Game Design as Cultural Practice Fall 2009

Blogpost 3: "Seriously I procrastinated so much I am doing the on Halloween night, thats sad even by my standards"

    One of the first counter culture games movement was the New Games movement started by Stewart Brand. "Brand explored how people interact with each other through the games they played, and devised a new 'set of meta-strategies to learn' through the development of New Games." (Fron). One of the most noticeable qualities of the new games movement was the subversion of traditional game mechanics and conventions. One game that best exemplifies the new games movement is "Rock-Paper-Scissors Tag". The game consists of two groups facing off in a massive game of rock paper scissors. Which ever side looses the round must run to their home base while the winning side attempts to tag as many people as possible on the loosing side. Whoever is tagged then joins the opposing side, causing groups to expand and contrast as the game continues. The game subverts one of the most fundamental conventions in games, winning. In the game there are no "losers". The two end states that "there is only one team or until everyone is too exhausted to continue" (Fron). In the case of exhaustion the game would be declared a tie, but in the one team scenario everyone wins. Even the very last person from the opposing team  that is  tagged would be considered a winner since the rules of the game dictate that he is now on the winning team. In this way the game 'encourages a "global allegiance' to the play of the game itself, rather than to the success of any particular team" (Fron). The point of Rock-Paper-Scissors Tag can be best summed up by DeKoven when he says, "victory is not determined by who wins, nor by what game we play, but rather by the quality of playing that we have been able to create together" (DeKoven, 12).

    As technology advanced, so did the sophistication of games. Eventually the games moved to the digital medium, allowing users to play games on their computers. One of the first such games was Spacewar. The game play of Spacewar involves multiple ships flying around a screen shooting at each other. While Spacewar is fairly conventional by today's standards, at the time the game was completely counter culture just by virtue of being part of a new medium. People were interacting with the game in ways they had never done before and thus subverted traditional analogue forms of play. The game was created by hackers, a group of people who could be described as, "They're kids who tended to be brilliant but not very interested in conventional goals" (Brand). This is a description that could seemingly be applied to the pioneers of the new games movement. Furthermore the game included one of the most important innovations in gaming,  "It encouraged new programming by the user" (Brand).  As DeKoven puts its,  "Once this freedom is established, once we have established why we want to change a game and how we go about it, a remarkable thing happens to us: We become the authorities" (DeKoven, 62). By allowing players to change the game to their liking every person can become an author. This was a practice that was not fully utilized until much later with the advent of moding. 

    In many modern games, specifically PC games, developers have included many of their in house development tools with the final release. These tools make it so that "Players are free to build their own game levels, create 'patches'...'skins'...and even build their own new games from scratch to run on the underlying  game 'engine'" (Pearce). This practice of modifying games, or "moding" games is essentially subverting the game on a fundamental level. Moders are given the ability to change any of the game rules. Moders thrive on making various tweaks and changes to established games, something promoted by DeKoven when he says "If making an exception helps us have an exceptional game, anything is all right." (Dekoven, 56)  One of the most popular mods is Counter Strike. The game was heralded by critics even earning the studio the Best Rookie Studio of the Year award. Still, the game was rather conventional, "[in] spite of it's altered theme anti-terrorist operations vs. Half-Life's 'alien experiment gone awry'), the basic play mechanic differs little from the original and follows the tried and true combat simulation genre" (Pearce). Unfortunately modding tend to be "biased towards [their] well-established game genre" (Pearce).  Luckily the practice of patching allows user to create plug-ins and further subvert the game. The patch "velvet-strike: counter-military graffiti for cs" takes the Counter Strike Mod and transforms the military shooter into an artistic graffiti simulator. In this way the patch rejects the standards of video games, ie violence and combat,  in the same way Dada artists reject the standards of art. 

Brand, Stewart. "SPACEWAR: Fanatic Life and Symbolic Death Among the Computer Bums," Rolling Stone, December 7, 2001.http://www.wheels.org/spacewar/stone/rolling_stone.html

Fron, J., Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (aka Ludica) (2005). "Sustainable Play: Towards A New Games Movement for the Digital Age." Digital Arts & Culture Conference Proceedings, Copenhagen, December 2005. 

Pearce, Celia. "Games as Art: The Aesthetics of Interactivity." Visible Language: Special Issue on Fluxus. January 2006.

 

De Koven, Bernard. "The Well-Played Game: A Player's Philosophy." New York: Anchor Books. First Edition, 1978.

SAmer Ead LCC4725 - Blog Post 3: Alternative Game Movements

Imagine “a game that is created by and for the players within a safe digital environment built not to wield authority over them, but to provide an even playing ground in which they themselves are empowered to play; a temporary world that encourages a new, participatory relationship with each other, rather than to a machine.” [Fron] Physical and board games have always had the advantage over digital games in the sense of allowing their users to alter the game rules and regulations as they please. Even though DeKoven states that “games are suspended from reality and have no bearing on what occurs outside of the game” [DeKoven], he retracts his position to state the fact that games that have a winning condition for only a portion of the players, than that must create a some hard feelings amongst them and those that lost. Where as if ending the game is based on the cumulative effort of the all the players to work together, instead of compete and create something, instead of destroy, than that would most likely result in a positive post-game mentality and feelings between the players. Yet in order to have a game that could possible satisfy the constraints of cooperative positive play than games have to evolve to capture the imagination of their players and allow them to express them through genuine artistic open mediums.

