One reoccurring theme I noticed in my blogs was that I look at videogames from a different perspective because of the little gaming that I have done. My blogs tended to be either about specific games we played in class or the games that my friends play. The games that I played most are Mario Kart and Super Smash Brothers both on Nintendo64. The new systems and games that people were blogging about were generally not the Halo or Grand Theft Auto games that I have had to watch my friends play, so often I had no idea what they were talking about. Many of my questions and thoughts about videogames are not about the playability and the graphics and how that affects the games. Many of my blogs were comments off of others blogs. The reason for this was because I felt that the ideas that I generated about videogames were not as in depth as some of the ideas my classmates posted on. From reading what their interpretation of the game or their experience I generated my own thoughts on the game or similar games or experiences. Many of the blogs talked about videogames in ways that I do not typically think about videogames, which caused me to question different aspects of the.
Some of the questions that I posted in my blogs would be interesting to actually research and discuss which makes me wish that I had kept up with the blogging throughout the semester. I like the open discussion and through the blogs one can see different trains of thought and interpretations expressed. For me the idea of posting my thoughts on videogames seemed intimidating during the year, because of my typical non-blogging, non-videogame nature and the obvious experience my other classmates had with both. Initially I thought that commenting and creating blogs would be a challenge for me but, after reading my classmates’ blogs many different ideas and questions arose about the games. The most valuable aspect of the blog was reading my classmates thoughts and experience with the games. My willingness to comment on their blogs instead of creating my own shows how interested I was in the experience of my classmates.
May 7th, 2008
mstarkey
Jason Nelson’s countergames were ascetically very interesting, but the visual aspects of the games overshadowed the games and their messages. I was wondering how successful his games actually were? How many people actually completed the games the first time they tried? How many people played for discovering his cryptic messages within the random poetry and flashing words? For me, the games took more concentration to look away from the flash animation and crude drawings then it took to complete the levels of Game, Game, Game and Again Game. The nature of Nelson’s countergames was to combine poetry and simple games to portray messages to the player. Not being a huge poetry fan, and one who plays short online games to pass time for a few minutes, I do not see a majority of people playing his games for the messages. I assume that most people play these games once or twice, showing a friend the cool animation and the morbid nature of some of his games like Bomar Gene or Death Spin. I do not see most people saying ‘look at this cool game that shows how people are constantly changing their belief systems’ when showing a friend Game, Game, Game, and Again Gamein their office cubicle. Surly there are those in the art world that appreciate Nelson’s work as a unique art form, but for the majority surfing I-AM-Bored.com, how many are looking for games that express societal qualms through revised poetry scribbled over with flash animation? His games are very personal and that is why I feel that only those who spend time to analyze his personal messages about today’s world are the ones that would truly understand his games. For the average gamer, these games, or countergames would be very unsuccessful in transcribing his messages. The playability of the games is very easy to understand and to operate, which would not deter people from playing, but the strange messages, music and animation that accompany seem to separate his games from the normal videogame genre.
May 5th, 2008
mstarkey
So I was thinking earlier about the Legend of Zelda. It suddenly hit me just how many official games there are in the story canon, and how it is perhaps the largest series of games with what is, technically, a continuous story. Sure, I think that there are, grand total, a larger number of Mario games, but they don’t have any sort of continuous plot line–the games only occasionally reference earlier games (especially recently, with it being sort of a running joke in the Paper Mario games and Super Mario Galaxy that Bowser always tries to kidnap Princess Peach and always fails). The Legend of Zelda games, on the other hand, actually have a defined timeline that all of the canon games fall into, even if how exactly they do so is a mystery to most of the fans. (There is quite a bit of speculation on the subject, and interviews with the creative team have revealed that there is, in fact, a master timeline that all of the games are required to fit into, and that there are two actual timelines existent in the series, which split apart after the first Nintendo 64 Zelda game, the Ocarina of Time.)
