"The Lessons of Lucasfilm's Habitat" - Chip Morningstar and F. Randall Farmer

Summary:

"The Lessons of Lucasfilm's Habitat" is a case study that looks at one of the first online, multiplayer games, Habitat, from the perspective of the developers themselves. Morningstar and Farmer use this article primarily to describe their experiences and give advice for future application of online, multiplayer technology, addressing future developers of the technology they pioneered. The authors argue that "cyberspace is defined more by the interactions among the actors within it than by the technology with which it is implemented" (664). Cyberspace is characterized by "the sharedness of the virtual environment, and not the display technology used to transport users into that environment" (676). Even though the developers of Habitat were using the primitive Commodore 64 as their platform for the game, they believe that the distribution method is not important as long as the user's experience is positive. Expectations of graphics ability will increase with the increase in technology development.

Within the article, the authors make several arguments about future use of this technology. Although some lessons are technical in nature, such as bandwidth concerns and the necessity of object-oriented data representation, many of their lessons focus on the interaction between themselves (the developers) and the players within their game. They state that there are two levels of "virtuality" within a game's structure: the infrastructure level, "where the laws that govern 'reality' have their genesis," and the experiential level, "which is what users see and interact with" (672). A strong case is made against mixing these two levels in any capacity. They also argue that online multiplayer games are very different from developing standard games because while a normal game programmer can shape every hour of gameplay, an online environment is more open-ended, allowing each individual user to shape his or her own experience. The authors make the claim that in order for online multiplayer games to truly expand into games with millions of users, cheating must be prevented, and user configuration of content should be expected. It is clear that the authors are trying to help the further development of this form of technology by clearly stating what they believe they did right and wrong in their experience, even self-criticizing themselves in some instances.

Inquiry:

The argument that "cyberspace is defined more by the interactions among the actors within it than by the technology with which it is implemented" is one that contradicts certain ideas that we have studied before (664). Marshall McLuhan strongly believes that "the medium is the message," yet Habitat's medium (Commodore 64) is argued by the developers as being unimportant to the overall function of the game. The message is not the medium, but rather the interactions among the users within the medium. I will have to disagree with the game developers here, assuming that it is understood that the console is the medium. I believe that Habitat being played on the Commodore 64 shapes the gaming experience in a way that affects the communication that occurs. For example, if the Commodore 64 was able to relay voice chat instead of strictly text, the communication experience would be completely different, meaning that the medium is having a sizable effect on the message. If it is assumed that cyberspace itself is the medium, then the authors are in agreement with McLuhan. Cyberspace as a medium is directly enabling the mass communication to occur.

I agree with the argument made that the "infrastructure level" and "experiential level" should be kept separate. Individuals play games like Habitat for the simulated experience generated by the experiential level of a game. If the infrastructure level interferes, that simulation is lost, and the real world comes to the forefront, negating the positive effect of the game on the user. In online games today, developers typically stay out of the experiential level, aside from interfering with situations of cheating or harassment. Having played a (now defunct) online game myself, having the ability to shape your own path though the game instead of being forced to follow a standard path is one of the greatest appeals in online gaming. The Habitat developers learned this fact early on, realizing that the true value of an online game is in the connections established and communication that occurs, not necessarily like the strict format of a traditional offline game.

Questions:

• In the article, the authors make the claim that they "do not possess the ability to produce an automation that approaches the complexity of a real human being," so they did not even attempt to make characters like this in the game (666-667). Do you believe that our technology has come far enough to create true, simulated humans within video games? What are some examples?

• In this article, many problems were listed with Habitat as an early online multiplayer game. Do you see any of these same problems still present in mass multiplayer games today?

• The authors pose the following question: "Is an Avatar an extension of a human being (thus entitled to be treated as you would treat a real person) or a Pac-Man-like critter destined to die a thousand deaths or something else entirely" (672)? Given the prevalence of "Avatars" across many forms of media (social networking, video games, etc), do you believe this question has been answered? What is your opinion on the matter?

Continue Reading

"Video Games and Computer Holding Power" - Sherry Turkle

Note about the author: Sherry Turkle is the current Director of the MIT Initiative on Technology and Self Program in Science, Technology, and Society, studying "the evolving connections between people and artifacts." [Source]

Summary:

Video games and Computer Holding Power is an excerpt from Sherry Turkle's book entitled The Second Self: Computers and the Human Spirit, published in 1984. In this excerpt, Turkle discusses the introduction of video games into mainstream culture, comparing the technologies involved to specific predecessors, as well as looking at individual examples through personal stories. She begins the excerpt discussing the wide-spread use of the computer in 1980s society. Turkle makes the claim early on in the excerpt that "the computer culture [is] a culture of rules and simulation," using video games as the primary example (501). Video games are often thought of as being a form of mindless entertainment; however, Turkle argues that the strategy and logic necessary to successfully play most video games goes beyond the stereotypical understanding of games as simple hand-eye coordination. She argues that the danger of video games "is not the danger of mindless play, but of the infatuation with the challenge of simulated worlds" (508). Video games are able to create identical, simulated experiences that cause certain individuals to strive for perfection within the "rule-governed" nature of the game itself.