 

Digital games have been projected to us in an image with regulations and conventions that restrict the user form broadening the sense of games to engulf him/her personal characteristics and express his/her self directly. “Unlike board games or even sports, the rule structure of most digital games is opaque—like the ubiquitous “man behind the curtain” they constrain players’ actions without recourse to alteration.”[Fron] Yet, players have always been capable to stumble upon astonishing, genuine techniques to bend the system, and create a new unintended experience. Even though such conventions have provided us with various phenomenal games, still I personally find hard to believe that the Spacewar researchers intended for their medium to turn into something so narrow. Brand Stewart depicts that idea when he says “Those magnificent men with their flying machines, scouting a leading edge of technology which has an odd softness to it; outlaw country, where rules are not decree or routine so much as the starker demands of what's possible.”[Brand] Conversely it seems to me like he is trying to say the total opposite, those researchers tried to find ways, and loop wholes, to control their environment and enable the user to take the medium out of the norm. Regardless, “We do not need curators to decide which art will be seen and which will not.”[Pearce]

 

An approach that we have been discovering lately is something that Bernie DeKoven was able to perceive way ahead of the crowd is digital games in a medium as flexible as board games and sports, where the climax of the game is not supposed to be determined by winning conditions, but by how the players generally collaborate and socially interact. Players ought to acclimatize the game as they play in order to generate an enhanced environment for socialization and interaction. I guess the question that we are trying to answer is provided by Fron in ‘Sustainable Play’, “Can we imagine new forms of digital culture that put the player front and center, in command of their own play experience? Can we play by our own rules?”

 

 

 

References:

o   DeKoven, B. (1978) The Well-Played Game: A Player's Philosophy. New York: Anchor Books. (2nd Edition)

o   Brand, Stewart. "SPACEWAR: Fanatic Life and Symbolic Death Among the Computer Bums," Rolling Stone, December 7, 2001. http://www.wheels.org/spacewar/stone/rolling_stone.html

o   Fron, J., Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (aka Ludica) (2005). "Sustainable Play: Towards A New Games Movement for the Digital Age." Digital Arts & Culture Conference Proceedings, Copenhagen, December 2005.

o   Pearce, Celia. "Games as Art: The Aesthetics of Interactivity." Visible Language: Special Issue on Fluxus. January 2006.

Ninja Gaiden's Testosterone Trend

When Ninja Gaiden came out for the Xbox, it was hailed as an achievement in action games. Drawing its gameplay from games like Devil May Cry, Ninja Gaiden entertained the hardcore gamers with difficult enemies, fast action, and big boobs. Although fairly one-dimensional in terms of plot, the game garnered a relatively large fanbase (mostly guys) and great critical praise. Consequently, Tecmo, the developers of  Ninja Gaiden decided to port the game over to the Playstation 3 with one added gameplay, the ability to play as the big-breasted female side character, Rachel. This was met with more praise as gamers claimed the character provided a change in pace and aesthetics. But again, the admiration was coming from the males. The developers knew they had a "guys'" game and they also knew that putting a playable female character would not attract females but rather sweeten the deal for the guys.

    Ninja Gaiden Sigma, and its predecessors, have become perfect examples of what Fron et al have described as "Hegemony of Play". Even a quick look at the game's trailer will tell you that  the game is chock full of "highly stylized graphical violence, male fantasies of power and domination, hyper-sexualized, objectified depictions of women,". The game's mechanic of fighting hordes of enemies by slicing and dicing through limbs and brains panders to this set video game culture of allowing males to express their animalistic instincts virtually. Henry Jenkins states that these depictions of violence are ways for boys to distance themselves from maternal regulations. He also states that typically females are taught by society to stay within these maternal regulations which would explain why such gratuitous killing is unfavorable for females. In fact, this relentless, nonstop action, with the overflowing enemies is what Jenkins describes as conventions of the 19th century boys adventure stories that have crossed over to the video game genres.

    Ninja Gaiden Sigma is also notoriously hard, requiring fast reflexes and the ability to "solve complex spatial rotation problems in real time" as Fullerton et al puts it. This mechanic of providing a challenge and hard-earned goal is what makes games so attractive for males, says Jenkins. There is a "boy culture" where they must compete with each other and show others their competency in beating particularly hard levels. This is evident in Ninja Gaiden Sigma's Challenge mode where the player is placed on a map and attacked by waves of enemies, with the goal of beating them all in the fastest time. YouTube will testify that there are plenty of males putting in the effort to show off their elite skills on these levels.

    The game doesn't just cater to the males culture of video game with its gameplay. Much of the spatial design is created in a way that males typically find "cool" and "gritty". In slight defence of Ninja Gaiden Sigma, there is a subtle level layout that allows for a slower pace, more exploration, and hidden treasure, elements that Jenkins lists as favorable mechanics for females. But much of this is a side story to the main action, and one look at the landscapes will tell you that there is nothing remotely feminine. Fullerton et al describe the male conventional layouts to be " rectilinear, typically manmade spaces, often the bruised and embattled remains of an urban environment, warehouse, office building, space ship, space colony, or high tech laboratory gone horribly wrong." While the game does vary itself in terms of locales, all of it is in some sort of disarray, beset by monsters and henchmen, and always contested. The few puzzles and free-roaming that exist are not enough to claim that Tecmo considered the wants of females when designing their game.

    Tecmo's idea to add Rachel's levels is very much similar to Tomb Raider's concept. Use a visually pleasing female model who conveys a sense of masculinity through its actions. As Jenkins states, the conventions of females are to stay on the beaten path, aim for more maternal futures. Although he advises that games should challenge girls more, make them ready for the professional world, Ninja Gaiden Sigma does not aim to satisfy these advices. Instead, it creates this independent, strong-willed female character in order for guys to mentally place their male instincts into a model they can drool over. Rachel ultimately becomes the "Kombat Lingerie" toting, male defined role in the male universe.