One of the things that caught my interest in this subject, though, is the fact that there are currently fourteen full-fledged canon games in the series, yet each new game is greeted with fervent anticipation and high expectations. This is really quite amazing, when contrasted with other long running series, like the Final Fantasy series, which has lost a significant portion of it’s fan base over the last three or four games (not to mention the spin-offs, which are generally considered to be badly made games). I have begun to wonder if, in fact, this is due to the naming conventions in each series. The Legend of Zelda games have “The Legend of Zelda” as the first part of the title, but always have a secondary half of the title which is unique to each game and describes what is going to happen. The Final Fantasy games, by contrast, are simply named by number, with nothing to differentiate each game but a roman numeral and a picture.
May 2nd, 2008
scify_rd
I definitely see a common theme that resurfaces in most of my blog entries. Not surprisingly, I talk a lot about the narrative components seen in video games. I’m a English major, what can I say? I’ve always been interested in literature and literary texts. I guess that’s why I enjoyed games like The Baron and The Bomar Gene so much. These games use texts in ways that I’ve never seen before, and that’s why I enjoyed them so much. Video games illustrate the idea that stories and narratives are a big part of everyday life. The stories we both create and encounter say a lot about the society in which we live. So, the fact that games can act as narratives means that video games are also reflective of our society. I’m not saying that all video games present elaborate stories, but I think all video games have story elements that comment on the practices we encounter in the real world. For instance, even the old Atari game Frogger follows the theme of journey and navigation through different obstacles. This idea ties into another subject that resurfaces in my blog posts - exploration. I think I touch on the use of space in video games and how it relates to our desire to explore and conquer new spaces.
I really enjoyed posting blogs throughout the semester. In the beginning, I was somewhat hesitant to contribute my thoughts and ideas to class discussion. I think blogging acted as an outlet for everything I left unsaid in class. Towards the end of the semester, I became more comfortable talking about video games, both in class and on the website. Looking at the evolution of my blog posts, I noticed that I became less structurized in my blog posts. It seems to me that I thought there was a “right answer” when it came to video games. My later blog posts are more like streams of consciousness, in which I pose a lot of questions that might not have a “right answer.” Before I took the class, I thought that video games had little to do with my life or my interests. After taking the class, however, I’ve realized that video games relate to a lot of my interests - music, writing, art - and video games tell us a lot about our desires, our fears and our ideas about the real world.
May 1st, 2008
scarterb
After reading my previous entries I don’t seem to have one subject I wrote about. Usually I commented on other people’s main entry and wrote my own opinion on the subject. Even though I wrote them as comments, I usually didn’t talk about quite the same thing as the original poster. It seems like I looked at their main idea and then used it as a prompt to write my own entry rather than actually responding to what they said. I think some of my comments would have been more meaningful if I did more of a response rather than taking the main idea from the first poster and writing about it from my perespective.
I also noticed that most of my posts from the beginning are more based on stuff we studied in class than my later ones. In my first post I talked about flow and the Star Wars game. However, in my later entries I don’t seem to incorporate much from the readings and class discussions into my post. I talked about games we played and how I felt about them, but I didn’t bring in outside information.
Overall, I think my posts were pretty varied and had an idea that they were trying to get across. Some of them seem to ramble on which is most likely due to the fact that on the blogs I just write, I don’t proofread like I would a paper. As a result, I just write about stuff as I go along and as it comes to my head. It may have been a better idea to write a blog and then go back and reread it later before posting it. However, for each blog I wrote, I wrote it and posted it at the same sitting. That said, I am content with most of my blogs and think they contribute something worthwhile to the discussion of videogames.
May 1st, 2008
Dennis Price
Has anyone noticed how frequently games are used as a commercial ploy? For example, theres dozens of ads on the internet that are like mini shooting games or “click this button” types of games for people browsing the net to play, enticing people to send them information or do a survey through alluring, mindless pea-shooter games. It makes me wonder if there was a survey done to prove that a majority of people are more likely buy into what they’re selling or giving if their banner had a game of some sort. I suppose that those mini games are intriguing little Flash doodads, but how does killing a fly with a swatter or beating the crap out of George Bush have anything to do with getting a free PS3 or taking a survey on a matchmaking site? Is it purposely not suppose to? Is it lying to the consumer by advertising like that? Sorry if I’m just blurting out questions but I just kinda want to get them out there. Really what brought about this post, wasn’t because of those games but for another game.
