magazine or on TV. And even though Nelson’s games are very strange to say the least, I think they’re examples of interactive modern art. I liked exploring them and also hearing Nelson’s own explanation of the Bomar Gene.

After reviewing what I’d blogged I was surprised that some of what I had written actually included some valid points.  Going over it reminded me of all of the issues that had interested me during the course of this class and helped guide me towards a topic for my final paper.  Other people’s blogs were helpful in this matter as well.  Even though I had to force myself to actually complete any bloggin assignments, the exercise was relatively worthwhile.  As with most things, you don’t really know what you’re capable of coming up with until you actually sit down and start writing about it.  When I was writing the blogging posts I managed to ask myself a lot of questions that I otherwise probably would have never asked, and the assignment forced me to think more critically about the issues we were studying.  It was also helpful to interact with and play off the ideas of other students.  I probably came to my greatest understanding of videogames as cultural texts through this exercise.

Really if i was to go back and take second looks at any of my posts it would probably have to be that post, now i don’t know if it was because it was the end of the year or not but it got quite a few comments. This just showed me that I had hit upon a topic that had some contention in the group and that there was a wide variety of opinions regarding the issue of counter games. The way i used the game was like a place that when an idea struck me I could go and post to get other people’s feed back on what i was thinking and then it hopefully related to the class, or i hit upon topics that would hopefully strike as controversial and get discussed more on the blog or in class.

I think that in these cases arguments can be made either way. Listening to music and watching a music video, or looking at art and then watching a movie, are both cases where there is a great deal of contrast. With video games, I think that the line is a little bit more fuzzy. In more abstract games, like Tetris, there is very little that you have to do and they are ‘distracting’ in nature. They still require a certain amount of attention and concentration on the part of the player in order to be considered ‘games’ however. RPGs present a whole new realm of gaming that allows players to assume a different persona, and make decisions that allow gamers to influence the outcome of the game.

When playing a video game you have to make decisions and you often assume a role. You are not passively watching a movie or a music video. You have to interact with the media. Many of the activities that can be performed during the games are not possible to perform in real life. They allow you to assume a new role.

In the case of video games, I have to say that a great deal concentration must be applied to enjoy the distraction.

My very first post was about the game “Flow”. I tried to compare it with “Tetris”, because 1, that was one of the only other games I knew, and 2 someone else had done it and it made sense to me. A lot of my postings ended up being comments on other people’s blogs. I think that this helped me, because it was easier for me to draw inspiration on other people’s ideas in order to open my mind.

I wrote a lot about my own experience in playing the games, because I felt that that was what I could speak about the best. My own impressions and observations were what made my posts unique to me, since a lot of them were comments. I feel like my opinions made my blogs different from anyone else’s and that was important to me.

As I got a little better with the blogs and learned more about games I feel like my postings became more relaxed and more insightful. I was able to draw a bit more inspiration from myself and less from other people, even though I still made a lot of comments because was what I was used to.

My last few posts reflected much more strong opinions about different aspects of the games. While writing one post about women in game I decided to use the ideas I thought of to insprire my paper about The Sims 2. I knew that was going to be the topic of my paper, but it wasn’t until writing that post that I decided to take angle.

I think that doing the blogs helped me to understand the games we played in this class and video games in general.

            The aspect of games that I focused most of my attention on was the social message or lesson that is revealed through the game, when one existed. For example, the Baron and McDonald’s game both had lessons to learn, one moral and one about the corporate world and its functions. FreeCiv also had underlying lessons about government, it shows how difficult it is to design a civilization and keep it going.

            Another major theme in my blogs is how the games relate to real life in different ways. FreeCiv because of the fact that it is supposed to mimic real life decision making and the McDonald’s game because it reflects decisions in corporate America. Passage was also a game relating to real life because it reflects that no matter what you do, you will eventually die, nothing can change that. It gives some perspective to the fact that some of us work really hard to succeed and others just skate by in doing the minimum to survive; in the end we all die.

            One thing I did talk about a couple of times is flow, especially when discussing that particular game. It is a concept that everyone is familiar with but I had never thought of it having a name or being studied. There are some games that definitely try to create a flow within the game and others, especially the counter games that seem to try to do anything but create flow.

            Over all, I learned more than I ever wanted to know about video games but also a lot of interesting things about other aspects of life, like culture and the evolution of technology in general. I think because I did not have a background with video games I was able to really relate what I played to the world outside of games, converting it into something I understood.

One way my blogging has changed is at first I seemed to be more focused on interpreting the details of the videogame rather than the larger topics that were related to the game. However as time went by I believe I was better able to use major concepts and ideas from the readings and from class discussions to make more in depth comments. However I do not know if that is because the way I was blogging had changed or whether it was the type of videogames that we were playing. From simple games without many messages like Pac-Man or Flow to games like September 12^th and McDonald’s videogame where there clearly is a message and a lot to write about. Also at first I was only trying to relate videogames to narratives or stories (such as with Passage, and Façade), but during my later posts I tried to interpret the videogames as art, especially in my last post about countergaming where I argued that countergames are basically interactive art.

