Future Case

Crossmedia, Social, Mobile, Business Modeling, Marketing, Research and insights

Archive for November 2012

Notes on Sloterdijk’s Philosophy of Plural Spherology in the Context of Technological Politics Studies.

leave a comment »

In 2009 Boom Publishers published the long-waited-for Dutch translation of Peter Sloterdijk’s Sphären lll. Schäume – Plurale Sphärologie. I was anxious to read it. Spheres lll, as I would call the book in English is the third book of the ‘Foam trilogy’, Sloterdijk’s opus magnum and treat to our understanding of humanity, communities and ‘being there’. For me, Sloterdijk’s writings have become and object to think with in terms of media, technology and culture. The trilogy has a straight forward set up Book l, micro spheres named Blasen (bubbles), book ll, macro spheres named Globen and book lll Plural Spherology named Schaum (Foam). That is the conceptual set up of the trilogy in which we must understand that the three levels of spheres cannot do without each other.

Spheres, or better Spherology is about people and space. It is, as Peter Sloterdijk (whom I shall refer to in this text as PS) calls it a ‘Chronolatery in Space’, a border-transcendent movement, say traffic, in which capital (value creation such as economical, social, democratic and cultural values) is generated. PS wrote “If you are in the world, you are always in a sphere”. And this is exactly the issue when trying to understand what and how new media is effecting our lives and consequently, the regulation of it. Regulation not necessarily means formal law-prescription and enforcement. It may also refer to functional operating systems in which people can participate and feel part of the group, protocol perhaps. Regulation in that sense can be regarded as a projection of security – belonging – and PS’s words lead us, as the projection of security, to the feeling of Immunity, as an individual but also as a group and even further, grander communities (cities, countries, the world). It is, as PS calls it, a creational attempt of the System, the sphere that holds groups together. Immunity systems (foam bubbles) can be regarded as a projection of security. Way back in time, the tribe was the sphere of immunity and togetherness was the metaphysical unity to guard us. Once Christian theology appeared, the human factor disappeared in favor of the appearance of God who now symbolized immunity through unity. Along with fascism and communism, religion is an attempt to create macro systems, in terms of Spherology called Globen (globes). In line with this logic, PS now coins capitalism as the most important macro sphere or Globe.

Apart from eruditely feeding the reader with a sheer endless list of coherent examples of his spherological realism, PS uses the metaphor of foam to illustrate the pluralism and varieties of communal behaviour when peoples live close to each other and the closer we live together, the more and the smaller the bubbles become; a multi-room society, from Globen; foam bubbles on a macro scale like countries or cities to the level of intimate tiny bubbles as representation of our smallest immunity, our room.

In all cases there are communities (clubs, schools, friends) that all form these bubbles and provide resilience thus offering possibilities of resistance to totalization of society. According to PS, this is positive human behavior. But, imperative signals from outside our modern intimate spheres influence us. They do so through media. Ideas, thoughts, whishes can all be misused in macro spheres and may, eventually trickle down to the micro spheres of our individual existence. This is for instance exactly what happens in advertising. On the other hand, there is dynamics in the foam and according to PS this is because we are non-conformists; we do not want to be as the whole, the group, community. We want to be unique. Yet in the strictest fashion of philosophy Sloterdijk states that, on the other hand again, we do imitate each other at the same time; an interesting behavior with the core that we conform not to conform, we show resistance to the community we (want to) belong to yet we are part of that community. PS calls this the romanticizing of the resistance. It is Kynism, the critique of cynical reasoning and most likely the distinctive characteristic of a system period. It is resistance to strange elements that want to inhibit our bubbles. That is why we must be fit in our immune system; a fit system will respond openly and properly, an immune system that is not fit will respond in a xenophobic sense. Fully in line with his metaphor, PS states that too much hygiene and security in a community – please allow yourself a good look at our contemporary state of the union – causes group-autism only to dissolve itself when getting in contact with fearful foes; the system (community) will turn against itself for as people cannot distinguish real threats from false, they cannot distinguish their own misfits. The mogul of the community will fight itself. Originally religious immune systems offered comfort to such an extent that even death was not a real threat (Heaven as the ultimate and ever-lasting Utopia).

