Fuyukaze has opened up a remarkable topic on his blog, titled
The Meaning of Gaming, in which he simply asks, "what does gaming mean to you? In beginning my response I realized that chronicling my thoughts for such a query would require my own long-winded entry. (As a side note, please be kind and not derail personal answers to his question from his blog to mine. Feel free to add to the thoughts posted here, but answers to what gaming specifically means to you should probably stay under the original. I don't want to hijack discussions from another post!)
To answer what the meaning of gaming is to me, let me produce a sliver of the variety of subjects this opens which fascinate me:
Video games function as a near metaphysical examination into the ephemeral nature of technology based, progressively developing entertainment.
They provide a window into modern culture and its responses to fantasy, imagination, and social critique in the form of interactive reflection.
As with other forms of media, they function as a meter of acceptable public content to a variety of cultures, and usually trail slightly behind the pulse of corporate entertainment appetites, differing in each country. The multicultural research gained in the study of the differences in ports of games from one locale to the other is a revealing micro-hobby of mine.
The debate of video games as art is also a passion of mine, though I personally see them as not specific works but more a vehicle through which we ingest another's work. Like flipping through a child's coloring book or touring the Louvre, we are taking in a collective sensory experience of one or more artists.
A psychological examination of maturity-biased perception in gaming, which produces such ideas as "video games are for kids," or "Once you're older, you should 'move up' from Mario to
Call of Duty or
Madden, speaks volumes about generation gaps and peer pressure systems.
The economy of the game industry operates under peculiar laws of supply and demand, and often displays interesting trends and disconnects between financial success and critical or popular acclaim. The video game collecting aspect alone functions as it's own metagame of value analysis and worth interpretation.
The advancements of technology in gaming, including control interfaces, realism and artistic approaches to graphics and sound, and the traceable arc of gameplay simplicity/complexity, are an approachable microcosmic study of the application of technology in daily life.
And then there's the phenomena of 'gaming culture,' the interesting banners that unite and repel individuals linked to specific games and gaming systems. From Europe's Sony entrenchment, Japan's rejection of Microsoft consoles, and the classic Super Nintendo and Genesis console wars, to the cat-and-dog fights of old school PC vs. Mac gamers, entire people groups can be studied and linked to various events, marketing, psychological approaches, and economic factors.
And these topics are just the ones off the top of my head at 2 a.m.
But what, specifically, does gaming mean to me personally? It's my favorite paradigm for observation and study. It is the choice prism I use to split the pure into the abstraction, the microscope by which I enjoy looking at the world and thinking about the details. While the scope of such a lens is obviously limited to the last several decades, when linked to the branch of the also relatively recent applied mathematics known as Game Theory, (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_theory for a worthwhile primer) suddenly there is an entire holistic field that makes the study of video games worthwhile, academic, even philosophical.
The best part? I find myself enjoying video games not only for the angles it gives into more 'meta-' subjects, but for the simple joy of the games. As fascinating as it is to use video games as a tool for study, I just have more fun with them than any other mode of entertainment, plain and simple. I can chat about art, mathematics, and social-political dynamics all day, but at the other end of the spectrum,
Super Mario 3 is still a blast to speed-run, competitive
Tetris still excites, and I'm always up for another round of
Halo Wars. Fun is fun.
|
A psychological examination of maturity-biased perception in gaming, which produces such ideas as "video games are for kids," or "Once you're older, you should 'move up' from Mario to Call of Duty or Madden, speaks volumes about generation gaps and peer pressure systems.
This observation is also a sociological examination, as it discusses influences that shape the attitudes of groups as well as individuals.
Er, not that I claim any sort of expertise in either field; I'm just sayin', is all...
|
|
I agree, that's a more accurate descriptor, especially in light of observing generational gaps and peer pressure. I looked back over this in the morning and remembered that while staying up to write after the kids go to bed is often the only quiet time I get lately, I get pretty clumsy results. Not that I'm an expert in any field either, of course. Always the student. 
|
|
Games sure are fun.
|
|
Speaking as someone who does dabble in the academic study of gaming professionally, I think what you are after is Game Studies (Humanities), not so much Game Theory (Sciences).
Here's a few sites that publish the kind of stuff I like to work on regarding games:
http://gamestudies.org/1001
http://gac.sagepub.com/
http://www.digra.org/
and a somewhat decent Wiki description: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_studies
|
|
@dsheinem: Wonderful! Another student of Game Study! I should then clarify with a more concise explanation of my post.
The topics I initially brought up indeed fall under the humanities 'division,' or Game Study. As I'm first a student of Theology, these were and often still are of great interest to me, and therefore the immediate topics to pop into my head when replying about the exploration of what video games mean to me. I could indeed have funneled such threads into an explanation of Game Studies, and probably should have. I'm not used to hearing the term or topic on this site.
After reviewing those pieces, I didn't actually mean to imply that Game Theory is the culmination of said research fields, but that Game Theory is a field apposed to said components, the parallel to Game Study. I probably should have been more specific, or at least mention the difference and similarities.
Game Theory, however, being a separate (though obviously overlapping and interlinked) field that approaches from a more 'hard' scientific angle, has been the opposite end I've attacked lately. Using the applied mathematics and equilibrium constructs to build holistic theorems separate from, but parallel to, the more cultural and societal research of Game Study, has been my 'meta-hobby' as of late. Then again, the more I study both, the more they tend to run together anyway.
I was, perhaps, trying to bring up both Game Theory and Game Study without rambling and being over-descriptive, as I tend to do. But now that the cat is out of the bag, so to speak, I'd love to hear any thoughts, research, or particular interests you have gleamed from your own academic studies.
Hmm...we're always looking for podcast interviews as well...
|
|
There's a Cultural Studies professor at MIT named Henry Jenkins who does a lot with video gaming culture and identity. I discovered him several years ago while doing a paper in grad school about fantasy sports, cultural identity, and the ethical dilemma. He's published a few books and essays on various topics that make for some good reading. Here's an article to check out and you can access more material through the home page of his site: http://web.mit.edu/cms/People/henry3/pub/complete.html
|
|
^Thanks! I've heard of his work before, I think. I'll look it up.
|