    So why do shallow games like Ninja Gaiden Sigma succeed and Brenda Laurel's Purple Moon games crash? It goes back to the "Hegemony of play" or rather the safe conventions of video games based on gender that are safe and make money. Laurel admits these businesses are simply out to make money and that taking out these age -old mechanics of violence and sex is not what investors believe in. Until a non-Barbie, video game manages to transcend the stereotypical pomp of "girly" games and be successful, the business and principles of video games will keep on churning out the same male driven games like Ninja Gaiden Sigma.

 

 

 

Bibliography

 

Laurel, Brenda. (2001). Utopian Entrepreneur. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001.

 

Fron, J., Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (aka Ludica) "The Hegemony of Play." In Situated Play: Proceedings of Digital Games Research Association 2007 Conference. Tokyo, Japan, September 2007

 

Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (aka Ludica) (2007). "A Game Of Ones Own: Towards a New Gendered Poetics of Game Space." In Proceedings, Digital Arts & Culture 2007, Perth, Australia, September 2007

 

Jenkins, Henry "Complete Freedom of Movement"  Salen, Katie and Eric Zimmerman. (2005). The Game Design Reader: A Rules of Play Anthology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press

Does it Matter if I Pick a Guy or a Girl?

Summon Night: A Swordcraft Story was released for gameboy advance in 2006 (originally 2003 in Japan). The game is a spin-off the Summon Night series, a little-known RPG franchise from Japan. Although A Swordcraft Story is also a fantasy RPG just like the rest of the series, it puts a unique spin on the plot by placing you in the shoes of a young weapons smith with the aspiring goal to make a legendary sword instead of saving the world from evil. The gameplay is pretty straight forward and generic: forge weapons to fight monsters in the labyrinth to be rewarded with rare materials to make stronger weapons with.

The interesting part about this game is the emergent storytelling that results from choosing your character’s gender. At the beginning of the game, you pick a gender for your character and a familiar to summon (one of 4, each with their own distinct personality and back story). Although the plot and most of the dialogue stays relatively the same, it’s amazing how the implications of gender on character interactions shape the story so much. “Values are everywhere, embedded in every aspect of our culture and lurking in the very natures of our media and our technology” (Laurel 28).

The first major example lies with Sugar, one of the possible spirits you can summon. She refers to you as ‘master’ regardless of gender, and is constantly offering you ‘sexual favors’ (in the rated-E-for-Everyone sort of way) claiming that she is your future wife (again, regardless of gender). In both cases, your main character will openly reject this behavior, but obviously the resulting implications differ in each version of the dialogue. “Today’s hegemonic game industry has infused both individuals’ and societies’ experiences of games with values and norms” (Fron).

Another important example happens in a plot event about half-way through the game. To get past a guard you must ‘seduce’ him by dressing up as a ‘sexy lady’ (I put this in quotes because the game does not have a very serious tone to it at all).  This scene plays out the same way with both genders, your character borrowing a skimpy red dress, high heels, and some make-up from a friend. But obviously the implications of cross-dressing only appear if you have a male protagonist. I guess the feminists would complain that this scene is a product of the “third gender” (Fullerton) using over-sexualization to appeal to the gamer, but the fact that the scene plays out the same way with both genders, in my opinion, makes this a moot point.

 

Works Cited

Jenkins, H. (2004). Complete Freedom of Movement. The Game Design Reader, 330-363.

Laurel, B. (2001). Utopian Entrepreneur. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Fron, J., Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (2007). The Hegemony of Play. In Situated Play: Proceedings of Digital Games Research Association 2007 Conference. Tokyo, Japan. 1-10.

Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (2007). A Game Of Ones Own: Towards a New Gendered Poetics of Game Space. In Proceedings, Digital Arts & Culture 2007, Perth, Australia. 1-11.

 

If games are gendered, does that make LBP a Transvestite?

While reading the past few articles, I could not help thinking about one of my favorite games to play, Little Big Planet. In Little Big Planet, the player navigates through the avant-garde style world by collection prize bubbles, overcoming obstacles, and beating challenges. Some of the greatest aspects of this make it a very gender neutral game. The design team at Media Molecule have found a way to fuse the girl and boy worlds to create an extremely entertaining game while not alienating either gender.

One of the most identifiable aspects of the game Little big Planet is the little sackperson. The designers purposefully made the silhouette of the sack person extremely identifiable since they planned on allowing the players to customize their sackperson as the game progresses. From the ground level it would appear that the designers of Little Big Planet had the intent of designing a unisex game, one that girls would appreciate and boys could dominate. It would seem that the designers understood that play is an innate human practice and function and that belongs to everyone (Fron).  The concepts in the game are neither female or male centric. Even though dressing the sackperson up and changing its looks may seem like a girls job, since dolls and dress up are for girls and all, but it allows the player to use their imagination more than anything. There is nothing girly about making your sackperson look like Gordon Freeman! It allows every unique player a chance to imaginatively represent themselves in the game world.

As Henry Jenkins wrote, "we need to design digital play spaces which allow girls to do something more than stitch doll clothes, mother nature, or heal their friend's sufferings..." Little big Planet has done just that, girls can spend all their time customizing their sackperson, but the designers added perks to draw the girls out in to the world. The more the player explores the world the more prizes they can find to adorn their POD or accessories for their sackperson. The designers of LBP have drawn the girls out to the far ends of the playground, not only allowing them to exist in the boyland game world but they can also define their own play. Girls are not simply, "allowed to play in boys' spaces, by boys rules"(Fullerton) they are invited to play how they want. The goals in LBP are very relaxed the player does not have to drudge through the level searching for every single prize bubble or adhere to some time limit or even battle for a high score. The only requirement in each level is that the player makes it to the end. While it might not be as deep or enlightening as the Purple Moon games, I think it follows along their ideas. The players can work solo to make it across a level or they can invite a friend, they can talk to one another directly through the game. Since the levels are all deeply interactive  they can explore the level and find different paths to complete the levels.   