But technology became religion’s opponent and more and more people de-slaved themselves from poverty. Perhaps PS uses this in advocacy of social constructivism; Technological Imaginary as an immune system against totalization of communities? In any case, because of technology the wanting, being able and execution are now closer related than ever. It makes us as mighty as God.

To conclude, let me quote Sloterdijk from the Dutch translation on page 598 (translation by me) as he attempts to relativize his self-alleged pomposity of thought and theory: “Let me not arouse false expectations. I would not dare assert that I have understood what the so-called spheres eventually mean. I doubt if I will work with such expressions in the future. It has not become fully clear to me what dyads or multipolar surrealistic spaces are, let alone be able to reproduce how peoples under their canopies, how city cultures behind their immunificating walls and how the liberal populations in their pampering greenhouses live. Anyway, historians are known for not being feeble with abstract ideas. In any case, I am convinced that these vague and grandiloquent theories, with the thoroughness in which I, to be honest, cannot believe to the full, one way or the other fall back on the [mentioned] phase construction I, after long but never disputed trial, hold for grounded”.

Personally I do believe that Sloterdijk’s philosophy of Plural Spherology bears elucidation and metaphor in understanding communities in their habitat and the role of technology and media. But then, I am not a historian.

 

My rating: ★★★★★ Very good and readable.

Book read: Peter Sloterdijk (2009) Sferen. Schuim. (Dutch translation) Boom Amsterdam. 693 pages, hard cover. Translated in Dutch by Hans Driessen. ISBN 978 90 8506 6750 / NUR 730.  Original title: Sphären lll. Schäume – Plurale Sphärologie. Originally published at Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 2004.

Written by Kees Winkel

November 30, 2012 at 13:56

Posted in 1

Tagged with , , , , , ,

Cambridge University team to assess the risk posed to humanity by artificial intelligence

leave a comment »

Written by Kees Winkel

November 29, 2012 at 13:36

Posted in 1

What are the differences between a Video Game and a Video Art Game? In search of reference points

leave a comment »

ABSTRACT

Although most look like real video games, the purpose of Video Art Games is not to offer the player the typical player’s reward of ‘winning a game’ or at least achieving an end result that was carefully worked on by reaching the highest level. This paper explores the differences between the two phenomena in order to gain insight in understanding why Video Art Games look like Video Games but are not. The paper also introduces a first draft of a checklist based on the work of Jesper Juul, the Smithsonian American Art Museum and several authors on art and gaming.

INTRODUCTION

From March until September 2012, the Smithsonian American Art Museum presented an exhibition dedicated to Video Game Art[1]. This roadshow-type of exhibition became very popular and according to Joystiq.com[2], the six-month exhibit attracted 686,406 visitors. The games exhibited were chosen by popular vote.

“Why are video games being featured at an art museum? Art is beguiling. Much like a great novel or film, you can become engrossed in the world created by a video games and the Smithsonian American Art Museum wants to celebrate the designers and developers who create these worlds. Video games are an emerging medium for creative expression and we’re very excited to explore their artistic evolution over the last forty years. All video games include classic components of art—striking visuals, a powerful narrative, and a strong point of view. What’s new is the role of the player. Of course, contemporary games have taken this creative expression to a whole new level, so the museum decided that this is the right moment to look at this popular global phenomenon”[3]

The Smithsonian American Art Museum was not the first institution to address the issue of Video Game Art. Earlier, ArtFuse[4] in New England and have had exhibitions on the topic. If one analyzes the artifacts exhibited in the mentioned exhibitions, the question rises of what Video Game Art actually is thus providing an object of research. Yet Video and Computer Games as an entity is a vast realm that needs scoping if addressing the topic art. There is a categorization of games in domains such as ‘Main Stream’, ‘Indie’, ‘Casual’ and ‘Art’ (respectively games that are excepted and played by vast groups of players, games that are developed, produced and published by independent game designers, games that are usually played in web browser and serve the purpose of being an interaction tool with an entity other than the game itself and games that serve the purpose of, although looking like games, are in fact not designed for the purpose necessarily). And although popular discourse uses the word art without giving it a connotation other than graphical shape, Video Art Games appear to be developed for the mere reason of creating ‘Art pour Art’; the video game serves as a vehicle for artists choosing video games as their means of expression.