I’m a member of Total Assault, which is like a club for new musical artists (mostly the metal, rock, electronica kind) and there was a link on the most recent email they sent me…a link to a widget game for Disturbed’s new CD, Indestructible. (Which, if you want to play, is here.) It’s not a fancy game, but I would have to say one of the first games that I have ever seen to actually promote something else. All it is, is a FFR (flashflashrevolution…ie DDR but for your fingers, there’s a whole site for it here). And you just press the A S D F and G keys when the color bar from the top reached the bottom where the keys are. And you basically play kinda like DDR except it’s only to Disturbed’s new songs on their new CD.
I played it for a little while, and you get into a sort of flow even though the music seems less “flowy” than you’d like it to be (I find that since techno music has a way more rhythmic sound it’s easy to get into a trance listening to Trance, like how a lot of the songs for FFR and DDR are like). What interests me is the fact that since get into this sort of flow, you’re not really listening to the music (the beats you press seem to not have too much connection with the music) but sort of absorbing it. And since you’re absorbing the sounds it’s like listening to the music that you’d normally just kinda put on in the car and zone out to (which I do all the time…it’s like a driving flow or something…and yes, I sing…loudly in my car. I probably look ridiculous.) This makes using a game like this almost an ingenious marketing ploy, to me. You don’t really get into that sort of state when you’re on the band’s site, and listening to the tunes while you click away, browsing like Beanie baby sites and stuff. I think it’s because you’re mind is much more active if you’re listening to the music on a site. I was on a music site after I played the game and I kept flipping through the songs (I have a short attention span) so when I’m going through the songs, I only hear about the first 15 seconds. With a game, I’m forced to listen to the ENTIRE song and just let the whole thing sink it, but it doesn’t really feel like it’s forced.
I suppose the whole point to this is just how much games are turning up literally everywhere (especially like movies’ official sites and network channels like USA) and how they’re being sort of used as a commerical commodity.
I know this is literally the last day to respond to these kinda things, but for you last minute bloggers, what do you think about this?
April 30th, 2008
Diane
The most common thing about my previous, beginning-of-the-semester, posts were than they were all unfinished. I still have some post drafts saved! Speaking of which, I’m just going to go ahead and post them here:
Reality on the Subject:
Random Questions of Thought
On the subject of reality, doea reality really help the game? If the game is more realistic than it really needs to be does that add more “fun” ot the game or does it really depend on the subject of the game?
On the subject of reality, we don’t tend to just use graphics as a mean to make something more realistic. We thrive in the “real.” We like the story to be real and gameplay to be close as real as possible (like alot of sports games, etc.). But why is it that we need things to be real in order to really enjoy it? This realism plays on a person to escape from reality. The drive to be real desensitizes us from reality. This is probably the case for most when it comes to violence in video games. But if games are considered as “art” then wouldn’t the violence and realism in video games be considered as a reflection of our violent in society?
Post #20:
I can understand that familiarity can cause a person to enjoy a game and especially get so deeply involved with it that they enter the state of flow; however, my question is (if this is the case) how do you go about getting started in a new game in the first place?
For me, I’ve never played any Warcraft game before World of Warcraft. I never knew the story line and personally, I never was interested in
As you can see, I’ve kept them in their incomplete state. Partially because I’m lazy and partially because if I were to continue the post, it wouldn’t have been my original thought process at the time when I was thinking it (as well as the knowledge that influenced it is different than my current knowledge on the topic of video games). But mostly, to further reiterate how incomplete my posts were.