So far the game seems like a dream for the girls, if that's the case then why would boys want to play it? It is definitely not to find their own little secret garden hidden within the immersive levels.  The game offers boys the same goals as the girls, which means the boys can compete against the level, they can find every single prize bubble or beat their friends best time if they want. With the use of the soft goals, the designers managed to create a space that can be extremely competitive or not competitive at all. Henry Jenkins wrote that "children are not so much addicted to video games as they are unwilling to quit before they have met their goals." It is the desire of the male to seek out these goals whether they be imagined or real and force themselves to fight towards them. It is not only the goals that piques the interest of the boys, the fact that they can manipulate the environment is very attractive as well. The same interactivity of the dream world that appeals girls, also appeals to the boys, for slightly different reasons, of course. The levels in LBP are much akin to the obstacle course created by traditional first person shooter games in which boys are able to move through in a very masculine fashion(Fullerton).

The gameplay is not the thing the designers did right, they also included a level editor. They gave the player the ability to create their own levels and contraptions, yet another creative outlet for the players. This gives girls not only the change to venture out into boyland, but they can also stay within their own secret space, their own creation. As Frances Downing was quoted in A Game of one's Own, "the unfinished nature provided a sense of ownership through an ability to complete the place with one's presence." The girl can build her own safe space in which she can play and be creative, she can also choose to share her secret space with her friends through the Playstation Network.  Boys can utilize the level editor as a way to conquer land, or to create something from nothing.  The level editor gives boys the opportunity to go out on their own and survive off the land, and create something with their bare hands. Something Jenkins  argues that is one of the goals of games today, to allow a release for the players.

Media Molecule has found a way to make the "little house" and the "prairie" exist on the same plane for both boys and girls. They utilized soft goals, forgiving losses, and very imaginative outlets to make a game that is universally appealing. With the unique set up of the game and the extra tools offered through the game, the designers have come very close to bridging the gap between traditional board games and video games. The player has the option to play the game by their own kind of house rules and even develop their own games out of the tools provided in the box. Maybe the union between the boys and girls world is achieved by returning to a time when games were not as gendered, a time when women's opinions counted in the game industry. Little Big Planet comes very close, I believe, to achieving that unity.

Fron, J., Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (2007). The Hegemony of Play. In Situated Play: Proceedings of Digital Games Research Association 2007 Conference. Tokyo, Japan. 1-10.

Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (2007). A Game Of Ones Own: Towards a New Gendered Poetics of Game Space. In Proceedings, Digital Arts & Culture 2007, Perth, Australia. 1-11.

Jenkins, H. (2004). Game design as narrative architecture. The Game Design Reader, 670-686.

Laurel, B. (2001). Utopian Entrepreneur. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

 

Sharing the playground: A gender study of Super Mario 64

    Not a day goes by in this world where some issue of race of gender does not come up.  Whether it be on a global scene, a local news report, or a personal encounter, these have always been significant issues in society.  Although many of the major problems surrounding these topics have been resolved, culture clashes still exist in many forms and in many places, such as the video game industry.  Digital games have, for the most part, refused to acknowledge their general lack of equality when it comes producing for all audiences.   Most games are produced by males and for males, exaggerating aspects of male interest (such as conquest and combat) and pushing these ideas onto all potential audiences.  Not all games, however, keep as narrow a view as this when picking an audience.  This essay will examine Nintendo’s Super Mario 64 to see how, as an enormously successful and influential game, it addresses issues of gender and culture, if at all.

            The gaming industry has dug itself into a deep trench that caters to a very particular group of gamers.  This core target group is what makes game developers money, because the games that are produced are attractive to this core group, so developers continue to makes similar types of games, and thus the gaming market finds itself in a deadly cycle that is unwilling to change and risk losses in profit [1].  Nintendo, however, managed to make a game that was enjoyed by a wide range of people, not just the ‘core market’.  Super Mario 64 was not particularly innovative in targeting a minority group of gamers; it was simply attractive to more than the typical boy target group.

Most games have a combat-centered game space, with end goals of either destroying or conquering an enemy or area.  In spaces such as these, females are guests in the world of boys.  They will play, and sometimes enjoy, the games that work this way, but there is no getting around the intended aim of the developer [2].  SM 64, however, did not have such a narrow game space.  The world that the character inhabits is expansive and open-ended, with goals of exploration and collection.  This game introduced the idea of an over world that was still part of the real world, part of the narrative and playable by the character.  Mario could move freely about the castle as he collects stars, discovers areas, and unlocks new worlds.  The goals of the individual worlds—while at times focusing on the destruction of some kind of enemy—usually rely on reaching new areas of the map, solving puzzles, finding secret areas, and just general exploration.  Fullerton et al talk about the importance of spaces and the idea of a ‘secret place’ when designing with females in mind: 

Secrecy is… a large part of classic children’s literature, and specifically literature focusing on female characters… These alternative universes cry out for player agency, for players to not only be transformed by, but also to transform the space as part of the play experience... [2]

 SM 64 has open spaces not specifically driven by violence that need to be explored by the player.  And, of course, there is always the safety of the castle to return, the over world that seems so surreally empty and enclosed all the time.  A place of privacy and rest while you decide on your next place of play.