Not much scientific research has been conducted on the issue and much writing focuses on a popular discourse in which ‘art’ has a central booster effect to the discussion. This paper will not involve in the discussion of what art in general is nor will it elaborate on artistic levels of graphics in all of the above-mentioned genres. In stead it will narrow the research domain down to workable proportions by focusing on ten games as presented by the Smithsonian American Art Museum as typical examples of the so-called Video Art Games (VAG’s). By using the Smithsonian checklist to identify Video Art Games and adding a theoretical cadre, derived from media and art theorists Jesper Juul, Walter Benjamin and Chris Melissinos this paper will attempt to formulate a plausible definition of what Video Art Game is and define an evoked set to determine reference points for future determination of Video Art Games.

A game [like World of Warcraft]is always developed with, as game researcher T.L. Taylor puts it, an ‘attempt to embed within it particular forms of use and, by extension, particular users’ (2006). Ergo, games are developed for people that want to play the particular game. Yet, as the curator of the Smithsonian American Art Museum’s exhibition of Video Art Games states, this particular genre of games is not necessarily about people wanting to play that particular game, it is more about the artist’s form of expression, perhaps augmented with an artistic statement; playing the game is of no particular relevance. The development in hardware, software and the Internet, have made it possible for artists to experiment with new creative game development tools. In VAG’s game elements have been added to, at least, make the creative product, the piece of art, and look like a game. And in fact, several of these games can be played and some VAG’s are actually meant to be played. In the latter case, playing is meant to be part of the artistic experience.

Many sources show examples of VAG’s and the Art of Video Games yet there does not seem to be a generally accepted definition of what a VAG actually is. This paper attempts to define VAG by analyzing both popular and academic discourse, deriving reference points – an evoked set of VAG elements – in order to develop a common checklist for the purpose of future quick scanning games that are meant to be VAG’s. The overall purpose of the definition and checklist is to create clearness over what is or is not a Video Art Game (is it art or not?).

Out of a list of five randomly chosen yet alleged VAG’s that will be elaborated on below, this paper attempts to determine whether these games are VAG’s in the true sense of the word, meaning that they fit into Jesper Juul’s general definition of games: A game is a rule-based formal system with a variable and quantifiable outcome, where different outcomes are assigned different values, the player exerts effort in order to influence the outcome, the player feels attached to the outcome, and the consequences of the activity are optional and negotiable (2003).

This now is a definition of a general and even generic game. It says nothing about the reason of development of the game. The definition is in fact gamer- or player-oriented; it tells us that it is a game that can be played within the connotation of what people should understand to be a game, keeping to five determining elements of game definition (rules, variable and quantifiable outcome, valorization of outcomes, player effort, layer attached to outcome and negotiable consequences). It does not indicate or tell us why we play the game or want to play it nor does it define what the publisher or developer of that particular game wants the players to do and/or experience. Yet different genres of games have different game purposes that are perhaps expressed in the core mechanics of the games. Video games have been through a vast evolution ever since its introduction in the early seventies of the last century. This has led to seemingly borderless possibilities in representation of realisms and performance speed. According to the curators of the Smithsonian Video Game Art exhibition, this development can best be illustrated by seven mechanics[5] that underwent the evolution from the days of Pong to EA’s FIFA 2013.

  1. Avatar,
    Originally an incarnation of a Hindu god, an avatar in a (video) game serves a conduit between a player and the game. An avatar is in fact the representative of the player in the game and will act accordingly. Although often empowered with human-like agency and affordance, an avatar does not necessarily have to look like one (i.e. in Pac Man, the open-mouth icon is the avatar) but nowadays avatars can be spectacularly realistic.
  2. Jumping,
    In game genres – amongst others platform games – jumping is a common mechanic to avoid pitfalls and disengagement in the game. Quite often jumping is incorporated as a mechanic and has a crucial role in the agility of the avatar.
  3. Running,
    Running adds tension and excitement to the game and according to Smithsonian, it was one of the first mechanics to be developed for character movement (2012). Again, after forty odds years of game development, the movements have become more sophisticated and realistic.
  4. Climbing,
    The mechanic of climbing is often applied to expand the ‘discoverable world’; one cannot comprehend what one cannot see thus climbing offers an experience of discovery.
  5. Flying,
    Flying as a mechanic in games offers the player a world unthought-of. Flight simulation as such attracts players to virtually cross over distances without occupying too much time. Otherwise in flight simulation, players can fulfill dreams of independence and freedom (or mere escape through the air).
  6. Cutscenes,
    Cutscenes, or in-game movies, play an important role in establishing the narrative framework of a game. Early video games did not have the computing power to create elaborate cutscenes, but many included an attract mode that allowed players to preview the action. As systems grew more powerful, cutscenes evolved to deliver critical pieces of the story through immersive, cinematic experiences[6].
  7. Landscapes,
    According to Smithsonian, landscapes are a backdrop for all video games, regardless of the game purpose. The landscape sets the tone for the experience of the game.