I can’t remember really if it was because I didn’t have the time or I was crunched for time or because I have a very multitracted mind that tends to jump around alot (it makes sense in my head, honest). I know that the one thing that stayed consistent was how a large number of them were comments (I always found it easier to comment on an opinion than just kinda randomly write…if you read my personal blogs they tend to stay in the area of “I’m bored” or “I’m avoiding work” or “I’m too lazy to clean”) and that they mention art. I suppose I talk about art the most because I am an artist and I actually want to become a character designer for video games (cliche, I know). Strangely and honestly enough, I normally don’t play video games, at least not often.
Anyway, I think I’ve always considered video games as a form of art and all through my posts, even the more currently ones, I still feel very strongly about it. The form of art that games take though has changed a bit from taking this class as well as my Aesthetics class (AVT 307 - if you want a class on the philosophy of art and a class entirely wrapped around the questions “What is art? And who says it is?” then I would take that class). I always just thought of video games as just another form of visual art but there is so much more than that. My appreciation for the game story has also grown. I never really associated the story/narrative as a separte entity to the game, since most of the games I play have some sort of graphics (Baron helped me with this a lot). Not only that but the game’s mechanics and thought process of “purpose” in games, like messages and statements. However, another thing that I’ve never really considered (and only actually thought about it recently which is noticeable in the last couple of posts) is the commercial side to the gaming industry (game demographics, sales, publicity, image, etc), which really impacts on the more mainstream gaming world than any other ascpect of gaming. It’s a whole other ballpark. What’s even more weird is that I’m actually interested in it (because I really dislike anything business/the “otherside” of the world).
I think the reason why I’m so interested is because of how much it can impact everything. It is sort of more like I’m interested in the power struggle that there is as well as how greatly it can impact our gaming society so easily and effortlessly. And I suppose I never really would have gained this interested without the final project and without this class.
And to answer about whether or not I’d go back and change my posts or add to them… I would and I wouldn’t. I would because I’d like to see if I can answer the questions I might have brought up but wouldn’t since it might alter what my original thoughts were at the time. I would definitly change my first post to something with a bit more complete and probably the Baron post since I really didn’t get as far as everyone else did in the game so I really didn’t know the whole story before writing the post.
April 30th, 2008
Diane
In my blogging, I mostly focused on the actual games that we had played for class, and most of my posts are split 50/50 on negative and positive feedback about the games themselves. I think because for me it is hard to read about something that involves your senses, for example I cannot read about art without having the art in front of me, the same goes for video games. I found all of the readings to be informative, but without playing the games that are mentioned in the articles, some of which we did play, it was had to get a firm grasp on what they were actually talking about.
Also, looking at my posts, I seem to have a lot of gripe about Interactive Fiction. It might be confusing from my posts, but I do see IF as a realm of gaming, I think my opinions about it are just slanted because I do not enjoy playing IF games, and this unenjoyment comes from not being able to get a grasp on how exactly to play. I think for myself, I need to just spend more time with interactive fiction, really try and hone down on the different techniques needed to move forward in a game to really be able and form an opinion about the nature of interactive fiction being a genre of games.
Overall, I have personally never been that serious about video games, really only playing games that take no skill and no thinking capacity to play. Having to blog and write analysis and having to think deeper about the true nature and inspiration of games has opened my mind to all sorts of different games. However, looking back at my writing, I can tell that my personal gaming tastes have not changed. I still love a good game that I can just run through, jump on an enemy, and collect coins.
April 30th, 2008
emilywitt
I still remember everything about the NES that was in my house during my childhood. It was hooked up to the TV in my parent’s room and I used to sneak in when I could to play. We only had 3 games: Super Mario 3, Duck Hunt, and Paperboy. Duck Hunt was my favorite, but our gun controller never seemed to want to work. My mom, my dad, and I would get together at least once a week and play together, one of the only times that my family ever really bonded over something. I also remember the day that the NES died and my dad went and bought the SNES, it just was not the same.