An idea that I see worth revisiting is how game play and political messages fit together in videogames. For example I wrote that the game September 12 had a clear political message but was not big on game play. On the other hand, instead of focusing on a single political message, McDonald’s Videogame tries to send too many messages at once in order to create a more complex game with more interesting game play

I value the game journal because it has given me an opportunity to understand topics that I have been confused about. Many times I would begin a post with a certain view on a subject, but after writing for a while I would see something I had not seen before which would completely change my view on the subject. After writing out my ideas and reading other people’s ideas, I had a better understanding of the subject.

            Through my posts there is also a trend about the political and social messages the games are implying, and whether or not the message is clearly conveyed. My post about the “McDonald’s Game” addresses how the game portrays the business as disgusting and its practices unethical.  I wrote about how “Disaffected!” showed that FedEx Kinkos is a sterile environment, but that the game would make me more likely not play the game again rather than not give business to FedEx Kinkos. My “AntiWarGame” post also falls into this category. The game was pushing the idea that business is driving the war and Presidential popularity is not based on the right merits, but the game was so disrespectful to the soldiers that this factor drew my attention rather than the point it was intended to make.  I believe examining whether or not the game gets their point across is important. People are easily influenced by friends, media, and entertainment. If a videogame has the chance to make a political or social statement but fails to do so by poor design or other factors an opportunity is lost.

 Through the class I have learned that videogames to have the potential to affect people. Even if they offend people, it is not necessarily a bad thing. Occurrences in society are offensive, so if a game draws attention to them maybe people will start thinking further into the issues themselves.

Throughout the whole blogging process there was a definite change in how I wrote. As my video game vocabulary and knowledge grew, I began to form my own opinions and ideas. I became capable of discussing abstract topics and enjoyed being able to ask questions. In each of my blog posts, I always tried to ask questions. I would try to discuss what I was thinking and then give the questions that it made me answer. It was excellent to read feedback from other posters who would comment on my original post.

My post discussing addiction is one that I consider revisiting simply because it got so much feedback. It was an interesting topic that sparked a lot of debate and I think that says something about the topic. Throughout the whole blogging process I realized how important the discussion between bloggers was. Reading comments allowed different theories and arguments to be displayed to the original poster, advancing the concepts and level of discussion. The aspect of the game journal that I value most would definitely be the communication between bloggers. I would always read comments made on my posts and for the most part they offered good insight that shed a lot of light on the topic at hand. Blogging allowed the class to express different views that they may not have been able to do in class and I think the outside discussion of the class is invaluable.

a) I’m not done with all of my other posts.

and

b) Most of my posts have been made within the past three hours.

But an opportunity is an opportunity, and I do feel that I can reflect on what I’ve written so far on this game journal.

First off, I’ve noticed that most, if not all, of my posts’ analyses make reference to other games.  Personally, I find that this helps me greatly when I’m trying to explain where a particular opinion comes from, or when I’m trying to justify an argument.  I’ve been a gamer for over three-quarters of my life, so this comes naturally.  I do realize, though, that this may not be the best approach, especially with the number of people here who aren’t as–let’s go with “fanatical” about gaming as I am.  So I’m really not sure how many people actually got the references I’ve been making, or how much of it just went over everyone’s heads.  But I’m not especially worried about that, because there’s always Wikipedia (which has amazingly accurate game information, which I guess is unsurprising, since it is the Internets).

I think the idea that I’ve been trying my hardest to espouse is that video games are a powerful art form.  A certain amount of this is merely fanboyish sticking up for my hobby, but truly, I believe that video games are a medium that can accomplish what no other can.  The interactivity brings a sense of immersion that no other art form can.  It also acts as sort of a democratization of art, allowing anybody to, in a manner of speaking, become the author or director.  And ideally, games are an incredible confluence of the visual, the aural, the literary, and the cerebral–the product of painters, musicians, poets, and mathemeticians.  It’s difficult for me to convey exactly how exciting that is.

So I have a tendency to get pretty enthusiastic and passionate in my responses to discussions within these journals.  Since I have such deep respect for gaming as an art form, I really want to push people to go deep into their criticism, and really explore the heart and soul of gaming.  Oftentimes, I do end up disagreeing with people’s statements–I think my defense of morality within Doom was probably the most extreme in that regard.  But really, I just want everbody to approach games as a literature or film critic would approach their respective art forms.  I think my favorite example of that sort of thinking would be my entry about The Baron.