            Obviously this game was not specifically targeted at girls, and many aspects of the design are catered towards masculine interests and ideas for achievement.  The main character is a plumber who has to save the beautiful princess (who is clad almost entirely in pink) from the evil monster.  For the most part, however, the gender exaggerations and stereotypes end there.  The tasks Mario must complete are not specifically masculine, he never fights with a weapon, and he isn’t overly muscular.  In short, this character could easily be a female, pending some alterations to the narrative.  So another attractive feature of SM 64 to females and the non-core gamers is its lack of boy focus.  Most video games can be seen as a parallel to boy childhoods.  ‘Boy culture’ becomes shifted into the digital world, leaving little room for girls to move in and join in the play space [3].  But SM 64 creates a world centered on goals that can be seen in both the childhood play of girls and boys: exploration, collection, decision-making, and discovering secrets, for example.

            Game design does not necessarily need to push for designing games specifically for girls (although this couldn’t hurt, and has been done before with some success) but simply needs to make games more accessible to wider audiences.  Getting too specific in games can lead to failure at times, as some games of the girls’ games movement demonstrate, where extremely ‘girly’ games lead to financial bombs.  But a change must be made to allow for males and females alike to inhabit the gaming community [4].  SM 64 gave a glimpse of how it is possible to create a game accessible by many, and its influence led to the creation of similar platformers, although many reverted back to a heavy male focus.  The game was still played primarily by males, because the industry’s audience is male dominated, and one game cannot change that alone.  But it was played and enjoyed by many, and its influence is still being explored today.  There exists massive untapped markets outside of the core gamers, and if game designers will take a risk and work towards breaking from the deadly cycle of industry entrenchment, games could begin to rise to a new level of influence and respect.

 

 

Works Cited

1. Fron, J., Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (2007). “The Hegemony of Play”. In            Situated Play: Proceedings of Digital Games Research Association 2007            Conference. Tokyo, Japan. 1-10.

2. Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (2007). “A Game Of Ones Own: Towards a New            Gendered Poetics of Game Space”. In Proceedings, Digital Arts & Culture 2007,            Perth, Australia. 1-11.

3. Jenkins, H. (2004). “Game design as narrative architecture”. The Game Design            Reader, 670-686.

4. Laurel, B. (2001). Utopian Entrepreneur. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT            Press.

Blazblue and the King of Fighters XII (Minorities Not Included).

FOLLOWING THE FIGHTERS:

I recently purchased a PlayStation 3 because I closely follow the fighting game scene. Where the fighting games go, I go. I had my eyes set on two brand new, Hi-Definition, 2-D fighting games -- Blazblue (Arc System Works) and The King of Fighters XII (SNK PLAYMORE JAPAN). I have followed the games pre-release, and knew just about everything about them. It was not until I actually purchased and played the games that I realized something-- neither game had a character who was not "White" or described as Japanese (because even these characters appeared "White"). 

This was actually quite alarming for me, because I just finished delving into Street Fighter 3: 3rd Strike which had an UNUSUALLY diverse cast of characters; 19 characters total, 4 female, 15 male, 5 had brown skin and were distinctly of African descent (none of these were large, BIG characters either), 4 monsters/creatures, 6 Asians, and 4 White Characters. It's as if the "racially discriminatory practice and stereotyping... in the content [the game industry] creates..."(2 Fron et al) was consciously fought against in Street Figther 3:3rd Strike. I have never seen a roster this mixed in ANY fighting game, to date -- despite other fighters having larger rosters. Street Fighter 3: 3rd Strike was released in 1999.

 21st CENTURY FIGHTING GAMES, 19th CENTURY VALUES?:

King of Fighters XII has a roster of 22, Blazblue has a roster of 10. Neither game has ONE character of a non-Mongoloid or Caucasoid appearance -- and remember, often in Japanese games, there is no distinction between the Mongoloid and Caucasoid characters save for their names and clothing. Both games however, have ONE huge, buff, and beefy character who is tanned -- in the case of King of Fighter XII, Ralf, who was as pale as any other in previous titles, magically became tanned/brown and extremely bulky. Iron Tager in Blazblue, is not really brown or tanned, he's actually orange-ish/red, but he is the only character who is a non-white/pale humanoid. 

So here we have TWO brand new, 21st century fighting games, that still manage to ignore races that make up more than 60 percent of the world population (U.S. Census 2004). I am sure that the main reason for this is because these particular games are meant to be consumed in Japan, North America, and Europe. However, I have a hard time believing that this is the ONLY reason the racial distribution is disproportionate. 
 

WHAT'S REALLY GOING ON:

There is obviously something else at work here, "[Game technologies, game production and game consumption] power structures perpetuate a particular set of values and norms concerning games and game play, which tend to subordinate and ghettoize minority players and play styles" (Fron et al 2). There are certain aspects of games, fighting games in this case, that are viewed as normal and acceptable. Here I feel that the developers of both The King of Fighters XII and Blazblue have said that there is no need for "minority" characters in their games, nor any desirability for their inclusion -- except to sorta/kinda meet the "big, black guy" quota. 

King of Fighters XII, is the 12th iteration of the King of Fighters franchise and Blazblue is the brainchild of Guilty Gear developers-- Guilty Gear also only had ONE large, tanned character Potemkin. The developers of these games have been making games for a LONG time. They have been working on fighting games, in particular, for over 15 years -- why haven't their character rosters consisted of more diversity? Why does a game like Blazblue have 3 (out of 10 total characters) blonde haired, blue-eyed characters (people with these traits do not make up 30% of the world's population), but not ONE single character of a race that makes up a substantially larger number of the world's population. 