I think the reason that there are so many products such as t-shirts and other apparel that features the original Nintendo system is because everybody who had that system in their house has some sort of emotional connection with it. For me, it reminds me of a time where my family was able to enjoy something together.
I also think that this is the same reason why the Wii has become very popular. I can play a PS2 or an Xbox game by myself, but when I play solo on my friend’s Wii, it just does not have the same effect as playing with others. It’s the simple things in Nintendo’s game design that makes them no fun unless you have a competitor. Take for instance Wii Sports, those games are just not as fun unless you have somebody to play tennis against or to bowl against. I think that there is a draw to try and bring people together through video games, and in my opinion, Nintendo has done a great job in creating games and systems that truly draw people together.
April 30th, 2008
emilywitt
After playing all of the games that were presented from Jason Nelson, I found the Bomar Gene to be the most interesting overall. At first, I could not figure out exactly how the game itself worked, but after a little probing I figured it out. Its clear that once you being ‘playing’ the Bomar Gene that it is a countergame, not having much of a scenario to play through and not typical game features such as a player to control or an enemy to attack. This game is more of an aesthetic experience than anything else.
The one feature of the Bomar Gene that I feel is most like a game is the element of exploration. In many games, you are given a player to use to travel around different levels and to explore and collect points and different objects along the way. For the Bomar Gene, there is no player or points to rack up, but going through each gene and discovering the different components that allow for video clips and texts to pop up, is this game’s element of exploration. The hunt to be able to see all the videos and to read all the texts is Nelson’s way of racking up points.
I think that it is interesting that the Bomar Gene, on the outside, has no visible hints that there could be elements of actual game in what is described as a countergame. I feel that the element of exploration gives hint of some elements of game, but elements such as rules and a game world could be argued. Although, each screen is different when you click a specific gene and each could be considered as a different ‘world’ in a sense. Overall, the game is a little quirky, but I do enjoy the exploration that Nelson provides in this countergame.
April 30th, 2008
emilywitt
I always knew that people took issues in the world and molded them in a way so that the general population could understand different points of view on these issues, I however had never played one myself. The game September 12th was very interesting to me in many different ways. When I first played the game, I merely played as if I was just playing another game, in that I would try and kill all of the terrorists that I could without killing any of the civilians. After playing got a little boring, I started studying the game much more in detail to try and figure out what exactly the game designer was trying to get across. As I started to play with a fresh look, it began to creep me out a little after noticing that when you killed civilians, more civilians would come and grieve their death and then become terrorists themselves, an artist statement that no matter how much you try an kill the terrorists, you will kill civilians in the process and that will just lead to more terrorism. Although, if you let the game sit, and do not make any actions in the game, the terrorism rate goes down, a statement from the designer to say that if we do not try and fight them, they will not grow as cells.
I believe that this is a very effective way of getting across a point to a generation that is absorbed by games and would not normally go and research and form their own opinions about these topics. Although the game really only presents one point of view about this situation, it is still a creative way of displaying a point that many different types of people at different intelligence levels could pick up on, as long as the player realizes that the game that they are playing is not just a game.
April 30th, 2008
emilywitt
In similar response to my post about Façade, interactive fiction is a gaming realm that I just do not understand, and I cannot figure out how to actually get through a game. Unlike Façade that had the scenario played out in front of you, the games Zork and Galatea are just text based. Here is where the difference between a game and a story mixes in my mind. In my mind, and through playing these games, I do not find this realm of interactive fiction to be much of a game. Although these games hold the aspects as defined by Aarseth of what a game is, rules, semiotic system, and gameplay, I think that each individual person’s definition of gameplay is where the line between game and narrative becomes blurry.
For myself, interactive fiction does not fit into the category of gameplay. I feel that this genre of game is more like the ‘choose your own adventure’ books. In both ways, the player, or the reader, creates the story line and can choose where to go within the story. Interactive fiction is different in that through the use of the commands, the player can explore the area and discover many more things than a reader can in one of the books. I myself have never been much of a writer, so trying to explore this world and create a narrative is not something that I personally would do for fun. Even though I do not believe that interactive fiction is much of a game, I can see where it steps over into the gaming world. For some people, exploring through text and creating a story entertains them in the same ways that a game would, but for myself, I do not see the overall appeals.