This list of mechanics of Video Games may not be comprehensive yet it indicates what should be regarded when analyzing Video Games. And to understand what Video Art Games are, we must determine the differences between Video Games and VAG’s.

What are the differences between Video Games and Video Art Games?

The answer to this question lies in the definition of the conception of the word Art. According to William Rubin, director of the Museum of Modern Art in New York, “there is no single definition of art.” The art historian Robert Rosenblum believes that “the idea of defining art is so remote [today]” that he doesn’t think “anyone would dare to do it.” Philippe de Montebello, director of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, states that there is “no consensus about anything today,” and the art historian Thomas McEvilley agrees that today “more or less anything can be designated as art.” And Arthur Danto, professor of philosophy at Columbia University and art critic of The Nation, believes that today “you can’t say something’s art or not art anymore. That’s all finished.” In his book, After the End of Art, Danto argues that after Andy Warhol exhibited simulacra of shipping cartons for Brillo boxes in 1964, anything could be art. Warhol made it no longer possible to distinguish something that is art from something that is not[7].

This rather gloomy collection of non-definitions indicates that contemporary definition of the conception of Art is a rather precarious task. Yet, as we use the word art so often, we must determine what we really mean with it in order to be able to determine what we mean by defining VAG’s. Let us therefor look at how an authoritative dictionary defines the word.

Merriam Webster[8] says:

  1. Skill acquired by experience, study, or observation <the art of making friends>
  2. 2 a: a branch of learning: (1): one of the humanities (2) plural: liberal arts, b archaic: learning, scholarship
  3. An occupation requiring knowledge or skill <the art of organ building>
  4. A: the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects; also: works so produced, b (1): fine arts (2): one of the fine arts (3): a graphic art
  5. A: archaic: a skillful plan, b: the quality or state of being artful
  6. Decorative or illustrative elements in printed matter

Even this modest listing of the word Art provides an obscurity of connotations and raises the question of how we should address the connotation of the word Art in the context of Video Art Games. The Merriam Webster’s list provides a petit discourse of ‘skill’ or ‘skillfulness’.

A Video Art Game can best be described as a (video) game that has been deliberately designed to be a work of art rather than a game in the sense that it fits the definition of what a video game is. The structure of a VAG is to produce a reaction with the audience other than experiencing the game. This on its turn emphasizes the idea that VAG’s cannot be regarded as games in the true sense of the word as the game purpose does not necessarily fit into the popular defining of the conception of Video Games. VAG’s tend to be unconventional with an emphasis on the aesthetics and/or complexity of the design. And although many VAG’s on the first glimpse seem to resemble aspects of many casual Indie games, VAG’s are not developed to be games at all.

Justin McElroy of the publishing house Joystiq.com has compared this defining of differences between VAG’s and Video Games as the same [as that] between a sculpture and a building. Though a building/game can be aesthetically pleasing, an art game/sculpture is using its very structure to produce some kind of reaction (2008).

Today’s improvements in graphic possibilities and capabilities and the increasing number of releases of art games have confused the perception of what a game and a VAG actually are. Justin McElroy of Joystiq.com has described this confusion as the same between a sculpture and a building. Though a building/game can be aesthetically pleasing, an art game/sculpture is using its very structure to produce some kind of reaction (2008).