The transition from pinball to video games is a thorough example Turkle uses to make the claim that video games have transcended the mechanical limitations of pinball, instead, creating a simulated situation where "a representation of a ball, unlike a real one, never need obey the laws of gravity unless the programmer wants it to" (502). It is clear that Turkle's excerpt is targeted toward an audience skeptical of the idea that video games have a role in society. For example, Turkle's primary argument is that although video games, when taken to obsessive extremes, can be harmful, the simulated challenge they create and "total concentration [they require] is a form of relaxation" (509). In this argument, Turkle is acknowledging that the simulation created by video games can be negatively seductive to some, but beneficial to others.

Inquiry:

In Turkle's excerpt from her book, is it difficult to respond strongly to some of her claims because she clearly presents both sides of the story. Several specific examples from individuals she interviews demonstrate the fact that video games can have a positive, calming effect on the players. In opposition to the view, an argument is also made that video games can be seductive in nature with the promise of a "perfect response" (512).

The idea that "the computer culture [is] a culture of rules and simulation" is an argument I agree with completely. The whole premise of a video game is one of simulation. In the present day, we have consoles like the Wii where you can play simulated bowling, simulated baseball, simulated boxing, simulated tennis, and simulated golf (and that's just Wii Sports!). Even when looking at older games Turkle mentions like Pong and Pac-Man, it is clear that these games are trying to simulate an aspect of the real world. In the case of Pac-Man, the simulated experience does not exist in the real world, but the idea of needing to accomplish certain goals before an enemy stops you is a real world idea manifested by the ghosts, food, and the maze. All video games attempt to simulate some aspect of society, either directly or indirectly, because this simulated experience is what people want to momentarily take their concerns out of the real world.

It was always clear that people became easily obsessed with games that seemed simplistic in nature more so than extremely complicated games. Although there are those who are considered "hardcore gamers," only opting to play the complicated games created today, I would argue that the majority of the general public enjoys simple games. For example, Bejeweled is an online game that is simple - change the order of colored gems in an effort to group them together and eliminate them. As of 2008, it has been downloaded well over 150 million times. It is clear that people like the simple nature of this game because it has a set of clearly defined rules; yet, it is interesting to note that people still try to exploit these simple rules in the spirit of competition. For example, if you type "Bejeweled" into YouTube, the first few results are discussing ways to cheat at this simple game. People enjoy these simple games, as Turkle mentions, because they are fixed, allowing the opportunity for individuals to seek perfection (even through cheating).

Questions:

• Turkle argues that children learning to use computers "seems to threaten a new kind of generation gap" (500). Do you believe that current video games continue to create a generation gap among individuals, or are current video games more accessible to all generations? How does this compare with video games in the 1980s?

• Turkle asks the following question: "Will the player of the games of the future be in a more complex world than is offered by today's games, but still in a world that is created by someone else? Or will the player be the designer of his or her own game" (506)? In the 26 years that have passed since this excerpt was published, can you give examples of games in which the players design their own gaming experience?

• What is it about "simple" or "fixed" games that makes them so appealing to such a wide range of individuals? What entertainment value do they hold that resonates with people?

Continue Reading

Digital Mapping

(Map of US Population Distribution) Barton and Barton are trying to emphasize in their article that the means and types of mapping have changed over the years, depending on what is deemed important by "consumers" of maps, and because of this, maps are overemphasizing and deemphasizing certain areas and aspects of life. They argue that maps exemplify power structures simply by the way that there are maps that are made and maps that are not made. This power structure is best exemplified in the quote "The map in particular and by implication, visual representations in general are seen as complicit with socio-control mechanisms inextricably linked to power and authority." (53) The idea that the map itself is being created by the author states the fact that the map is important. Obviously, this author has knowledge of map making to some degree, as well as power structures due the definitions of words such as hegemony in the article. The reader does not need to be familiar with cartography to fully understand the point of this article. The authors want there to be a way to make a map that is unbiased and neutral. A map that doesn't create an unequal power structure and doesn't discriminate. I think that in an ideal world, it would be wonderful to make visual images that have no bias, but I don't think it is possible. All maps are created with a bias, even the free google maps. There are areas that are more photographed than others, and people can pay to have businesses mapped that would tend to direct people to their company. Even companies like Amazon track your purchases "for your convenience" so they can make recommendations for other purchases for you. Their true intention is simply to make more money off the customer. Are new media maps positive/negative/both? Are there such things as completely neutral map? Should we even care if there is a motivation behind the creation of a map? Why?

Continue Reading