However, I do find fault in my gripes in that I cannot figure out exactly how to play and get moving in these games, even after reading the guide on how to play. I cannot seem to get the point I want across, ever.
April 30th, 2008
emilywitt
Playing Façade was my first venture into playing a game that was based off of text, a game that creates a narrative. After playing in class, I am still confused as to how those types of games work. Not having the experience in the game definitely affected the play of the game. I quickly came to realize that I could not just say anything that I wanted, my vocabulary had to be somewhat ‘dumbed down’ so that the computer could tell what I wanted to say. Because of my problems in trying to communicate with the computer and the game, this just led to frustration instead of a joy that comes with playing a game.
However, once I could somewhat get passed the disconnect between myself and the game, I found the game was a rolling narrative of sorts. By that I mean, the story develops as you go along through the game, it is not set out beforehand, but is created by the certain movements and phrases that are said during the gameplay. I do feel though that the narrative that does come from playing was sort of lacking. The situation of being invited to a dinner party where you are the only guest with this couple could be an awkward situation in itself, and their constant bickering and wanting you to choose sides just increases the awkwardness.
In my normal life, I hate awkward situations, so for me, this game was not that fun to play. Between not being able to say what I wanted and them being able to understand, and the awkwardness of the overall situation, for me made it a non-pleasurable experience. However, if there were a handbook on how to communicate with the game so that I could get across what I wanted to say, I might have been able to enjoy it a little better.
April 30th, 2008
emilywitt
Just hearing the name ‘Super Columbine Massacre’ put an image into my head of exactly what this game was going to be like. I decided that I wanted to play a little bit of it before I read the artist statement just to get a feel for the game, but I soon realized after playing for about fifteen minutes that without reading the statement, the game was just thoroughly disturbing. Danny Ledonne in his statement says “I wanted to make something that mattered,” and in some ways I feel that he accomplished that task. After playing and reading Ledonne’s statement, I still felt extremely disturbed that I had played this game, however I can see Ledonne’s point in that the game did, in some ways, put me into the minds of Dylan and Eric, however twisted it might seem to play the game.
I think that what was most disturbing about playing this game in comparison with other games where there is shooting and killing involved, is that in this game they were real people and that this event actually happened. I know that this was Ledonne’s plan in making the game, but having real names to the real faces that you are killing is upsetting. For example, in the game you encounter the girl who’s story is widely known about admitting to believe in God before being shot at Columbine. Having and exact name and an exact face to put in that situation puts you directly into the situation that happened.
I think that if this event had never actually occurred and that it was just a situation that was created in Ledonne’s mind, I would not have been as disturbed while playing the game. There still would have been a little disturbance because of the school setting, but there would not have been an actual picture in my mind of the events that happened on that day.
April 30th, 2008
emilywitt
I have to admit that I wasn’t really much of a “gamer” growing up. However, I was into Nintendo 64 at one point. I was a big Mario fan and Mario Kart was one of my favorite games. Watching the trailer for the new Mario Kart for Wii, I felt a big nostalgic and thought I’d blog about it. What makes Mario Kart so appealing? First, it combines all the familiar characters we knew as children, including Mario, Luigi, Peach, Princess, Bowzer, etc. The game is also appealing because of its use of space. The game allows players to choose from numerous environments to race in. (My personal favorites were Yoshi Mountain and Rainbow Road.) In this way, the game plays on the human desire to explore unfamiliar spaces. You get some sort of pleasure in exploring and uncovering secret routes and short cuts. Well, at least I do anyway. I also think the progressive gameplay is an intriguing element. The player gets to choose his or her own path to the finish line. The various elements in the game, such as the wild card each player can receive, enhance the gaming experience. If you obtain a lightning bolt, you can zap all other players. While they shrink in size, you remain the same and zoom past them. These elements can sometimes raise the difficulty level, making it that much more satisfying when you finish the race first. Another reason I like Mario Kart is because it was a family game. It brings people together. My cousins and I always played Mario Kart together. I think the game entertained our competitive spirits, a thing that a lot of games do. Fighting games and racing games are just among the many games that allow people to exercise their competitiveness. If the new Mario Kart plays on any of the same aspects that first made me gravitate towards the game, I think I’ll have to buy my very own Wii.