And according to Walter Benjamin, approximately ninety years ago, the cultural value of the traditional work of art is unique in time and place, the result of craftsmanship, in its essence ritual, represents a supersensible value and allows (a history of) multiple interpretations that become part of its surface layer (1936). Benjamin knew nothing about contemporary developments of gaming and art. Yet,  he understood that art, and indeed reproducible art such as moving pictures in his days, serve not only as the expression form of individual artists but may just as well serve the purposes such as information dissimilation and propaganda.

Nora Young, a Canadian writer and broadcaster suggested that the difference between Video Games and VGA’s lie within the realm of ‘High’ and ‘Low’ art. VAG’s – as being deliberately developed as pieces of art – fit into the domain of the High Arts whilst traditionally video games have occupied a position in the “cultural gutter” (making up the “low arts”) (2010).

Three Examples of VAG’s

Game critic and journalist James DeRosa has introduced a number of VAG’s that are considered, as he calls it, ‘Artsy-Fartsy’ (2010), a rather populist naming as its connotation suggests a certain air of snootiness. He questions whether doing nothing other than holding right on a control pad constitute a game? Some VAG’s challenge the boundaries of the definition of what a game is, specifically as defined by Jesper Juul. DeRosa continues that he would be content that if the action is an interactive metaphor for something greater, then yes, it does. But that doesn’t mean anyone who finds it boring has to agree with me (2010).

Out of DeRosa’s selection of 10 VAG’s, in this paper three were chosen to serve as case example. The methodology used is as follows. A combined list of Jesper Juul’s definition of what a game is, the seven mechanics as defined by Smithsonian and the five mentioned characteristics serves as a checklist to identify if the individual game meets the defining characteristics (as they are now used as game requirements). After having checked the three games, a general conclusion is determined with the purpose of adding to future discussion about the phenomenon of VAG’s.

Three games

1. Everyday the same dream (Pedercini, 2009)

Figure 1: Screenshot of Everyday the same day (Pedercini, 2009)

Dream is an apparently easy game to play. The controls (mechanics) are not the right, left and upward cursor button and space bar. The ‘play concept’, is to grab hints and continue through the day. Everyday the Same Dream can be regarded as an interpretation of the dehumanized contemporary life. Perhaps Paolo Pedercini shows us the boredom of everyday yet the title of the art piece suggests a dream not finished yet: is there hope? No one will know as when having finished the first cycle, the same routine starts all over again.

2. Coma (Brush, 2010)

Figure 2: Screen shot from Coma (Brush, 2010)

Coma is a platform oriented VAG that mixes elements of a point-and-click adventure. The main character (avatar) in the game a boy called Pete. When playing the game with simple operating mechanics of the cursor and space bar, one may forget that one is actually playing a VAG as there are many conventional game elements. On the other hand, the player is immersed in a lucidity of dreams that serves the name of the game: Coma. The player may question whether one Pete is in a state of coma. And in fulfilling a series of tasks, one may wonder where Pete is headed; wakefulness or death?

3. ImmorTall (Millar, 2012)

The VAG ImmorTall is based on the idea of bête noire, the black beast character in literature. Bête noire can best be described as a creature that people detest or fear. In ImmorTall, the creature falls from space onto the world where a small girl picks it up. This is where the narrative starts. With rather simple operating mechanics, cursor and space bar controls, the player is taken through a landscape where events take place. The bête noire helps the little girl, the player’s avatar, through these events and because of this assistance it grows taller and taller. The end of the game is least to say moving.

Figure 3: Screen shot from ImmorTall (Millar, 2011)

Game characteristics and a checklist

The developed checklist contains of the six characteristics of games as defined by Jesper Juul, the mechanics as described by the Smithsonian and the four added, as elaborated earlier in this paper. In this checklist, we will observe the game’s characteristics by means of playing the games and filling in the checklist.

On the basis of game play, the author of this paper filled in the checklist per game after which conclusions are drawn for lessons learned. Again, the purpose of assessing the three example VAG’s is to gain understanding in whether the proposed VAG’s can be regarded as game or not. For this purpose, the extended checklist of Juul (2003) serves as a format for recognition, using the (subjective) method of answering “yes” or “no” when agreed that the particular element or mechanic is embedded in the game or not.