SOCIETAL VALUES, STANDARDS OF BEAUTY?:

This may fall back into wider concepts such as the developers/societal standards of beauty, target markets, and the conventions of Japanese animation-- where both Blazblue and King of Fighters XII both draw inspiration from. Games such as Final Fantasy, Persona, and numerous other Japanese games follow a similar trend--Final Fantasy XIII is about to witness its SECOND playable black male character with Sazh Katzroy, Barrett from Final Fantasy VII being the first. Japanese role-playing games tend to favor ambiguously Caucasoid/Mongoloid characters who share Japanese facial features, but occasionally don blonde hair, blue or green eyes, and other distinctly European features.

Similarly to the statement that "girls must be 'allowed' to play in boys' spaces" (Fullerton et al 3), racial minorities must be "allowed" to EXIST in "white/asian male" spaces. Once a minority character is included, they are expected to play a minor role, and/or fall into a ridiculous stereotype. Few games have broken this cycle; Resident Evil Outbreak, Left For Dead 1 and 2, the Tekken series, and Street Fighter 3 have managed to create minority characters who break the mold, or offer more than just the blatant stereotype.

NEVER PART OF THE GAME DESIGN PROCESS: 

Unlike the 20th century board game industry where women, typically white, were a part of the game design and playtesting (Fron et al 6), minorities have never really been a part of the process. Racial minorities have always been subject to being represented by those who are not like them and/or know and care little about them. This trend has continued and has meshed with the "Hegemony of Play"  to create the 50 Cent games, Marcus Phoenix in Gears of War, and many other disappointingly shallow characters and game.
 

WHAT'S TO COME:

I am not entirely sure what is going to happen with the racial distribution in games. Blazblue will have another entry in the series come Spring 2010 and there were two new characters announced -- both characters have Japanese names, both look Caucasoid. The King of Fighters XII is expecting a new expansion or updated roster next year, but there has been no word on who will be included the next time around. Tatsunoko Vs. Capcom: Ultimate All Stars is another fighting game to be released by Capcom JP, but again contains no minority characters -- the game draws from prominent heroes of other fighting games, most of whom are Japanese but look Caucasoid.

I am aware that fighting games have a track record of exploiting stereotypes to no end (see Street Fighter 2, Art of Fighting, Fatal Fury, Virtua Fighter, etc), as this offers a way of immediately distinguishing characters from one another, and gives each character a "built-it" back story. However, games like Tekken 5 and Street Fighter 3: 3rd Strike, have included minority characters that did not adhere to a pre-established stereotype. Elena (SF3) is an Kenyan Princess who practices capoeira, Raven (Tekken 5) is a master ninja in the aesthetic of Wesley Snipes' BLADE, and Sean (SF3) is a Brazilian aspiring and determined student of Ken Masters.

The market that fighting games typically appeal to is similar to the market that the "Hegemony of Play" focuses and caters to. It may take a while before we see more balanced rosters in Japanese fighters, given their roots in Japanese Anime, which adores the Japanese-named-Western-Looking characters.

Call of Duty 4—A Predominant Male Game Space

Call of Duty 4—Modern Warfare is the fourth episode of the world-acclaimed Call of Duty game series. The game series is well-known for their fine integration of the excitement of first-person shooter games with a great sense of historical authenticity. Unlike its three predecessors that set their stages at various chapters of World War II, the fourth episode of the series moves its stage to modern days with a focus on a war lead by United States and Great Britain on a fictional global terrorist network. Though the game’s setting maybe fictional, it none-the-less achieves exceptional level of realism by its faithful representation of real-life weaponries, military equipments, vehicles, realistic landscapes, visual graphics/sound effects and authentic battle tactics and enemy AIs.

Even without any statistic to back up it, I guess it would be safe to claim Call of Duty as a FPS game predominantly designed and played by male players only.  Personally I’ve never met a female player that claims to be a fan of the Call of Duty series. In fact, as far as I can recall, I never actually know any female that has played the game or, now thinking about it, much of any FPS games. A clear distinction of gender genre has been drawn here: boys play war games and girls play exploration or social games, and it looks all very natural to many. This distinction of male and female game genre preference is partially explained in the article by Fullerton et al (2007). Quoting Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s argument on gender space difference, the article points out that the basic feminine impulse is to gather, to put together and to construct where as the basic male impulse is to scatter, to disseminate and to destroy.

As Fullerton et al. claimed in “A Game of One’s Own: Towards a New Gendered Poetics of Digital Space,” most existing digital game spaces have been strongly gendered towards male constructions of space and play. This is particularly true when it comes to first-person-shooter games. Usually games of this genre are highly intensive and even physically demanding. Particular skills such as quick reflexes and strong ability to solve spatial rotation problems are highly valued, which are skill more in male’s favor due to cognitive differences between males and females (Fron et al, 2007). In this sense, Call of Duty is typical. The game renders a game space that largely reflecting the male concern of potentially “dangerous and always contested” space (Fullerton et al. 2007). As the game set its battlefield in a fictional urban environment, it is quite amazing to see how it excludes almost entire female element from the game environment. For one thing, not a single female character can be found within the game. As far as I can recall, the only appearance of a female image is on posters hanging on the wall in buildings. The only “active” female role is a voice of a female operator who can be overheard sending verbal instruction through player’s earphone in an intro scene. When thinking back of the previous Call of Duty episodes, this pattern becomes even clearer. No female figures ever appears in the Call of Duty games other than in the form of posters on the wall, etc.—not much more than just an “object” for the male gaze or fantasy. So if the game designers possess the ability to tell stories spatially or environmentally through their designs, as Jenkins (2004) claims so, what is the story being told here voluntarily or involuntarily? Maybe just another big red sign that reads “boys only”?  When it comes to reinforcing the existing order of the gaming industry, COD Is no doubt a typical example that showcase a FPS game designed by a gaming industry that is predominantly male and white, who targets a male audience, who ignore what Fron et al (2007) call the rest of the “minority” players and still managed to make billions of dollars every year. As Jenkins (2004) pointed out that the “hegemonic” gaming industry has reinforce its technological, commercial and cultural investments by enforcing particular definition of games and play, individuals’ and societies’ experiences of games will continue to be portionalized and alternative products being further marginalized. Unfortunately, this might be the way the industry will be for a long way down the road. 