April 30th, 2008
scarterb
Ok. I find it a little creepy that I keep hearing the same songs used in SCMRPG on the radio nowadays. I guess I was oblivious to the songs before I played the game. Now, it seems like I hear the songs every single day. I think the game attached deeper meaning to the songs. Therefore, I’m become more consciously aware of them. It just goes to show you how video games can seep into our everyday lives - We just don’t realize it. Now everytime I hear Radiohead’s “Creep,” I’m going to be reminded of Columbine and the game. I’m not sure whether this is a good thing or not. If Danny Ledonne’s intent was to keep the conversation about Columbine going, he was definitely successful. The realia incorporated into the game are everyday things that we come into contact with regularly. But songs are meant for pleasure and entertainment. Has Ledonne taken the pleasurable aspect out of those particular songs? Would you rather listen to a song that has social value, a song that forces you to think about serious issues such as school shootings? Or, would you rather just sit back and enjoy the song for what it is? In any case, we’re just sitting here. Whether we’re playing the game or listening to a song in the game, we’re not really doing anything. I don’t know about you guys, but I’m sometimes hesitant to say that video games like SCMRPG force us to act. Video games help us change the world! Not really. It seems like such a long shot, you know? Can video games really inspire us to act? I hate to say it, but most people will just play the game and that’s it. Should we really praise SCMRPG for evoking thought, even though it doesn’t necessarily evoke action? Well, producing mere thought is the first step, right?
April 29th, 2008
scarterb
After playing Rom Check Fail I was reminded of a freeware game called I Wanna Be the Guy (IWBTG). Like Rom Check Fail, IWBTG relies on the player being familiar with the graphics, music and gamespaces of old Nintendo 8-bit games such as Mike Tyson’s Punch-Out and Mega Man. The game has a bit of a cult following because it is the most difficult game ever. Ever.
Like old Nintendo games, standard left-to-right controls with the ability to jump and shoot help navigate the player-character, “The Kid.” Also, IWBTG opens up with an introductory screen using the same sort of broken English commonly found in games made in Japan (i.e. “All Your Base Are Belong to Us” or “). Though IWBTG can actually be beaten and sort of makes sense, what it and Rom Check Fail have that makes both of these games fun to play is the ability to make a player say, “Oh yeah, that’s from the castle level of Mega Man 2!” or “But Zangief isn’t supposed to be green!” These games that use material from old platformers are quite innovative. They take something old and tired and put a new spin on it.
Unlike Rom Check Fail, which I think is more of an anti-game, IWBTG has a level system, save points, mini-bosses and an ending. I think that this would be an interesting game to discuss in future semesters of HNRS353, at least alongside Rom Check Fail.
Word of advice: the game is incredibly frustrating so maybe watching Youtube videos of how to progress through the game will help you.
April 29th, 2008
ckenny
The idea of holding a conversation with a computer game character, though not a new one, intrigued me. I can still recall downloading programs off of BBSs that promised “real” text-based conversations with your computer. The conversations sounded as stiff as a starched collar but the promise of having a chat with nobody seemed like it could be fun. It never got fun.
Me: What are you doing?
Computer: I don’t understand “doing.”