And I think that, judging by the deep intellectual discourse taking place within the journals, people truly are taking games seriously as an art form.   I couldn’t be happier about this.  I think–well, hope, I guess–that if a larger audience had the same kind of opportunity to examine games as closely as we have in this class, there wouldn’t even be a question as to whether or not games are art; to suggest that they aren’t would be as daft as trashing The Great Gatsby, or Casablanca.

I believe that real life graphics can have a negative impact on specific types of games.  There are some games designed specifically for a quick distraction. I feel like the simple side scrolling video games like Mario will always have a place in the minds of gamers because of its simplicity. It is a game less complicated and more available to gamers of all ages. Games with real life graphics generally seem designed for an older audience and require more technical skills to be fully enjoyed. Video games are a form of entertainment but I feel as though as graphics become better and better, people begin to lose sight of the real world by more fully immersing themselves into a virtual reality. Games are meant to be played as a distraction, not as an enveloping world that the player gets lost in. More advanced technologies, not just graphics, have allowed players to lose their identity in a game. I think that as graphics become better, that possibility of losing oneself becomes more possible. Something that I think would be more interesting to include in games is the type of spontaneous drama that occurs in reality tv shows. People watch those shows because they never know whats going to happen next. What if video games were designed around this concept of spontaneous drama? Could games become just as addictive as television shows? I think the video game market would increase dramatically because these games would incorporate elements that would attract female players. If games had random interactive cat fights video games could take over the free time of men and women everywhere.

I have said this before and I guarantee it won’t be the last time:

I suck at video games.

To be fair, I really just am incompetent at anything that requires movement and coordination. I was the only girl on the YMCA basketball team for two years to never score (or attempt) a basket.

That being said, Call of Duty 3 and 4 have become the bane of my existence.

It started out this weekend with a couple of friends who forced me to play CoD4. I figured since they were inebriated I would have an advantage…I was wrong. I got killed so many times and after about an hour, the only times I killed anyone were when I accidentally tossed my grenade into what looked like empty space and caught someone by surprise (I get twitchy fingers and inexplicably press buttons) and the other time I just pouted and used my feminine charm until one of the boys LET me kill him (and even then, it took me awhile to figure it out).

This afternoon I went to Zach and Eric’s apartment to borrow a book and Zach wanted to play CoD3 and I got all excited. “I have played this twice this weekend! Maybe I will get the hang of it THIS time!”

…I was wrong again.

Zach and I traded off playing single player, and I think I amused him greatly. He tried his best to help me but to no avail. “You should probably face the guy to shoot him…”

It ended up going: Me dying in 30 seconds, Zach playing for 15 minutes, me dying in 33 seconds, Zach playing for 30 minutes, me deciding I now need a nap, Zach not letting me leave until I watched him get to the save point, Zach reaches save point, FINALLY I nap.

Now I suppose the point of this blog thing is to have a point and I have been trying to think of one for awhile now and here it is:

Will video games ever become on the same level as movies? Many of us were (at least) initially offended by the SCMRPG, but would we would have been if it were a movie? Probably not as much.

This seems very unrelated to my previous quips on CoD so I will try to explain. I have discussed this with Sean and Eric some, but I do not think video games will ever reach the same cultural significance to them as movies if only for the simple fact that the audience is much more narrow. I can watch a movie about WW2 or Un-named Arab countries in war, but I have a feeling that countless hours will be required for me to get anything out of these games and that I really hope I am not the only one who has this problem.

Ideas?

Ok nap time. Thanks Zach for making me sleepy while watching you.

In my early posts I would discuss specific games and what about the game I may have liked or disliked, or what issues the game may raise.  In my later posts I discussed social issues associated with videogames like morality in videogames and the use of videogames as a medium for socio-political discussion.  I think this progression paralleled my progression in understanding how to critically analyze videogames.  In most of my posts I discussed a topic with sided arguments and so I would pick a side and express why I chose that side. Then I would try to give an example with a game I knew well (which limited my choices) to support my opinion on the subject.  For the most part I have not changed any of my opinions that I expressed in my posts.  There is only one post that I would only slightly alter. I would change the comment I made about anti-games like the Bomar Gene and This is How You Will Die not being games because they loose the play aspect that makes them games.  Now that I understand how these games are supposed to be “played” (and I use “played’ lightly).  I still think that they should be categorized differently, but they are games and do still hold some aspects of traditional videogames.

Other peoples posts were really helpful to read especially when it came to writing the inquiry’s.  A lot of times they would bring up topics I would have never thought to discuss. They were even helpful when I was choosing my topic and game for my final paper.  I think that for future classes there should be a few deadlines throughout the semester when a certain number of the posts should be due. That would help to spread out the posts more and prevent a large build up at the end of the semester. It would be especially helpful to people who are procrastinators like myself.