Reference:

Fron, J., Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (2007). The Hegemony of Play. In Situated Play: Proceedings of Digital Games Research Association 2007 Conference. Tokyo, Japan. 1-10.

Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (2007). A Game Of Ones Own: Towards a New Gendered Poetics of Game Space. In Proceedings, Digital Arts & Culture 2007, Perth, Australia. 1-11.

Jenkins, H. (2004). Game design as narrative architecture. The Game Design Reader, 670-686.

Laurel, B. (2001). Utopian Entrepreneur. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

 

Gender and Representation in Persona 3

I was drawn to writing about the 2006 role-playing game Shin Megami Tensei: Persona 3 (published by Atlus, and henceforth referred to as Persona 3), due to its superficial resemblance to the Purple Moon game Rockett’s New School, as described by Brenda Laurel in Utopian Entrepreneur: much of its gameplay revolves around navigating a social community in school, within the context of a strong, character-driven plot.  However, unlike the “utopian” games that Laurel describes, Persona 3 ultimately devalues its social aspects, fails to create an androgynous or otherwise “safe” space for female gamers, and at base falls back on the “hardcore” role-playing game mechanics that have historically appealed to traditional "hardcore" gaming audiences.

To briefly describe the basic gameplay and plot: in Persona 3, the player takes control of an ordinary teenage boy (the character is an empty vessel, named by the player and lacking a distinct voice or personality) who has recently enrolled in a new school.  The player must make and maintain friendships, balance study and social life, pursue romantic interests, join after-school activities, and try to maintain a healthy lifestyle (for example, staying up late to study may lead to tiredness and increase the risk of becoming ill).  The player is in control of the character all day, every day, though the course of a year.  These “daily life” activities only account for about half of the gameplay, however: the rest is a more traditional RPG, based on battles and level-grinding.  The premise of the plot is that, each night at midnight, there is a secret time period (the “Dark Hour”) of which only some people are aware, and in which supernatural events happen.  The school transforms into a randomly-generated, seemingly-endless tower full of monsters, and the characters gain access to their “personas,” representations of their personalities which can be summoned as combat avatars. 

From a spatial perspective, the game is interesting for a number of reasons.  Most obvious -- to the point where I didn’t notice till mid-way through the game -- is how domestic it is: in comparison to the exotic frontiers typical of Jenkins’ “Adventure Island” spaces, the gameplay in Persona 3 takes place almost entirely within a few city blocks.  The game moves between the protagonist’s dormitory, the school, and the immediate neighborhood, and players get to know the local characters rather well (Jenkins might refer to this as a “Play Town”).  Rather than traveling abroad to find adventures, the game’s characters carve out their story in the secret places and events of the world around them.  As mentioned in Jenkins, Laurel, and Fullerton et al., the concept of the “secret spaces” within domestic life is a common trope in female-oriented literature in games.  In this case, the portal to the enchanted world is represented by the clock, rather than the looking glass or the wardrobe.

The second spatial aspect of the game is that the secret world of the “Dark Hour” is an example of what Fullerton would call a narrative space, “a space imbued with story and mystery to be discovered and uncovered.”  The world itself tells a story -- its mysterious existence (how it came about, its effects on the real world, etc.) are what drive the central storyline, and the main motivation for the characters is exploration. 

Finally -- and problematically -- the game seems to evenly divide itself between community spaces (the social aspects of navigating high school) and combat-oriented spaces (the “Dark Hour,” which, despite its emphasis on exploration, is also characterized by near-constant battle), with little relationship between the two.  While success in the former world is dependent on time management and social instincts, success in the latter is based on repetition and linear progression -- the player fights endless battles in order to gain levels and become stronger, enabling him to climb higher in the tower and fight more battles, etc.  Jenkins would call these the central virtues of mastery and self-control, common in “boy culture”: “Putting in the long hours of repetition and failure necessary to master a game also requires discipline and the ability to meet and surpass self-imposed goals.”  Clearly there is a division between male- and female-oriented spaces in the gameplay, and, while progress in the one is tied loosely to progress in the other (that is, forming stronger social connections during the day will enable the player to create somewhat more powerful persona avatars), the link does not feel very powerful; the primary method for advancement is still level-grinding, which can be accomplished only through combat. 

This form of gameplay also depends on prior knowledge of the mechanics common to role-playing games, and will naturally exclude those players not already familiar with the genre (especially given its steep difficulty curve).   Since most games in this genre are based on high-fantasy worlds -- traditionally exclusionary spaces in their own right, given their representations of women -- Persona 3 seems to be assuming a largely male audience (though not necessarily a young male audience).  These audiences will be familiar with combat in RPGs, but not with social simulations; the social sections of the game are correspondingly far more forgiving (there is no “loss condition,” and friendships can always be repaired, for example).  By contrast, players familiar with social simulations but not RPG combat will have a difficult time playing the game. 