Façade is another game that I was familiar with by watching way too much G4TV. I waited for months until a Mac version was designed before I could play it. It seemed so much more advanced than the games I used to play - at least based on what I had seen of it. Façade is the most recent computer “game” that allows users to talk to virtual characters. After two sentences, though, I felt like I was playing the old text-based programs but I found that I enjoyed the storyline of the unhappy couple. The way that I managed to plod through the game was to, instead of fooling myself into thinking that I was talking with my computer, treat Façade like a game that I wanted to complete. Instead of having my character “pick up the sword” I entered dialogue telling the characters that they “turn me on.”
Though the game behaves like any other text-based game or interactive fiction - what you type affects how you progress in the game - the characters’ facial expressions and voices make the player feel that more is at stake. While I didn’t care if I upset my old DOS program - that monotone bastard was a sad sack anyway - I actually wanted the characters of Façade to be happy.
I don’t think artificial intelligence will ever resemble human intelligence, at least not in my or my children’s’ lifetimes, so these sorts of games fall flat in that respect. However if you treat Façade like a game with an outcome, it can actually be fun… for a few minutes, at least.
April 29th, 2008
ckenny
I’ve noticed that my blog entries from the first to the fifth have gotten progressively simpler. I think I took the first one more serious because I intended on doing an entry per week. When I realized that I wasn’t going to be able to keep up a task of Herculean effort akin to cleaning out stables, I found it easier to just dumb down my thoughts and rush an entry.
I like the idea of blogging. It’s a new way to share thoughts and ideas with like-minded people while keeping everything on one self-contained website. I don’t like the idea that I MUST post an entry especially for weeks when the subject matter was, I found, a little uninspiring - the week we played FreeCiv - or when we covered a blog-worthy game that ended up being part of an Inquiry assignment - Super Columbine Massacre RPG.
Maybe if I felt that people, besides the professor, actually read my entries I would keep up with them. I feel that the readers find reading my entries as tedious as I sometimes find writing them. Or maybe if I just kept my mouth shut in class I could have saved some of my material for the blog instead of class discussion.
I guess blogging as a class assignment is inevitable. Blogging is relatively new and professors want to try it out with their students. As I wrote, blogging is conducive to discussion and sharing ideas just so long as your best material wasn’t already spoken in class.
WARNING: My next batch of blog entries are going to be some of the most hurried and consequently terrible writing I’ve ever done.
April 29th, 2008
ckenny
I’m writing my final paper on Toribash, a futuristic fighting game created by a Swedish software developer by the name of Hampus Söderström. Söderström describes the game as a “turn-based fighting game. Create your own martial arts movies in single player sandbox mode, or join the competition in the multi player modes.” In the game, you customize your own moves and create mini fighting clips. You can see a trailer for the game on the Toribash website: www.toribash.com. I was interested in the game because it explores the physics behind different fighting moves, and the game seems to take violence in video games to a new level. It’s really like something I’ve never seen before. It’s ironic because players are made up of what looks like wooden blocks, yet blood spews out when players are hit. The game is pretty difficult to get a handle over because you must create different moves by relaxing, contracting, extending or holding various joints. Manipulate all the right joints and you’ll come up with some killer fighting move that dismembers your opponent. The game is a progression game, because players advance the game by inventing new moves.
Toribash is somewhat of a conventional fighting game if you consider its depiction of blood and gore. But you can’t really argue that Toribash can influence players to behave violently. Or can you? The characters in Doom are fantastical monsters, but Danny Ledonne suggests that the game had some influence on Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. So, do games like Toribash that use nonrealistic subjects still trigger violent behavior? In my opinion, you can’t blame violence in reality on video games. It is clear that both Harris and Klebold suffered from depression and it is possible that games like Doom exacerbated their feelings of anger and frustration. However, that does not mean that everyone who plays Doom will commit mass murder. Just like video games, stories and films have the ability to evoke intense emotion like anger, sadness or frustration. How come we rarely hear about film or television being the cause of violent behavior?
I’m interested in hearing what you guys think about it. Oh, and I’m also interested in hearing which games you guys have decided to study for your final papers.
April 27th, 2008
scarterb
Older Posts