Before concluding the outcomes of this checklist test, it must be made clear that there are differences between the different elements in the checklist. The first six elements are defined by Juul and regard the question whether we are dealing with a game or not. For this purpose it is required to answer the six element-questions from three perspectives: the game as a formal system, the player and the game and the game and the rest of the world (elements 1 till 6). Elements 7 till 13 regard the question what the core mechanics are. These questions need not be answered from the three perspectives as a simple “yes” or “no” indicate the embedment of that particular mechanic in the game. Elements 14 till 17 are questions that refer to whether we talk about a piece of art, a video game or a VAG (as a mixture of game and art). Obviously all answers are negotiable if not disputable and only serve the purpose of discussion of what VAG’s are and what the differences are or can be with video games. More future development of research tools is required.

As a reference, I add the definitions of the six game elements as defined by Juul: The game definition [I propose] finally has 6 points: 1) Rules: Games are rule-based. 2) Variable, quantifiable outcome: Games have variable, quantifiable outcomes. 3) Value assigned to possible outcomes: That the different potential outcomes of the game are assigned different values, some being positive, some being negative. 4) Player effort: That the player invests effort in order to influence the outcome. (I.e. games are challenging.) 5) Player attached to outcome: That the players are attached to the outcomes of the game in the sense that a player will be the winner and “happy” if a positive outcome happens, and loser and “unhappy” if a negative outcome happens. 6) Negotiable consequences: The same game [set of rules] can be played with or without real-life consequences (Juul 2003).

The outcomes of the VAG game plays are as follows.

Game 1: Everyday the same dream

    The game as formal system The Player and the game The game and the rest of the world
  1. 1.      
Rules (cannot be argued) Yes No No
  1. 2.      
Variable and quantifiable outcome No No No
  1. 3.      
Valorization of   outcomes No Yes No
  1. 4.      
Player effort No No No
  1. 5.      
Player attached to outcome No Yes No
  1. 6.      
Negotiable consequences No No No
  1. 7.      
Avatar No
  1. 8.      
Jumping No
  1. 9.      
Running No
  1. 10.    
Climbing No
  1. 11.    
Flying No
  1. 12.    
Cutscenes No
  1. 13.    
Landscapes Yes
  1. 14.    
Deliberately designed to be a work of art Yes
  1. 15.    
Using the same structure as a game for a different purpose Yes
  1. 16.    
Allowance of multiple interpretations No
  1. 17.    
High art instead of low art No

Game 2: Coma

    The game as formal system The Player and the game The game and the rest of the world
  1. 1.      
Rules Yes No No
  1. 2.      
Variable and quantifiable outcome No No No
  1. 3.      
Valorization of   outcomes No Yes No
  1. 4.      
Player effort No No No
  1. 5.      
Player attached to outcome No Yes No
  1. 6.      
Negotiable consequences No No No
  1. 7.      
Avatar Yes
  1. 8.      
Jumping Yes
  1. 9.      
Running Yes
  1. 10.    
Climbing Yes
  1. 11.    
Flying No
  1. 12.    
Cutscenes No
  1. 13.    
Landscapes Yes
  1. 14.    
Deliberately designed to be a work of art Yes
  1. 15.    
Using the same structure as a game for a different purpose Yes
  1. 16.    
Allowance of multiple interpretations No
  1. 17.    
High art instead of low art No

Game 3: ImmorTall

    The game as formal system The Player and the game The game and the rest of the world
  1. 1.      
Rules Yes No No
  1. 2.      
Variable and quantifiable outcome No No No
  1. 3.      
Valorization of   outcomes No Yes No
  1. 4.      
Player effort No Yes No
  1. 5.      
Player attached to outcome No Yes No
  1. 6.      
Negotiable consequences No No No
  1. 7.      
Avatar Yes
  1. 8.      
Jumping No
  1. 9.      
Running No
  1. 10.    
Climbing No
  1. 11.    
Flying No
  1. 12.    
Cutscenes No
  1. 13.    
Landscapes Yes
  1. 14.    
Deliberately designed to be a work of art Yes
  1. 15.    
Using the same structure as a game for a different purpose Yes
  1. 16.    
Allowance of multiple interpretations Yes
  1. 17.    
High art instead of low art Yes

Conclusion

After having played the three games and having filed in the checklist, A first conclusion may be drawn that the three groups of elements (elements 1 till 6, elements 7 till 13 and elements 14 till 17) are of different stature yet supplement each other. By asking whether we are talking about a game (1-6) with certain specified mechanics (7-13) for the purpose of creating art (14-17) we may observe the differences between what a Video Game is and what a Video Art Game is and thus gaining insight.