 That said, Persona 3 avoids many of the pitfalls described in “The Hegemony of Play.”  For example, as in most role-playing games, the combat is command- and turn-based, and therefore not dependent on “mastery of quick reflexes and an ability to solve complex spatial rotation problems in real time,” which tend to favor male gamers.   Its characters also avoid the hyper-masculine “third gender” archetype common to many games: the main character is fairly androgynous, the violence is highly abstract (the enemies are the likes of blobs, or monsters shaped like household objects, and there is no blood), the sexuality is fairly subdued, and the actual plotline revolves more around solving mysteries than physical domination (the characters almost never engage in combat with other people, and even those few encounters always end in tragedy). 

The representation of women in Persona 3 deserves special mention, however, and I found one mechanic in particular distinctly questionable.  Though females comprise half of the major combat characters, are well-written, and dress reasonably by game standards most of the time (those are major qualifications: in real-life, their shortness of their skirts would be fairly ridiculous, and there are several notable sections where the females don swimsuits, kimonos, etc., and are explicitly leered at by the male characters), they are heavily objectified in the social space.  In the player’s daily high-school life, female characters are treated as fundamentally different than male characters: simply put, males are friends, and females are potential sexual conquests.  The male friends have individual story lines that eventually lead to a strengthened social connection.  The female friends have individual story lines as well, but they always lead to romantic engagement with the player (climaxing with a sexual act).  In other words, there are no platonic friends in Persona 3; all cross-gender friendships lead eventually to sex.  Due to criticism of this problematic aspect of the game, its sequel (Persona 4, which I haven’t played) allows the player the choice of whether to pursue a romantic relationship with females.

Though interesting to consider in terms of gender, especially as it relates to gendered spaces in gameplay, Persona 3 is ultimately disappointing -- more useful, perhaps, as a first exploratory step in a new direction, which more “values-based” (as Laurel would put it) game developers can further explore.

 

Works Cited

Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (aka Ludica) (2007). "A Game Of One’s Own: Towards a New Gendered Poetics of Game Space." In Proceedings, Digital Arts & Culture 2007, Perth, Australia, September 2007.

Fron, J., Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (aka Ludica) "The Hegemony of Play." In Situated Play: Proceedings of Digital Games Research Association 2007 Conference. Tokyo, Japan, September 2007.

Jenkins, Henry. "Complete Freedom of Movement: Video Games as Gendered Play Spaces" The Game Design Reader, ed. Salen, Katie and Eric Zimmerman.MIT Press:Cambridge, MA, 2006. 330-363.

Laurel, Brenda. (2001). Utopian Entrepreneur. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001.

Gender in The Sims

The Sims is a life simulation computer game developed by Maxis. It is a game that does not conform to the paradigm of the male dominated video game.  Drawing from the readings of Laurel, Jenkins, Fron et al, and Fullerton et al, I will discuss the ways in which gender is embedded within The Sims.

 

One of the most important aspects of The Sims is that it caters to both the male and female gamer.  It avoids being classified under the “Hegemony of Play” which Fron states, “ignores the needs and desires of ‘minority’ players such as women and ‘non-gamers’ (Fron et al, 1).  The Sims accomplishes this in many ways; one is by allowing the players to fully customize their characters.  At the start of the game, players can either choose set characters, both male and female, or players can choose to create their own character.  Laurel states, “Supporting personalization is a power and graceful way to acknowledge and celebrate difference.  In a networked world, allowing detailed self-representation will assist tremendously in the formation of online communities”(Laurel, 51). By implementing this type of personalization to the game, creators of The Sims eliminated the stereotype of the dominant male protagonist game, making the game gender neutral.

 

The game play in The Sims is fairly simple.  It is set in a neighborhood with multiple different families.  The player can direct their character through a variety of different everyday tasks such as going to work, taking a bath, chatting with neighbors, making food, etc.  In addition, the player is able to fully customize the living space of their character from furniture, doors, lights, windows, etc.  In some ways, these features highlight the characteristics that Jenkins classifies as play for girls.  Jenkins states that play for girls “adopt a slower pace, are less filled with dangers, invite gradual investigation and discovery, foster an awareness of social relations and a search for secrets, center around emotional relations between characters” (Jenkins, 356-357).  These characteristics can be seen in the slow pace of the game and the slow development of the players’ character.  It is also seen in the interaction the player has with the other characters within the neighborhood.  Although this is one approach to the game play in The Sims, there are actually many different styles of play according to how the user wishes to play.

 

Unlike any other game, The Sims has no win condition, giving players the freedom to create their own goals that they wish to achieve.  This offers a variety of different game spaces that appeal to both female and male audiences, demonstrating the concept of an “’androgynous space’ that engages all aspects of all persons: a space into which women and girls are invited and welcomed, but in which men and boys can also enjoy more diverse and nuanced forms of play than are typically available to them.”(Fullerton et al, 1).  For example, The Sims contains female conceptions of spaces, both the domestic space and constructing and cultivating space, as mentioned by Fullerton.  Players can either focus on just the day-to-day domestic activities of their character or “contribute to building the world” through sharing their customhouses with other players around the world (Fullerton et al, 7).    

 

The success of The Sims can definitely be attributed to its achievement in making a game that appeals to both male and female gamers, ultimately showing that success of a video game comes not only from its content or game play but also the target audience it is made for.

 

 

Works Cited

Fron, J., Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (2007). The Hegemony of Play. In Situated Play: Proceedings of Digital Games Research Association 2007 Conference. Tokyo, Japan. 1-10.

 

Fullerton, T., Morie, J. & Pearce, C. (2007). A Game Of Ones Own: Towards a New Gendered Poetics of Game Space. In Proceedings, Digital Arts & Culture 2007, Perth, Australia. 1-11.

 

Jenkins, H. (2004). Game design as narrative architecture. The Game Design Reader, 670-686.

 

Laurel, B. (2001). Utopian Entrepreneur. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.