In the case of the three example VAG’s we may conclude that although the VAG’s appear to be games they are in fact not games according to Juul’s definition; they simply do not live up to the requirements that make a game even if there is enough mechanics and can the question whether it is a piece of art can only be answered after extensive research in the gam’s sources.

In any case the three example VAG’s most likely move the player’s mood as the outcome, as predictable as they may seem when starting the playing (there is no way of influencing the outcomes of the game), is not a happy ending.

I suggest that in the future the methodology and its contents need more research in order to contribute and provide valorized toolsets to the research domain of identifying differences between games and look-alikes (VAG’s ) that serve different purposes.
 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brush, Th. (2010). Coma (web browser), Armor Games, USA
Conditt, Jessica (2012-10-02). “Here’s how many people saw The Smithsonian’s Art of Games”. Joystiq. Retrieved 2012-10-11.
De Mul, J., (2009)The Work of Art in the Age of Digital Recombination, in M. van den Boomenet al. (eds), Digital Material, Amsterdam: AUP, 2009, pp. 95‐106
file://localhost/Volumes/User_Data/Users/kees.winkel/Desktop/The%20Game,%20the%20Player,%20the%20World%20%20Looking%20for%20a%20Heart%20of%20Gameness.html Retrieved 18 October 2012)
http://bitmob.com/articles/10-artsy-fartsy-games-for-people-who-like-artsy-fartsy-things?page=1 Retrieved 15 October 2012)
http://herocomplex.latimes.com/2012/03/19/smithsonian-scores-with-art-of-video-games-exhibit/#/0
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17373879
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/16/arts/video-games/an-exhibition-in-easy-mode.html
http://www.salon.com/2012/03/10/video_games_as_multi_player_art_projects/singleton/
http://www.usatoday.com/life/lifestyle/story/2012-03-12/video-games-smithsonian/53502696/1?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/gog/exhibits/the-art-of-video-games,1215143/critic-review.html
http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2012/03/art-of-video-games-smithsonian/
Juul, J. (2003). The Game, the Player, the World: Looking for a Heart of Gameness. Keynote presented at the Level Up conference in Utrecht, November 4th-6th 2003.
McElroy. J.,(2008). http://www.formatmag.com/news/video/ Play, Pushing. game-blogs Video Game Blogs.
Millar, E. (2012) ImmorTall (web browser). Pixelante.net, Canada
Ocias, A. (2010). Loved. (web browser). Kongregate.com, USA
Pedercini, P. (2009) Everyday the Same Dream (web browser), Molle Industria, Italy
Piilonen E., Marcetic, L., Carney, D. (2010). Company of Myself (web browser), 2DArray.net. USA
Salen, Katie, and Eric Zimmerman. Rules of play, game design fundamentals. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2004.
Smithsonian American Art Museum, Exhibition Videos, The Art of Video Games, http://americanart.si.edu/exhibitions/archive/2012/games/artists/ (retrieved 4-3-2012)
Smithsonian American ARt Museum, The Art of Video Games, Featured Games, http://americanart.si.edu/exhibitions/archive/2012/games/featuredgames/
Smithsonian American Art Museum, The Art of Video Games, http://americanart.si.edu/exhibitions/archive/2012/games/mechanics.
Smithsonian American Art Museum, The Art of Video Games, http://americanart.si.edu/exhibitions/archive/2012/games
Taylor, T.L. (2006) http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1611/1526
Taylor, T.L. (2006). “Beyond management: considering participatory design and governance in player culture.” First Monday. Special Issue #7: Command Lines: TheEmergence of Governance in Global Cyberspace (2006a). Web. Accessed Ma<http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article /view/1611/1526>

Written by Kees Winkel

November 2, 2012 at 16:08

Posted in 1

Tagged with , ,

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 502 other followers

%d bloggers like this: